[0:03] mic doesn't it's pretty loud.

[0:06] >> How do we turn the volume down on that?

[0:08] A little better.

[0:11] Thank you.

[0:12] >> Right. Right. Good evening. Um the

[0:15] Hillsboro City Council meeting is now

[0:17] called to order. Um the time is um

[0:21] 3:32

[0:25] and um February 9th, Monday. City clerk,

[0:29] may we please have the roll call.

[0:31] >> Thank you. Mayor Cole Adams,

[0:34] >> present.

[0:37] » Schwang,

[0:38] >> present. Kle,

[0:39] >> present.

[0:40] >> Braxdale,

[0:41] >> present.

[0:42] >> Cole,

[0:43] >> present.

[0:45] Um the first item um today is actually a

[0:48] study session which is why we are

[0:49] starting at 3:30 and we will be

[0:51] returning after close session for the

[0:53] regular city council meeting at 6 p.m.

[0:55] The study session today is on um water

[0:58] rates cost of stud of service study

[1:00] which will be introduced by finance

[1:02] director Jen Cook. She's here with her

[1:04] entire team. Um I'm happy to call their

[1:07] names. Uh Rick Simmonson, vice president

[1:10] HFN and H Consultants. Gibb Sasser,

[1:13] project manager, HF and age consultants

[1:16] and lufti karof partners special

[1:18] districts and public finance practice

[1:20] groups best and creger are available for

[1:22] questions. Okay, Jen, good afternoon.

[1:26] >> Good. Good afternoon.

[1:29] So, we're here today to study the the

[1:31] water rates. This is a very draft

[1:34] preliminary view and there's no action

[1:37] that is required today but we are asking

[1:40] for any feedback from the city council

[1:43] so that we can then prepare a more

[1:45] detailed uh technical report and bring

[1:47] that back for review by the city

[1:49] council. Um so just a couple of things.

[1:53] Um these would be maximum rates that

[1:57] would be considered and um should

[2:00] circumstances in any one year uh when if

[2:03] these were adopted um be more favorable

[2:07] then uh city council would have a choice

[2:09] of not adopting the maximum rate for

[2:12] that year. So again, remember that this

[2:15] is a study session, but at some point

[2:17] when we get to a proposition 218 notice

[2:20] where you will will would be um adopting

[2:24] a maximum set of rates. Those would set

[2:26] the rates for the five years, but each

[2:29] year you you will come back we'll come

[2:31] back with a resolution on how much would

[2:34] be adopted and it could be anything at

[2:36] the max rate level all the way down to

[2:39] anything like zero should there not be a

[2:42] rate needed in that one year and a rate

[2:44] increase in that one year.

[2:49] Also just to note on on uh rate study

[2:52] overall that uh the total rates cover

[2:57] the costs of the system. This is not a

[3:00] profitm

[3:01] uh situation where one set of rates

[3:05] would give you a different answer than

[3:07] another set of rates. We're going to be

[3:08] showing you two different options here

[3:11] tonight and they would both end up with

[3:13] the same resulting revenue and

[3:15] expenditures. It's just a matter of how

[3:18] those rates are configured. And so just

[3:20] to keep that in mind as well. And with

[3:23] that, I'm going to hand it over to our

[3:25] consultants.

[3:27] >> Good evening. Rick Simson, senior vice

[3:30] president with HFNH. So we have

[3:32] conducted a water and sewer rate study.

[3:34] I'll first start with the water and ask

[3:37] uh for feedback. If along the way you do

[3:39] have a question, please do not hesitate

[3:41] to stop me.

[3:46] See this way.

[3:49] There we go.

[3:52] So, the purpose of this discussion is to

[3:55] uh highlight our preliminary findings

[3:58] for our cost of service study with rates

[4:01] to become effective July 1 of this year.

[4:05] We are we have in projected revenue

[4:09] increases for the next five-year period.

[4:12] Again, these are revenue increases 6% 6%

[4:16] followed by 3 5% to cover increasing

[4:19] costs. Again, when we do rate studies,

[4:23] the maximum allowed is a five-year

[4:25] period. So, we're recommending for the

[4:27] next five years.

[4:29] Part of this review does look at

[4:32] restructuring your current rates. You

[4:34] have four tiers for your volutric water

[4:37] rates. We are presenting here tonight

[4:40] the results of bringing that to a

[4:42] two-tier or a uniform system. Uh there's

[4:47] been recent litigation and court

[4:49] findings throughout the state of

[4:50] California that has led to refining how

[4:54] water rates are sent and they can be in

[4:56] conflict with one another. So there is

[4:58] still some discretion if you have a

[5:00] uniform or two tier and that's why we're

[5:03] presenting both here tonight.

[5:07] What is driving those initial revenue

[5:09] increases over the next five years?

[5:12] First rates have not increased since

[5:14] last January. So we know some sort of

[5:16] increase will be due this year and we're

[5:18] projecting for July 1, 2026 of this

[5:22] year. One of the town's main costs is

[5:25] the cost of the water coming from the

[5:29] San Francisco Public Utilities

[5:31] Commission in which you have an

[5:32] agreement to purchase water from them.

[5:34] Those costs are increasing just this

[5:37] year 9% and over the next five years

[5:40] they'll increase 23%. So rising water

[5:44] costs along with regular inflationary

[5:46] increases for your operations and

[5:48] maintenance costs including capital

[5:51] expenditures and we'll highlight some of

[5:54] those projects in the forthcoming slide

[5:56] at about 2.9 million per year. In

[5:59] addition, there's still current debt uh

[6:02] that the city has for past projects that

[6:05] will continue through this 5-year

[6:06] period. But something that's helping

[6:08] offset some of these costs is a about a

[6:11] $400,000 reduction in that debt service

[6:14] payment in the last year of the next

[6:16] five years. So for fiscal year 3031,

[6:24] I mentioned the SFPU and their costs

[6:27] rising. So this is something that over

[6:29] the last few years they've been

[6:31] increasing their rates annually. They

[6:34] went through a period uh from 2017 to

[6:37] 2022 where they kept rates the same.

[6:39] They were utilizing their reserves to

[6:42] pay for their projects, but they

[6:43] realized that was not sustainable. So

[6:45] those costs have been increasing as of

[6:48] late and are projected to continue to

[6:51] increase. They look at their rates on an

[6:54] annual basis. So they've given us some

[6:56] projections of what to expect over the

[6:58] five years. As I mentioned, 9% this year

[7:01] and it'll continue to increase over the

[7:03] next five years. The last time rates

[7:07] were set were in 2022.

[7:09] So that's the time where they started

[7:11] when we set the rates back in 2022. We

[7:14] know they were increasing to that 475,

[7:17] but not sure how they would handle those

[7:19] increases moving forward. You can see

[7:21] some substantial increases increases

[7:24] since the last time rates were set.

[7:30] In addition to rising water costs, uh we

[7:33] have seen the town uh residents and

[7:36] businesses using less water, which is a

[7:38] good thing. Uh however, that means

[7:41] revenues are decreasing along with it.

[7:44] Uh you'll see the historical peak uh

[7:48] about 13 14 years ago was quite high.

[7:51] This is 1.6 6,00 cubic feet and 100

[7:55] cubic foot is about 750 gallons. So

[7:59] there's been a lot of conservation uh

[8:01] which is a good thing. We've seen that

[8:03] decrease since the last time rates were

[8:05] set again in 2022. Took a bit of a dip

[8:08] and it's on the rise again. But for this

[8:12] rate setting uh five years we've taken

[8:15] the average consumption of 1.13 million

[8:20] HCF per year and projected that moving

[8:23] forward. So not a significant increase.

[8:26] We're trying to be conservative and say

[8:28] water even though we're seeing an uptick

[8:31] in water sales for this purpose. We're

[8:34] trying to be conservative and not bank

[8:36] on having those uh increasing sales. So

[8:40] it it is in line with the average over

[8:42] the last seven years. So we're fairly

[8:44] confident.

[8:48] Looking at the capital expenditures,

[8:51] uh there's about a million dollars per

[8:52] year for just water main replacement.

[8:55] These are the the main with under the

[8:58] street delivering to the households and

[9:00] businesses replacing that at a million

[9:02] dollars per year. There's a couple more

[9:05] significant projects. uh pump station

[9:08] generator Clark Concar about 1.6 million

[9:11] as well as the Daryl pump line rehab and

[9:14] replacement. So these types of projects

[9:17] come along uh periodically so they have

[9:20] been included here as well about 3

[9:22] million 2.973

[9:24] per year and that's what's included in

[9:28] this analysis. So some major uh rehabs

[9:31] and repairs.

[9:36] Let's get to the crux of a cost of

[9:38] service study. Uh the first thing we

[9:40] look at as we're analyzing the rates are

[9:44] uh staff meeting with staff to

[9:46] understand the on andm costs which are

[9:48] depicted here in the light blue. Admin

[9:51] and O and M costs in the stacked bar

[9:53] chart.

[9:55] Purchase water costs on the bottom dark

[9:58] green there. We want to make sure we can

[10:00] cover those costs as well as debt

[10:03] service. As I mentioned, there's

[10:04] outstanding debt service. So, there's an

[10:06] obligation to pay that back and that's

[10:09] on the dark uh darker green and the

[10:13] light green are capital projects. This

[10:15] is a bit more discretionary, but as I

[10:17] showed on the previous slide, there's

[10:19] necessary projects that should be done

[10:21] over the next five years. So, they get

[10:23] this gives us a visual of what the total

[10:26] costs are over the next five years.

[10:28] We've overlaid on that the solid black

[10:31] line there which are your revenues at

[10:33] current rates. So if you did nothing

[10:35] with your rates you can see even in this

[10:38] current fiscal year we are covering

[10:41] those costs that must uh occur the on

[10:43] andm the debt service purchasing the

[10:46] water and most of the capital projects.

[10:49] So we know there is a shortfall that

[10:51] needs to be bridged over the next five

[10:53] years as that continues to go up and by

[10:56] 3031

[10:58] uh we would not be covering the debt

[11:00] service as well. So we know some sort of

[11:02] increase is necessary

[11:08] and some of you may be familiar with

[11:10] this chart as we look at this to

[11:12] understand how much revenue needs to be

[11:15] generated and taking into consideration

[11:18] not just those expenses and revenue at

[11:21] current rates from the last slide but

[11:23] understanding you have reserves. So

[11:25] whenever revenues come in more than your

[11:27] expenses, they're held in a reserve.

[11:29] They can't be used for other town

[11:31] purposes. So within the water reserve,

[11:34] we're starting uh in June 30, 2025, so

[11:38] the end of fiscal year 2425

[11:41] just $7 million. So we can utilize some

[11:45] of those reserves. And that's what's

[11:47] occurred in 2526

[11:49] since there hasn't been a rate increase

[11:52] uh this fiscal year yet.

[11:55] So you see the solid green line which

[11:57] depicts the fund balance at the end of

[12:00] each year assuming the percent increases

[12:03] in revenue you see across uh the bottom

[12:07] there. If you do nothing, we've depicted

[12:10] that with the dotted green line there,

[12:13] you'll dip below what we call our

[12:15] operating minimum reserve before the end

[12:18] of fiscal year 2627 and it'll be fully

[12:21] depleted by the end of 2728.

[12:24] So we use these as guidelines as

[12:26] operating minimum. That's for day-to-day

[12:30] operations, keeping in reserves. you can

[12:33] pay for uh staff on a day-to-day basis

[12:37] as revenue comes in only when build. So

[12:40] that's a minimum we never want to see uh

[12:43] the fund balance go below incrementally.

[12:47] On top of that is a capital reserve to

[12:49] help pay for those capital projects or

[12:51] emergencies that can come up during the

[12:53] year. And that's depicted in the solid

[12:55] blue line. So, as we're crafting the

[12:58] necessary revenue increases, we try and

[13:00] keep that solid green line above that

[13:03] red line and approaching the target as

[13:06] we do so here by the end of the fifth

[13:08] year. So, that's how we got to the

[13:10] percent increases you see there.

[13:15] Now, revenue increases are different

[13:17] than rate increases.

[13:20] In this particular case, when you do a

[13:22] cost of service, you need to allocate

[13:24] costs to each of the respective charges

[13:26] and customer classes.

[13:29] So currently, how we read this table,

[13:31] the current revenue from 2526 rates show

[13:35] we get about 12.6 million from

[13:37] residential volumetric charges. So

[13:40] that's based on how much water you use

[13:43] and the non-residential less than a half

[13:45] million. The service meter charge is

[13:48] that fixed charge before you turn on

[13:50] that faucet paid by all customers. So

[13:54] roughly currently you're getting about

[13:56] 71% of that revenue from the volutric

[13:59] charge and 29% from the service charge.

[14:03] As we've done the cost of service, we

[14:05] see costs have shifted between

[14:08] residential and non-residential

[14:10] volumetric charges where residential's

[14:14] coming down, non-residential going up,

[14:16] but a large shift of those costs to the

[14:19] service or meter charge increasing to

[14:21] 36%

[14:23] of the cost that should be recouped from

[14:26] the service or meter charge. So we are

[14:29] seeing a shifting of those costs which

[14:31] happened during a realignment of a cost

[14:33] of service. So though we've mentioned

[14:35] and you see there at the bottom right

[14:37] hand corner that there's a 6%

[14:40] revenue increase

[14:42] the rates will change in a different

[14:44] manner. Some higher some lower.

[14:50] So what does that look like? And I did

[14:52] mention we have two different scenarios.

[14:56] Whoops.

[14:58] First on the left side of the slide

[15:00] you'll see the service or fixed meter

[15:02] charge. These are charged to your

[15:05] customers regardless of how much water

[15:07] they use. But it is dependent on the

[15:09] capacity in the system that they have

[15:11] which is measured by the meter in which

[15:14] they need. So it is graduating. The

[15:17] smaller the meter, the less fixed charge

[15:19] you pay as you're uh using less capacity

[15:23] in the system or need less capacity in

[15:27] the system. You need a smaller system if

[15:29] you have a smaller meter, a much larger

[15:31] system to be maintained if you have a

[15:33] larger meter. So we are seeing as I

[15:36] showed in that previous slide a shift

[15:39] and an increase uh more than the 6% in

[15:44] the service charge going from 16118 to

[15:47] 23795 for the 3/4 inch meter.

[15:53] looking at the tiered volutric charges.

[15:57] We're looking at reducing just a one

[15:59] customer class instead of separating by

[16:02] monthly by residential and

[16:04] non-residential.

[16:06] Currently residential has a four tier

[16:08] system and non-residential is uniform.

[16:11] We've looked at two different scenarios.

[16:13] On the right hand side top you'll see we

[16:17] have allocated the costs and developed

[16:20] tiers with breakpoint of 42 HCF in a

[16:25] bimonthly period for customers that are

[16:28] build on a bimonthly period

[16:31] and that charge would be $9.32

[16:34] until you hit 42 units. If you hit 42

[16:37] units during that billing period, the

[16:39] following units are charged $14.75.

[16:44] And that would be the same for the

[16:46] monthly customers, which there's a

[16:48] handful of residents and the commercial

[16:51] businesses. And since that's done on a

[16:53] monthly basis, that breakpoint is half

[16:56] of the bimonthly. So once you reach 21

[16:59] units, you would charge be charged a

[17:01] $9.32

[17:04] and 1475 once you go over that 21.

[17:09] Or alternatively, and as Jan mentioned,

[17:11] both of these scenarios generate the

[17:13] same revenue.

[17:15] So it doesn't harm city staff and doing

[17:18] the work they need to get done. that if

[17:21] it's a uniform, all customers would be

[17:25] charged for each unit of water. Again,

[17:28] an HCF is 750 gallons at $11.50.

[17:35] So, as you can imagine,

[17:38] uh there was a different bill impact

[17:40] between which scenario was chosen,

[17:43] though again overall the same revenue

[17:45] will be generated just differently by

[17:47] each customer.

[17:49] So with that I have a few slides of

[17:52] showing the bill impacts and they can be

[17:54] quite significant.

[17:56] Here we're showing just those customers.

[17:59] There's uh 12 that are build on a

[18:02] monthly basis. These residents have

[18:04] chosen to be build on a monthly basis.

[18:06] So we know what their bills are

[18:09] currently with the four tier system. And

[18:12] if they use the same amount of water in

[18:14] the same months that they did

[18:16] previously, we're showing the impacts of

[18:19] the two proposed scenarios. First, the

[18:21] two-tier and then the far right two

[18:25] columns for the uniform charges.

[18:28] So, it does vary depending on how much

[18:30] water you use and when you use it during

[18:33] the year. So, you'll see a significant

[18:35] decrease in customer F of about 28,000

[18:40] for the year. Again, this is for the

[18:42] year or it could be an increase of $922

[18:47] for customer J. Again, it depends on how

[18:50] much water you use within that each

[18:53] monthly period depending on do you hit

[18:56] that tier where you pay more or not.

[19:01] There are

[19:03] also large changes to bills if you go

[19:07] uniform. So, we can't avoid uh having

[19:11] significant changes, but they do differ

[19:13] from customer to customer.

[19:16] As large as a $42,000 reduction in their

[19:19] annual bills for customer F and 1,400

[19:23] for customer J.

[19:31] We also have a limited number of

[19:33] commercial customers that we've shown

[19:36] here as well. This is each commercial

[19:38] customer because there's just a handful.

[19:43] Again, it does matter which of the two

[19:46] scenarios of chain or which of the two

[19:49] scenarios

[19:52] are chosen.

[19:55] $82,000 increase to customer A

[19:59] or 24,000 if you choose a uniform.

[20:03] That's how you read this table. So

[20:07] both options are reasonable and

[20:10] defensible,

[20:12] but we wanted to make sure you had full

[20:14] disclosure of the impacts of both of the

[20:17] decisions.

[20:20] So give you another second to peruse

[20:22] this.

[20:26] And it's a bit more difficult because

[20:28] the rest of your customers that weren't

[20:30] on those last two slides are

[20:32] residential. So there's nearly 4,000. So

[20:35] it's a little bit difficult. We can't

[20:36] put them all on one slide and show each

[20:38] individual customer's impact. So what

[20:41] we've done here on the top, if you look

[20:45] at the horizontal line and you look to

[20:48] the left, those are the number of

[20:50] accounts for each of the two options

[20:52] that would see a

[20:54] decrease in their bills for the year in

[20:58] buckets there. So, starting from that

[21:01] horizontal line and looking to the left

[21:04] and looking at the two-tiered rate row,

[21:06] that's 398

[21:08] customers would expect to see a decrease

[21:12] in their annual charge between zero or

[21:17] $1,000.

[21:20] As you go to the left, you'll see the

[21:23] numbers of customers begin to decrease.

[21:25] 114

[21:27] would see a decrease between 1,00 and

[21:30] 2500 and so forth.

[21:34] Looking to the right of the horizontal

[21:36] line, these

[21:41] oh I've been saying horizontal instead

[21:43] of vertical.

[21:46] So from the vertical line number of

[21:48] accounts with annual bill increase

[21:52] the bulk of your customers about 85%

[21:57] under the two tier will see a bill

[21:59] increase

[22:01] one to $500 is 1,128

[22:04] of that 85%.

[22:07] 501 to a,000. Most of the residential

[22:11] customers, 2,249

[22:14] out of the 3988

[22:17] and 32 could see increases greater than

[22:19] a thousand.

[22:22] You look at the uniform rate uh for

[22:28] the second option again you will see

[22:31] significant increases about 82% in

[22:35] total. will see an increase and 18%

[22:39] would see a decrease in the numbers you

[22:42] see there. So there is a bit of a shift

[22:44] with the uniform where there's greater

[22:47] decreases for example in the 20,000 plus

[22:51] one customer in the two-tier versus

[22:53] three in the uniform. You'll see a

[22:55] similar change as the impacts shift

[23:00] to make it a little easier for those uh

[23:03] that know their water use. On the bottom

[23:05] here we have shown uh average water use

[23:09] which is 240 HCF or high water use which

[23:13] is two times or low water use half of

[23:16] that. Wherever you fit within that

[23:18] category you can get an idea of your

[23:21] annual impact. Again it depends on how

[23:24] much water you use during the year. It's

[23:26] those high water use customers under

[23:28] both options that will see the decrease.

[23:38] So that was a basis of our initial rate

[23:42] study. What we always do once we've

[23:45] identified what the necessary revenue

[23:47] increases are, we look at the

[23:50] sensitivities. As you know, water use

[23:52] can change from year to year. So we like

[23:54] to see what could occur with what we're

[23:57] recommending, which is depicted here in

[23:59] the solid blue line there in the middle.

[24:01] what could occur to your fund balance if

[24:04] water sales increase or decrease? So,

[24:08] we've just shown a couple here. I think

[24:10] it gives us comfort when we see

[24:12] something like that this that even if

[24:14] revenues

[24:16] increase because there's a lot more

[24:17] water sales and what we projected your

[24:20] fund balance is still under the target

[24:22] till that fifth year but it remains

[24:25] healthy. So, you may contemplate having

[24:27] something less than what was projected.

[24:30] for example, this 5% in the fifth year,

[24:32] you may be able to do something less if

[24:34] water sales improve. But we're more

[24:37] concerned with what if there's more

[24:39] conservation, less water sales, what

[24:42] would that would do to the fund balance

[24:44] to fund the operations and capital. So

[24:46] we also depict that as well. the dotted

[24:49] orang-ish and reddish lines you see

[24:52] there some various sensitivities

[24:55] still above that minimum operating even

[24:58] if we see consistent reduction in water

[25:01] use. So with what we're recommending, we

[25:04] do have the two options, but we are

[25:07] confident with our projections that

[25:09] regardless how the water sales go over

[25:11] the next 5 years that you'll be in good

[25:14] shape. And if they increase

[25:15] significantly

[25:17] when you're setting rates, those are

[25:19] just the maximum. You can always do

[25:21] something less, which was the case about

[25:23] six years ago where council decided not

[25:25] to increase the rates because it had

[25:28] sufficient revenue.

[25:33] So that's the details of our study and

[25:34] our preliminary results. I just want to

[25:36] give you a a timeline of what we will be

[25:41] doing with next steps. So tonight we're

[25:44] here with a council study session. We're

[25:46] looking to meet with the FAC in March

[25:50] 2nd, followed by coming back to the

[25:53] council either March 9th or April 13th

[25:57] to get approval to send a proposition

[26:00] 218 notice, which is a notice that is

[26:02] required whenever you're going to

[26:04] increase rates. So, you notify your

[26:06] residents and businesses.

[26:09] At that time, you would decide which of

[26:11] the options.

[26:13] If we do not decide that tonight,

[26:16] it would be printed on that Prop 218.

[26:19] Following at least 45 days, which is a

[26:21] requirement before you have the public

[26:23] hearing, that would occur either in May

[26:25] or June, depending on when the notices

[26:27] were mailed out. Again, this is all in

[26:30] an effort to have rates effective July

[26:32] one of this year.

[26:36] » Thank you, M.

[26:37] >> So, let's circle back just real quick.

[26:39] Circle back to what we're asking you

[26:41] for. So I'd like to just summarize uh so

[26:44] a new rate study was conducted of the

[26:46] preliminary results that I presented to

[26:48] you here today for rates to be effective

[26:51] July 1st. We are uh looking for feedback

[26:56] questions how we may uh answer any of

[26:59] those questions and get your feedback on

[27:01] which of the two rate scenarios you

[27:04] would like us to come back with.

[27:05] Typically we will have a full report

[27:08] based on the selected scenario. You can

[27:11] see more of the details how rates are

[27:13] calculated.

[27:19] » Thank you.

[27:20] Mr. Simson. Sorry to cut you

[27:22] off earlier.

[27:23] >> Um I um I suspect the council have some

[27:27] questions, right? Any of my colleagues

[27:30] have any clarifying questions for Mr.

[27:32] Simson? Starting with Council Member

[27:34] Muang.

[27:36] >> Thank you. Uh thank you. Great to see

[27:39] everyone in person. This is fantastic.

[27:41] Um so thank you for your presentation.

[27:44] My question is this. Um we're looking at

[27:48] basically the

[27:51] purchasing price of the volumes of water

[27:54] that we need to purchase um and the

[27:57] capital improvements that we have. And

[28:00] based on those two factors and the

[28:02] consumers uh even if we purchases the

[28:06] consumers paying for them right and so

[28:09] based on that that's how we come about

[28:12] factoring into

[28:15] um the unit price is that is that that's

[28:19] correct

[28:19] >> is that in the nutshells how how I

[28:21] understand this

[28:22] >> yes

[28:22] >> okay so my question and this this may be

[28:26] more to our public or director And that

[28:29] is in the capital improvements. I

[28:32] noticed that there are several items

[28:35] that talk about the demolishing of the

[28:38] tank and so forth. Are those

[28:42] a long-term capital improvements? Are

[28:44] they the demolitions will be placed with

[28:49] a new tank? Is is that how

[28:53] I I guess I'm trying to figure out what

[28:54] is the cost for us to have quality

[28:56] water.

[29:06] Hello. Good evening, Madame Mayor,

[29:07] members of the council. A great

[29:09] question. So, like for example, the

[29:10] demolition of the tanks. It's fully

[29:14] considering our new tank that's in

[29:15] service, the Daryl tank, as well as uh

[29:18] anticipation of our future high water

[29:21] line, which would make some of our

[29:23] mid-level tanks um redundant or not

[29:26] necessary. These are 1950s era tanks

[29:29] where we have not spent money to

[29:30] continue to keep them up. And so our

[29:33] goal would be to fully decommission them

[29:35] and not have to continue to spend money

[29:37] on keeping them.

[29:39] So that's for that one item,

[29:41] >> right? And and I guess what I what I'm

[29:43] trying to uh look at is that for the

[29:45] duration of the next uh five or six

[29:48] years that we're in this cycle of the rate increase uh studies um are

[29:53] those in the in that time frame uh

[29:57] necessary

[29:59] and and I said it loosely. I'm not

[30:01] questioning your professional adjustment

[30:04] or assessment on that. uh not to where

[30:08] it's emergency, but it it's good to

[30:10] remove them if they're in threatened uh

[30:13] state to where they'll be structurally

[30:15] deficient or could

[30:19] again if they're unused then you just

[30:22] don't let the tank sit there and rust or

[30:25] fall fall apart. So our goal would be to safely decommission that. Uh could we

[30:31] defer them for a short period of time?

[30:34] Absolutely. We can look at that if

[30:35] that's you know one thought. Um items if

[30:39] you're asking what items maybe the other

[30:41] way is say what items here are

[30:42] absolutely essential. Uh then the water

[30:45] main replacement program is essential

[30:47] because as you know we have pipes that

[30:49] are in our system. We've been here for

[30:51] over a hundred years. We have pipes in

[30:53] our system that have been here since

[30:55] we've been incorporated that do need to

[30:57] be replaced. uh the

[31:00] water coding improvement project. That's

[31:02] essential because those are tanks that

[31:04] we want to continue to serve the

[31:06] community that are are prone to for

[31:10] excessive rust and need rehabilitation.

[31:14] So

[31:15] >> okay, that's the other way. So uh the reason I asked is because again you

[31:20] know uh there are different

[31:23] uh uh perspectives regarding uh water

[31:27] conservations versus uh you know uh the

[31:31] payments that we uh pay toward using and

[31:34] maintaining the high quality of a water

[31:37] and in the sort of in the sales with the

[31:41] uh water purchase of uh SFPU

[31:45] Is there a practice of advanced payments

[31:48] like anticipating how much volumes that

[31:50] we will be using um say in the in the

[31:55] summertime is a higher volumes in the

[31:58] winter time is a lower volume. Is there

[32:00] a sort of a predium as to the price

[32:03] break or that was not the practice?

[32:08] >> I can answer this unless you try. So,

[32:11] um, SFPU does their best to predict and

[32:14] I think there was a slide here. If you

[32:16] go back to the SFPU rate,

[32:22] you'll see between 2017 to 2022, they

[32:26] had the same exact rate every year.

[32:28] Although they incurred and they were

[32:30] underway on their water and improvement

[32:33] program which was a billion dollar

[32:35] program

[32:37] they when they had to balance out and

[32:40] came back to us they hit us with a big

[32:42] charge. Uh so unfortunately I think the simplest answer is they don't

[32:47] forecast quite the same way we do. We

[32:49] try to anticipate over the next five

[32:50] years all of our projects. they've come

[32:52] back to us with one year unveiling of a really big amount and that's when Bosa

[32:58] advocates for us and they say can't ask

[33:01] for a 60% rate how have you spread this

[33:03] out over the next five years so they've

[33:05] given us kind of a early look but what

[33:08] happens is there's an annual meeting

[33:09] that happens in the end of February with

[33:12] all the water managers and account

[33:14] holders and that will occur in the next

[33:16] two weeks and then they'll unveil just

[33:18] this year's rate increase no guarant

[33:21] guarantees beyond that.

[33:23] >> Thank you. That's all I have right now.

[33:26] >> Thank you, Council Member Schwang.

[33:27] Council member Adams, any questions?

[33:30] >> Uh, yes. Thank you. Um, Paul, don't go

[33:34] too far. Uh, wouldn't it make some sense

[33:39] for us to have that information about

[33:42] what this year's rate is going to be if

[33:44] it's just two weeks away?

[33:49] » Great question. I think timing is

[33:51] everything. Um certainly before we have

[33:54] our next meeting, we'll get the official

[33:56] stamp on that.

[33:58] >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Uh I have a

[34:02] couple more questions.

[34:05] >> Thank you. Very nice to meet you in real

[34:09] >> IRL. Yes. Um

[34:14] uh the projected increases

[34:17] that you have on this same slide vary

[34:21] quite a bit uh from 53 cents to 19 cents

[34:26] to 20 2020 20. So those are all

[34:30] suppositions correct

[34:32] >> with the exception of the 2026. This is

[34:35] July 1, 2026 rate that will be charged.

[34:39] They've received, the town has received

[34:40] notice of this is the maximum that it

[34:43] could be charged. They're still hedging

[34:45] their bets that it may be less, but this

[34:47] is the maximum they said they will

[34:49] charge. And then we've looked back at

[34:52] some of the increases and tried to

[34:54] project around a 3 to 4% annual

[34:57] increase, not knowing exact. Uh so

[35:00] that's at least built into the analysis.

[35:03] And there is a provision in Proposition

[35:06] 218 that once we divulge what the

[35:09] assumption is, if for example it goes up

[35:11] by one dime over the $6.52

[35:15] in 2028, the town can pass that through

[35:19] without going through this process again

[35:21] since it's a pass through cost.

[35:23] >> And are these then reflected in the

[35:26] 66555%?

[35:28] Yes.

[35:29] >> Okay. So on a chart like this when it

[35:32] doesn't say percentages, it would be

[35:33] great to include that information.

[35:37] I'm new, so I I get to try to sit there

[35:40] with my little calculator and figure

[35:42] everything out. Um,

[35:46] on the next slide, water demand has

[35:51] declined from previous rates study

[35:56] uh except for last year. Last year we

[36:00] increased we actually were beyond our

[36:03] projections.

[36:04] So how are we to decide whether that's a

[36:08] trend or an anomaly?

[36:10] >> That's the difficulty because of mother

[36:12] nature with a lot of precipitation, less

[36:14] water use. So we have to do our best

[36:16] with the projections.

[36:19] >> But in fact we had a lot of water. We

[36:22] had good rain and in fact we sold more

[36:25] water which is I think what we want to

[36:29] do is sell the maximum amount of water

[36:33] >> from the Oh absolutely. Uh you can't

[36:36] control how much people use. Um the last

[36:39] study when this was looked at the

[36:42] assumption moving forward is 1.2

[36:44] million. So that's where I mentioned

[36:46] we've seen a decrease even though it's

[36:48] increased the last couple years. Will it

[36:50] ever get back to that amount? We are

[36:53] projecting at this point the best guess

[36:56] 1.13 million.

[36:57] >> I mean historical a historical peak of

[37:00] this magnitude would be an anomaly that

[37:02] you'd throw out in a study because

[37:04] >> Oh, correct. We did not include that.

[37:06] >> Yeah. So, uh, the next slide, uh, you

[37:11] have future capital projects and you

[37:15] don't have any until 2030,

[37:19] at which point uh, you project $2.5

[37:23] million worth of capital projects.

[37:27] How how did you come to that?

[37:30] >> Yeah, absolutely. So working with the

[37:32] town, they have a current five-year

[37:34] program, but this is this 2627 is the

[37:38] second year. So it goes through 2930.

[37:41] And speaking with staff looking to

[37:43] project for 3031 since we are looking at

[37:46] a fiveyear, that's the average they've

[37:49] are projecting to spend over the next

[37:51] four years. So it's just uh extending

[37:55] that uh average to the fifth year.

[38:00] So no specific projects have been

[38:02] identified for that 2.5 million though

[38:06] in 2030 that's why it's escalated to 2.9

[38:10] million. So the specific projects if

[38:13] Paul has some in mind I'm sure he can

[38:15] elaborate on that but again the

[38:18] five-year CIP only went through 2930.

[38:23] » Okay. Um, the next question is on

[38:30] uh slide, it's hard for me to say. It's

[38:33] either page 10, slide nine, or page

[38:36] nine, slide 12. I don't know.

[38:37] >> I'll go slowly. You can tell me

[38:39] >> that one.

[38:40] >> This one.

[38:41] >> All right.

[38:42] Uh, this is an interesting way of

[38:45] presenting this material because you

[38:48] really have to think through what you're

[38:50] trying to tell us here. Um, in actual

[38:54] fact,

[38:56] tell me about this difference at the

[38:59] end. That's that's the really critical

[39:01] part.

[39:02] >> Yeah, absolutely. So, the reason we

[39:03] include this in all of our studies, we

[39:06] everybody asks what's the rate increase

[39:08] and that's why we're careful to say

[39:10] revenue increase for a cost of service

[39:13] year. And so, this ties back to we keep

[39:16] saying 6% 6%. So this demonstrates that

[39:20] overall what the town will see is an

[39:22] increase in revenue of 6%.

[39:25] But it will be borne by the rates in a

[39:28] different manner depending on which rate

[39:30] we're talking of. So we read this as the

[39:34] residential volumetric charge the

[39:37] revenue generated from that currently

[39:40] exceeds the cost of service. So those

[39:44] volumetric charges, revenue from those

[39:48] rates will actually bring in less money

[39:52] that's being uh covered by an increase

[39:57] in the non-residential

[39:59] and an increase in the service or meter

[40:02] charge. So again, it's at the cost of

[40:05] service, you have to allocate the cost

[40:06] into the services that are being

[40:08] provided. So we know it's not always

[40:10] exactly 6%. Some's going to be higher,

[40:13] some's going to be less. In this year,

[40:16] it's quite a disparity. Um, the service

[40:19] meter charge is going up significantly,

[40:22] bringing in 36% of your revenue because

[40:25] of

[40:27] a fire service that had previously been

[40:30] collected through the volumetric charge

[40:32] for public fire protection. Uh, the

[40:35] courts have said, you really need to

[40:37] look at those, discern what those costs

[40:39] are. they should be paid equally by each

[40:41] customer and you do that through the

[40:43] fixed charge. So those costs now are in

[40:45] the fixed charge where previously they

[40:47] were in the volumetric. So that's why we

[40:49] see this realignment.

[40:52] >> Well, the next slide shows the fixed

[40:55] charges.

[40:56] >> Yes, it does.

[40:57] >> And this has an interesting

[41:00] for me. uh if you look on the service

[41:03] charge the proposed charges don't

[41:07] actually all go up. There's a point and

[41:11] in fact when you explain this you said

[41:13] the larger the meter size the more it

[41:18] will go up but in fact it doesn't. It

[41:20] actually at a certain point at 3 in goes

[41:24] down in your projection and in the six

[41:27] inch and the 8 inch.

[41:29] >> Yeah. So, let me Yeah, I should have

[41:32] explained that while I was on the slide,

[41:33] so I'm glad you brought it up. And my

[41:35] comment about that it's increasing is

[41:38] specific to the rates that are increases

[41:42] with the size of the meter regardless.

[41:43] So 161, it's going to get larger as you

[41:47] go down. Not the increase is going to

[41:49] get larger. So I apologize if my I

[41:52] misspoke because you're right, some are

[41:54] increasing, some are going down. So when

[41:57] we develop the fixed service charges,

[41:59] it's made up of two components. A fixed

[42:02] component within that fixed charge that

[42:05] regardless of how much flow you have,

[42:08] you should pay the same as your

[42:10] neighbor. Whoever has an 8 in should pay

[42:13] the same as somebody with the one inch.

[42:15] Those sorts of costs, customer service

[42:18] billing, you get one bill with the same

[42:21] stamp on it than your neighbor does,

[42:23] regardless of your meter charge. And

[42:25] those fire flow costs are also included

[42:27] there. Everybody's getting the same

[42:29] protection. Therefore, they pay the same

[42:32] amount for those costs. Then there's a

[42:34] capacity component based on the size of

[42:37] the meter. The capital costs that you're

[42:40] maintaining. You can picture as if

[42:44] everybody had 3/4 inch meter and didn't

[42:47] use much water, you could have a pipe

[42:48] this size. But if you've got 8 inch

[42:51] meters, they have a lot more demand. You

[42:53] need a pipe this size that's in the

[42:55] ground to serve both of those customers.

[42:56] Well, who should pay more for having to

[43:00] maintain a larger system and that's why

[43:03] it's graduated and gets larger. So, this

[43:05] is a realignment again from the last

[43:08] study that occurred to how costs have

[43:11] changed and how they should be recouped.

[43:13] So, there's more on that fixed kind of

[43:15] account charge that everybody should pay

[43:17] for. So you're seeing increases in the

[43:20] smaller meters but decreases in the

[43:23] larger meters.

[43:28] » So the larger meters, what you're saying

[43:30] is, if I get it correctly, the larger

[43:33] meters are going to pay more obviously,

[43:35] but relatively they're going to have a

[43:39] smaller

[43:42] increase. In fact, they won't even have

[43:44] an increase. They're going to have a

[43:45] >> for their service charge. will have a

[43:47] decrease and then their volutric

[43:49] depending on how much water they use

[43:53] they'll see an increase on that charge.

[43:55] >> That's over on the right. Correct. I'm I'm still trying to figure out the

[43:59] left. Yes. Okay.

[44:02] >> Um

[44:03] All right. And then if you go three more

[44:06] slides, I think we'll get to customer

[44:09] bill impacts.

[44:12] This This is the one.

[44:16] >> Again, I'm with my little calculator.

[44:20] >> Yes. at trying to do an Excel

[44:23] spreadsheet so that I can really look

[44:26] at not what the current bill is,

[44:29] but exactly and and not what the current

[44:33] bill is annually, but what the customer

[44:36] is going to see on the bill they

[44:38] receive, whether they're bimonthly or

[44:41] monthly.

[44:43] So, I'm I'm dividing these up to really

[44:47] see the impact that is going to be

[44:51] reflected in the bill.

[44:54] And I would like you to do that for me

[44:58] so that I'm not trying to figure that

[45:00] out because I think that's going to be

[45:03] where we're as a council going to hear

[45:05] from people when they look at that bill.

[45:08] They're not going to think about the

[45:09] year. they're going to think about right

[45:11] now.

[45:13] So, that's information I would like to

[45:16] see presented. I also would like to see

[45:19] the mean

[45:22] because that will help us see how many

[45:25] calls we're going to get and u just be a

[45:30] little more accurate because we're

[45:32] talking and I'll just say my

[45:34] perspective.

[45:36] We've been wrestling with this since

[45:37] 2020. We've been going to court. We've

[45:40] been losing. We've been trying to figure

[45:42] out the right thing. We have neighbors

[45:45] who've been advised that they should go

[45:49] with a flat rate.

[45:52] We're trying to figure out very specific

[45:55] things. So the more data we have,

[45:59] the better we will protect our citizens

[46:02] and also make it possible for us to make

[46:06] the very best decision. So sorry to go

[46:11] through all the slides. I didn't even go

[46:13] through all the slides that I had

[46:15] questions on. But the more data we have

[46:19] that is the way our customers, our

[46:23] citizens are going to see it,

[46:26] I think the better decision we'll be

[46:28] able to make.

[46:30] >> We we appreciate the comments. It It's

[46:33] always nice when you get a fresh set of

[46:35] eyes. As we're in this day in day out

[46:38] for 25 years, we sometimes forget to see

[46:41] it through the lens of a rateayer. So

[46:44] those comments are much appreciated.

[46:47] Thank you, Council Member Adams. Um,

[46:50] Council Member Crow, any questions?

[46:52] >> Thank you. Yes. And I'll try and be

[46:53] brief because I know we have to get to

[46:54] sewer, too. Um, so to try and be fair to

[46:58] the large water users. Um, uh, we've talked about this before that

[47:04] there may be some who have large

[47:06] properties who are actually using less

[47:08] water per acre than people with smaller

[47:10] properties. Are we able if we wanted to

[47:14] calculate that and charge them at a

[47:18] lower rate if they are in fact

[47:19] conserving or under 218? If they're

[47:22] using that much water, we have to charge

[47:25] them at that rate.

[47:29] » Um, thank you for the question. I can

[47:30] weigh in on that one. So, Proposition

[47:32] 218, unfortunately, it does not allow

[47:34] for conservation to be used as the basis

[47:38] for how you allocate costs. So um

[47:42] generally you have to calculate the cost

[47:43] on a parcel basis. Whatever the size of

[47:46] the parcel

[47:46] >> so whatever they're using that's the

[47:48] volume that Thank you. Right.

[47:50] >> And then uh to build on that we brought

[47:52] this up before we have some customers

[47:55] who have 2inch pipes that they were

[47:57] inquire required to install for their

[47:59] fire sprinkler system but they actually

[48:01] don't use water at a greater rate. But

[48:05] it can we give them relief on their

[48:08] service charge?

[48:11] >> Yes, that is something that you can have

[48:13] a policy to reflect that this is upsized

[48:16] for that fireflow if they can

[48:18] demonstrate they don't utilize that. And

[48:20] typically in the jurisdictions that

[48:22] we've seen it that's monitored. So if

[48:25] they oops I accidentally went over. So,

[48:27] it is monitored to make sure you can

[48:30] stay within that smaller, but you can

[48:32] make a policy to

[48:34] um utilize that when it comes to the

[48:37] service charge so you're not paying that

[48:39] full amount.

[48:40] >> Thank you. I think that would be fair.

[48:42] And then just I think that I'm sorry to

[48:44] interject. Um

[48:45] >> I'm sorry. Could you just finish your

[48:47] question then you can comment?

[48:48] >> Interject on based on her questions. I I

[48:51] think that we over the years have adjust

[48:54] uh because of the the pipe size that

[48:57] people were concerned that we did adjust

[48:59] it. Um

[49:00] >> we were looking at it. We were looking

[49:02] at we haven't we haven't apology.

[49:06] >> Yeah. Just um one uh council member at a

[49:09] time speaking please. Um go ahead Paul.

[49:11] Do you have

[49:12] >> to clarify both uh we looked into it. We

[49:14] know all of those folks that are

[49:16] impacted that have the larger pipe, the

[49:19] larger meter, but that use water at a

[49:22] smaller volume comparable to an inch

[49:25] meter. So, we have that information,

[49:27] >> but we haven't enacted it.

[49:29] >> Yeah, I would recommend we enact that,

[49:31] but so thank you. I'm glad that you

[49:32] thought that we were doing it already.

[49:34] And then one last quick question. If we

[49:36] don't approve these increases, would

[49:39] that affect our bond rating?

[49:42] It's probably a jam question

[49:46] because we do have we still have our AAA

[49:48] bond rating, right?

[49:50] It's some we will need water rate

[49:53] increases. Um and the question would be

[49:57] when would that become critical for our

[49:59] bonds, right? Um so you can see on on

[50:02] this slide here at the bottom the debt

[50:05] coverage ratio

[50:07] uh goes from 2.15 upward. And so we need

[50:10] to keep a ratio of of 1.2. So we're well

[50:15] within it with this scenario. This um

[50:19] the rates as proposed here are going to

[50:22] be more about covering our operations

[50:25] and our capital needs um because it does

[50:28] appear that we're going to be within our

[50:30] debt service coverage. It's a great

[50:32] question though.

[50:32] >> That's all I have. Madam

[50:33] >> and thank you, Council Member Crowley.

[50:35] Um Vice Mayor Rexdale.

[50:38] >> Thank you. Um again uh like others have

[50:40] said so good to see you in person and uh

[50:43] thank you for the detailed analysis and

[50:44] also thank you for giving us the slides

[50:46] in advance is always um super helpful to

[50:48] see them in advance. Um I'm going to try

[50:51] to ask uh questions with quick answers

[50:54] because I I know um we're maybe running

[50:56] out of time and we need to get to sewer.

[50:58] Um first question is um we usually do

[51:02] this the bigger cost of service analysis

[51:05] every five years and this for water not

[51:09] sewers is we're on an earlier schedule.

[51:12] Is that

[51:13] >> that's correct?

[51:15] >> Um and um I understand there's probably

[51:20] many reasons for that so we don't need

[51:22] to go into that. Um, I noticed in the

[51:24] capital improvement projects the

[51:26] highline wasn't up there. Is that

[51:29] because it's

[51:31] under a different budget category?

[51:35] Thank you. That's a great question. Uh,

[51:36] we actually have assumed that that would

[51:39] get approved, you know, for for

[51:42] assumptions of this rate study and that

[51:44] the it would be financed with a

[51:47] short-term loan during the last two

[51:50] years of this analysis. So, it's not

[51:53] known as a capital spending because that

[51:55] would be what we spend, but we would

[51:57] actually be getting in proceeds from the

[51:59] short-term loan and paying debt service.

[52:02] So, that's why it's not shown on here.

[52:04] >> Okay. Thank you.

[52:07] >> Um,

[52:09] okay. This is a question I've had for a

[52:11] long time and this is goes in the

[52:13] category of there's no such thing as a

[52:14] stupid question, I hope. Um, we talk

[52:16] about pipe size and we talk about meter

[52:18] size. Is that the same thing? I think

[52:21] the meter is the little the thing

[52:23] outside your house that can be read, but

[52:26] that's not a pipe.

[52:29] >> So, it connects to a pipe, what we call

[52:32] a service, and that size of that service

[52:35] >> is different for each meter size about

[52:38] the capacity of what you can get.

[52:40] >> So, it's what is on the other side of

[52:42] that pipe that has the other side of the

[52:44] meter that has a different size.

[52:46] >> That's correct.

[52:47] >> Because I'm like, I think our meters are

[52:48] all the same size. Okay. Uh thank you.

[52:51] Um that is helpful. Um then um with

[52:55] regard to I think this is this the same

[52:58] question I have for two different

[53:00] things. um one is the um the

[53:05] service charge and one is the two-tier

[53:08] and given uh the various court opinions

[53:12] and all of that um how do we justify

[53:17] different service charges and different

[53:20] potentially if we went this way

[53:22] two-tiered

[53:24] um different charges based on meter

[53:31] I don't know if you want to answer it be

[53:32] legal.

[53:33] >> Yeah, I can I can weigh in. So, there

[53:36] are a lot of different court opinions

[53:38] floating around sort of in the

[53:40] atmosphere right now and they've all

[53:42] kind of had different approaches as to

[53:45] how you allocate costs. Uh, with respect

[53:47] to a two-tier structure, um, there's

[53:50] kind of two general principles that that

[53:52] would hopefully accomplish. Number one

[53:54] is that you want to make sure that

[53:56] you're allocating costs based on the

[53:58] proportional cost of service which

[54:00] includes you know the cost of the

[54:02] infrastructure particularly your storage

[54:05] your pumping and your distribution

[54:07] that's designed at a larger level in

[54:09] order to meet varying levels of demand.

[54:12] Um doing it in a two-tier structure

[54:14] tries to kind of simplify it a little

[54:16] bit and makes it really focused on the

[54:18] data that the town has. Um, there's also

[54:22] the other side of sort of the various

[54:24] court opinions that have been

[54:26] circulating, which is that you have to

[54:29] make sure not only that your larger

[54:31] users aren't subsidizing your smaller

[54:33] users, but also that your smaller users

[54:36] are not subsidizing your larger users by

[54:39] having, for example, this the cost of a

[54:41] system that's already been built, but

[54:44] that was built to accommodate multiple

[54:45] levels of usage

[54:47] Latin for everybody. So the idea behind

[54:50] the two-tier structure um as would be

[54:53] explained in the rate study would be

[54:54] that would be a means of accomplishing

[54:56] both of those goals.

[54:59] >> Could it could it be argu Thank you. Uh

[55:02] could it be argued that under a uniform

[55:04] rate structure really you would want

[55:06] uniform service charges? So the service

[55:09] charge is a little bit different because

[55:11] the service charge looks at the size of

[55:13] the meter that serves the parcel and it

[55:15] takes sort of the maximum

[55:18] demand that that could place on the

[55:20] system and so as the meters get larger

[55:23] they have the capacity to place more

[55:24] demand on the system and those go only

[55:27] to the fixed costs that the town incurs

[55:30] in order to meet those varying levels of

[55:32] demand. So the way that they're

[55:34] increased, those are based off of what

[55:37] are called meter capacity ratios that

[55:40] look at the maximum demand that each of

[55:42] those meter sizes can place on the

[55:44] system and increase them exponentially

[55:46] based off of what you know as you get

[55:48] larger. It's not like a one to two sort

[55:50] of ratio. It's

[55:52] bigger because it's a you know it's a

[55:53] circle. Um and so so that that has

[55:57] actually not really been an issue in the

[56:00] courts. Um I think the courts have been

[56:02] pretty comfortable with those thus far

[56:05] where the courts have had differing opinions is really on the

[56:08] volume side.

[56:09] >> Okay, that is extremely helpful. Thank

[56:12] you. Um sir uh the last thing quick

[56:14] comment on uh your presentation the

[56:18] customer bill impacts by monthly

[56:19] residential

[56:21] uh slide 13

[56:24] on the bottom where you have um are you

[56:28] very low low average and high um I found

[56:32] that super helpful so I I love council

[56:34] member Adam's suggestions also for um

[56:38] rateayers but um I think this maybe

[56:42] adding to it a little bit for her

[56:44] suggestions like where where am I? I

[56:47] don't know right how many how many I use

[56:49] but you know I kind of have an idea

[56:50] where I fit and so I I just I found that

[56:53] super um helpful and thank you.

[56:55] >> Thank you.

[56:57] >> Um thank you Vice Mayor Rexdale. Um

[56:59] thanks for the presentation. Um just a

[57:01] couple of clarifying points and thanks

[57:02] to all the questions posed by my

[57:04] colleagues. Um what I didn't quite

[57:08] understand in the presentation is the

[57:10] actual cost for the actual operating

[57:13] cost to have a larger volume. I mean was

[57:16] that embedded in the on&m?

[57:22] » Apologies.

[57:24] >> I think it's I think

[57:25] >> so reviewing are you referring to a

[57:27] two-tier system? What costs are there

[57:31] the incremental costs in order to charge

[57:33] more per unit? Correct.

[57:35] >> Yes. Those are on andm costs and even

[57:38] some capital costs that are necessary

[57:40] for a larger system for when there are

[57:43] times of peaking. So you only pay that

[57:45] when you actually need to utilize that

[57:48] larger system.

[57:50] >> Okay. I think what I would like

[57:51] clarification on is if everyone was on

[57:56] the two-tiered system, what would the

[57:58] capacity

[58:00] what would be required in terms of

[58:02] capacity? How how would that affect our

[58:04] total expenditures

[58:07] comparatively?

[58:09] Let's just assume everybody uses a

[58:11] thousand cubic feet. I don't know I

[58:14] didn't have the right units here.

[58:15] >> It's it's based on historic water use

[58:18] and when they peak

[58:21] >> so it's also using peaking, not just

[58:22] volumetric.

[58:24] >> Yes.

[58:24] >> Okay. the volumetric

[58:26] >> because sort of what I'm hearing is

[58:29] given that there's certain factors that

[58:31] are beyond our control such as how much

[58:34] rain we have, how much water storage the

[58:36] state has, that is well obviously the

[58:39] state can't control that either to some

[58:41] degree. The cost of purchasing the water

[58:44] is really going to be beyond our

[58:46] control. That's going to continue

[58:48] historically it's continued to go up

[58:49] even by smaller numbers. So if the cost

[58:53] continues to go up and we were to hit

[58:55] another drought session, which is

[58:57] inevitable because of weather patterns,

[58:59] >> yeah,

[59:00] >> the demand will continue to fall even

[59:02] more precipitously. So your gap between

[59:05] your revenue and your expenditure will

[59:07] continue to grow. So I think what I

[59:09] would like in our subsequent

[59:11] conversation is what infrastructure

[59:14] costs because that's all we can control.

[59:17] What infrastructure costs can we

[59:19] mitigate on the front end to stabilize

[59:22] or never be able to stabilize 100% is

[59:24] the point I'm trying to make, but at

[59:26] least to predictably say

[59:29] this is what it's going to cost us to

[59:32] provide unlimited amount of water for

[59:34] whoever wants to demand unlimited amount

[59:36] of water because we can't cap how much

[59:38] water everyone has.

[59:40] >> If you want 10 times more than the next

[59:42] door neighbor, you can have it. But what

[59:45] costs are embedded in that cap in that

[59:47] infrastructure? Because that it seems

[59:49] like that's all we can control the cost

[59:51] of water from the states

[59:53] >> can control.

[59:53] >> We can control that. How much water we

[59:55] have yearto year, we can control that.

[59:58] >> Um and certainly we can control the

[1:00:00] demand. I mean if people want to use a

[1:00:02] lot of water and they want to pay for

[1:00:03] it, that's fine. So I think I would just

[1:00:05] like more information on the

[1:00:07] infrastructure. Yeah. what what costs

[1:00:10] are we able to manipulate or change to

[1:00:14] create some predictability with regards

[1:00:16] to our cost. Um but anyways, excellent

[1:00:20] presentation. I don't have any further

[1:00:22] questions. I understand we have to move

[1:00:24] on to um the other study session unless

[1:00:26] there's additional comments from staff.

[1:00:29] I see our city manager is looking at me

[1:00:31] like um he wants to tell he wants to

[1:00:34] clarify something for me. Oh.

[1:00:36] >> Oh, go ahead, Jen, please.

[1:00:39] Yes.

[1:00:41] >> So, just to summarize a bit, uh when we

[1:00:45] bring this back, we will be putting in

[1:00:48] more transparency on bill impacts. We

[1:00:52] will be looking at um like a usage that

[1:00:57] is below like a policy as described by

[1:01:00] uh council member Kick. And um we will

[1:01:05] be

[1:01:07] looking just one last time today to see

[1:01:10] if there is any kind of initial

[1:01:13] direction on one of the two avenues for

[1:01:19] um going with a uniform rate or a

[1:01:22] two-tiered rate. If there is not, we'll

[1:01:24] be writing a report and bringing that

[1:01:26] back with um with more analysis and um

[1:01:30] transparency.

[1:01:31] >> Okay.

[1:01:32] >> Yeah. Yes. Council I miss Vice Mayor

[1:01:35] Rexdale. A quick question for that. Um

[1:01:39] I don't I think I know the answer, but I

[1:01:41] wanted to ask because I actually don't

[1:01:43] know the answer. Um, is there a way like

[1:01:46] we could like if we decided we want to

[1:01:49] go with the two-tier and then the

[1:01:53] government, the California Supreme Court

[1:01:55] says no two no two-tier ever not allowed

[1:01:59] that we could come back and change to

[1:02:01] uniform in in a year the next time we

[1:02:04] discuss rates or is that a five-year

[1:02:06] situation?

[1:02:09] It would just require a new 218.

[1:02:12] Okay, thank you. Um, the next president.

[1:02:15] Yes, Council Adams. Okay.

[1:02:17] >> Yes.

[1:02:18] >> You know, Jen, we actually didn't really

[1:02:21] have much conversation about which of

[1:02:23] the scenarios we would like you to come

[1:02:26] back with. Is there a possibility that

[1:02:29] we could just come back again with both?

[1:02:32] Because I think there were questions

[1:02:34] about details that would help us with

[1:02:38] that analysis.

[1:02:40] I'm just raising.

[1:02:41] >> Yeah.

[1:02:41] >> And that's a very good thought. Um we

[1:02:44] have um uh sort of goal setting,

[1:02:47] strategic planning. Is there any

[1:02:48] possibility we can elaborate on the

[1:02:49] subject at that point? Um certainly our

[1:02:53] consultants could join us remotely if

[1:02:55] possible, if needed. I'm not sure in

[1:02:58] terms of the calendar, but that's a good

[1:03:00] point. Maybe we can look into it to see

[1:03:01] how we can come back with more details.

[1:03:04] Yeah, I would say the goal initially for staff and our and our experts over

[1:03:08] here, the goal was to pick a direction

[1:03:10] as to which way we want to sort of

[1:03:12] invest the remainder of our experts time

[1:03:15] here to bring forth something, whether

[1:03:16] that be a uniform or two-tiered. If if

[1:03:19] that's not a decision that we're

[1:03:20] comfortable getting into today without

[1:03:22] some more information, we would set up a

[1:03:24] future meeting to answer some of the

[1:03:26] questions that you brought up. But if

[1:03:27] you're asking what was staff looking

[1:03:29] for, it it was one one of the two, but

[1:03:32] it sounds like we're at a position now

[1:03:34] where we're having a an understanding of

[1:03:36] the two of them, but we need some more

[1:03:37] information. And I would ask our experts

[1:03:39] here, do you have the enough information

[1:03:43] from the council to come back with with

[1:03:45] some of the questions they had?

[1:03:50] » Yes, we do.

[1:03:51] >> Yeah. And I think you you're right in

[1:03:53] summarizing it. We do need more

[1:03:55] information and thanks for looking into

[1:03:56] it further.

[1:03:57] >> Yeah. And as to the methodology of that,

[1:03:59] whether that's at a at an additional

[1:04:01] study session or maybe setting some

[1:04:04] additional time at a at a future

[1:04:05] meeting, you know, we can certainly get

[1:04:06] together with these uh experts and come

[1:04:09] up with a plan for it.

[1:04:10] >> Okay. Thank you, city manager. Okay,

[1:04:16] we will now move on to

[1:04:19] sewer rates. Thank you. Hello, Mr.

[1:04:22] Santgo. Good afternoon, Madam Cole. Um,

[1:04:24] and council. So, the other portion of

[1:04:27] the study session is the sewer rate

[1:04:29] study. Um, just a quick background, the

[1:04:32] last time we adopted a 218 for the sewer

[1:04:35] rates was June of 2021. We did use all

[1:04:38] five years of the rate series. We

[1:04:41] adopted the last one in July. And so,

[1:04:43] that's why we're doing the new study

[1:04:44] again with HF&H and Gabe will be uh

[1:04:48] presenting it.

[1:04:52] Good evening. I'm Gabe Sasser, project

[1:04:55] manager with HFNH. I want to apologize

[1:04:57] in advance for how quickly I might go

[1:04:59] through these slides.

[1:05:01] I'll look forward to your questions.

[1:05:04] So, the purpose of today's presentation

[1:05:06] is to present our preliminary analysis

[1:05:09] of the five-year schedule of sewer

[1:05:11] rates, which would be implemented as

[1:05:13] early as July 1, 2026.

[1:05:18] Uh there's two main takeaways from this

[1:05:20] presentation. One, projections indicate

[1:05:22] that the revenue increases

[1:05:25] ranging between two and three% are

[1:05:28] needed over the next 5 years. And I'll

[1:05:30] provide more detail as to why. The

[1:05:33] second takeaway is that in looking at

[1:05:36] the cost of service, we reanalyzed the

[1:05:39] residential indoor water use.

[1:05:42] And in doing so, uh, this is going to

[1:05:46] result in commercial bills increasing by

[1:05:48] more than residential customers bills.

[1:05:52] And that is because, uh, sewer charges

[1:05:55] are based on a single family dwelling

[1:05:57] equivalent, what's known as one .edu.

[1:06:00] And that one .edu is reflective of the

[1:06:03] average indoor residential household

[1:06:05] water use.

[1:06:07] Residents are charged one unit for sewer

[1:06:10] service as their flows are fairly

[1:06:13] consistent throughout. But in contrast,

[1:06:17] commercial customers,

[1:06:19] their flows vary significantly. And so

[1:06:22] their charges are reflective of the

[1:06:24] actual flows of that commercial parcel

[1:06:27] relative to the average residential

[1:06:30] customers.

[1:06:32] And when we last or when this was last

[1:06:35] studied, uh the indoor water use

[1:06:38] standard was based on 14400 cubics cubic units of water use annually.

[1:06:47] And this was reanalyzed this year and

[1:06:50] that figure has declined to 78 units of

[1:06:55] indoor water use. And so what this means

[1:06:57] from a billing perspective is that if a

[1:07:01] commercial customer used 144 units, then

[1:07:05] up until now they were build for one

[1:07:07] unit of uh in terms of their sewer

[1:07:10] charge, which is $4,311.

[1:07:14] However, at that same level of flow, if

[1:07:17] we use the new standard of indoor water

[1:07:20] use, reflective of conservation and

[1:07:23] changes in residential patterns over the

[1:07:26] years, this means that customer, that

[1:07:29] same customer would now be charged 1.85

[1:07:32] units for the same levels of flow. And

[1:07:35] for numbers,

[1:07:37] that's $7,975.

[1:07:41] So, a significant increase. So,

[1:07:44] something to preview for you. To take a

[1:07:46] step back, as Rich touched upon, sewer

[1:07:49] rates were last studied in 2021, and

[1:07:52] this resulted in five years of

[1:07:53] consecutive 4% annual increases. This

[1:07:57] sewer rate study covers the upcoming

[1:07:59] fiscal year 2627 through 2033.

[1:08:04] In terms of where we're going, uh the

[1:08:06] rest of the slide shows that capital

[1:08:08] improvements uh to be cash funded

[1:08:11] average $5.1 million per year and that

[1:08:14] public works continues its efforts to

[1:08:16] reduce inflow and infiltration through

[1:08:19] pipe replacement and addressing

[1:08:20] homeowners deficient laterals.

[1:08:23] These are four bullets associated with

[1:08:26] the costs uh in projecting the revenue

[1:08:30] requirement that the sewer rates uh must

[1:08:33] address. First, there's annual operating

[1:08:35] costs which are increasing by

[1:08:37] inflationary measures and no additional

[1:08:40] headcount is anticipated in those

[1:08:42] numbers. This is the largest cost

[1:08:44] category which ranges between 6.7

[1:08:47] million up to 7.7 million over the

[1:08:49] 5-year period. Next, there is Sanonteo

[1:08:52] Burnley treatment costs and those are

[1:08:54] increasing 5% annually. Those are costs

[1:08:57] really outside the city's control as

[1:08:59] these are the treatment costs and the

[1:09:02] costs required to treat every parcels uh

[1:09:05] collected sewer discharge.

[1:09:08] There are the capital expenditures which

[1:09:10] I touched upon and I'll be showing you

[1:09:12] on the next slide. And then finally

[1:09:14] there's debt coverage. There's $3.8 8

[1:09:17] million annually through the first four

[1:09:20] years and then in the fifth year uh that

[1:09:23] amount reduces by half a million due to

[1:09:26] a reduction in the schedule of the 2023

[1:09:28] refunding bond payment. Of that 3.8

[1:09:31] million, 1.9 million is the Sonteo clean

[1:09:35] water portion that the town is

[1:09:37] responsible for paying that they share

[1:09:39] with other agencies.

[1:09:42] This is a uh overview of the capital

[1:09:45] expenditure projections. Uh again, this

[1:09:48] is a five-year program and four years

[1:09:50] were available. And so as a result for

[1:09:53] 20 3031, we used the average of the

[1:09:57] four-year spend. So if you took the

[1:09:59] average of those first four columns of

[1:10:01] the subtotal, that's what generated the

[1:10:03] 4.6 million in the fifth year. And then

[1:10:06] those construction costs have been

[1:10:08] escalated to account for

[1:10:11] historic changes in labor and material

[1:10:13] costs. Collectively,

[1:10:16] from an escalated standpoint, that's

[1:10:18] $5.1 million per year that rates will

[1:10:21] pay for. This does not include the

[1:10:23] Macadamia Storm project as that project

[1:10:26] staff has determined may be funded

[1:10:28] through FEMA and insurance and thus

[1:10:31] rates would not need to uh pay for this

[1:10:34] project.

[1:10:37] This is an overview of uh the forecasted

[1:10:41] expenses shown by the stacked bars.

[1:10:43] There's four cost categories. There's

[1:10:45] the on andm expenses which include uh

[1:10:48] salary, uh labor, benefits as well as

[1:10:52] materials and services the town provides

[1:10:54] for the collection services. There's the

[1:10:57] treatment costs. Those are the external

[1:10:59] costs for the Sanonteo and Berling game

[1:11:02] treatment plants. the debt service which

[1:11:04] I touched upon briefly and the capital

[1:11:06] improvements.

[1:11:08] Um for uh clarification, the capital

[1:11:11] improvements shown are based on the

[1:11:14] actual amounts to be spent on the last

[1:11:17] slide and not the 5.1 million on average

[1:11:20] each year. So that's why if you're

[1:11:21] looking at the size of those bars, they

[1:11:23] vary from year to year. We contrast that

[1:11:26] with the revenue at current rates, which

[1:11:28] is the black line. Currently revenues

[1:11:31] are sufficient to meet the expenses for

[1:11:33] the current fiscal year. But as you can

[1:11:36] see that expenses are outpacing revenues

[1:11:39] at current rates in future years and

[1:11:41] some level of reserves use of reserves

[1:11:44] and revenue increases will be necessary.

[1:11:48] And that brings us to our five-year

[1:11:50] schedule. This is the financial plan. Uh

[1:11:53] Rick touched upon how the minimum

[1:11:56] reserve and target reserve are derived.

[1:11:58] So I'll go ahead and bypass that

[1:12:01] portion. But the goal is to set rates

[1:12:04] such that the reserve fund balance, the

[1:12:07] dark green line, maintains a threshold

[1:12:10] above or at the target reserve. And so

[1:12:12] with the recommended revenue increases

[1:12:15] that you see on the horizontal axis, uh

[1:12:18] the town can maintain and meet that

[1:12:20] goal. absent any rate increases. Uh the

[1:12:25] reserve fund balance would follow the

[1:12:28] dashed lighter green line

[1:12:31] with uh the recommended revenue

[1:12:33] increases in 2627.

[1:12:36] We evaluated the cost of service which

[1:12:39] is shown on this next slide.

[1:12:41] And so in looking at the cost of service

[1:12:44] uh we established the rates that you see

[1:12:46] in the first table. So per equivalent

[1:12:50] dwelling unit

[1:12:52] uh each residential parcel would pay

[1:12:54] $4,39347

[1:12:57] and you can see the $8247

[1:13:01] increase in that first year and then

[1:13:03] thereafter they would see um increases

[1:13:07] to their annual charge u mirroring that

[1:13:11] of the revenue increases.

[1:13:14] Now this is where the indoor water use

[1:13:16] analysis comes into play and in

[1:13:19] relooking at that and updating that

[1:13:21] assumption uh this is what's causing the

[1:13:24] commercial bill difference that you see

[1:13:26] in the second table. So specifically I'm

[1:13:28] pointing at um that four that final

[1:13:32] column on the right hand side overall

[1:13:34] generating a 3% increase but residential

[1:13:38] customer bills would collectively

[1:13:40] increase by 2%.

[1:13:42] However, commercial customers would

[1:13:44] increase by significantly more uh given

[1:13:48] their uh share of the overall flow and

[1:13:51] the change in the water use assumptions

[1:13:53] which are a proxy for sewer flows.

[1:13:58] And so to provide context, uh we looked

[1:14:01] at what commercial customers are

[1:14:03] currently charged. And so those uh 12

[1:14:07] customers are shown.

[1:14:10] And then there's two and I'll note

[1:14:16] and sorry um

[1:14:20] sorry uh so we have the current charge

[1:14:23] in the second column and then that's

[1:14:25] compared to the revised water use. So

[1:14:27] this these would be the bills uh for the

[1:14:30] same levels of flow as what they're

[1:14:32] currently being charged under the new

[1:14:34] indoor water use assumption. And you can

[1:14:37] see the dollar difference that those

[1:14:38] customers would pay. And then for

[1:14:41] context, uh maintaining the same water

[1:14:44] use standard, which is not reflective of

[1:14:47] current conditions of the system, uh you

[1:14:50] could see would lead to significantly

[1:14:52] lower increases, but again would not be

[1:14:54] reflective of the current cost of

[1:14:56] service, which is the goal of this

[1:14:57] study.

[1:14:59] Taking a step back, this is the timeline

[1:15:01] for rate adoption in order to implement

[1:15:04] rates July 1.

[1:15:07] uh with the intent to return to council

[1:15:10] in March to receive approval to initiate

[1:15:13] the 218 process for a public hearing to

[1:15:16] be held in May.

[1:15:19] Uh at this time uh we request your

[1:15:23] discussion and feedback regarding the

[1:15:24] preliminary rates presented and for

[1:15:28] reference again these are the rates.

[1:15:30] Thank you.

[1:15:31] >> Thank you very much. Um,

[1:15:34] I will take it to the council. Um,

[1:15:38] was just going to go in order so we all

[1:15:40] get a chance to comment. Um, council

[1:15:42] member Adams,

[1:15:45] I have very few questions. Yay. But, uh,

[1:15:48] the slide that is the most difficult is

[1:15:51] the second the one right before the rate

[1:15:54] adoption timeline where you talk about

[1:15:57] the actual increases for the customers.

[1:16:01] an increase of uh

[1:16:05] you know a jump of $67,000

[1:16:08] that's going to be pretty well noticed.

[1:16:10] So we don't have that many uh commercial

[1:16:13] customers. So are these the 12 basically

[1:16:18] is this

[1:16:18] >> these are all

[1:16:19] >> this is literally all right. So these

[1:16:22] are schools country club and

[1:16:26] racket club.

[1:16:29] Yeah. Okay.

[1:16:33] There's no other question other than

[1:16:36] that's going to be interesting to see

[1:16:38] how that will be accepted, but no

[1:16:41] questions.

[1:16:41] >> Thank you, Council Member Adams. Um,

[1:16:43] Council Member Trang.

[1:16:46] >> Thank you for your presentation, Gate.

[1:16:48] You're on point. Um question is on the

[1:16:52] second slide deck that you talk about um

[1:16:55] our uh treatment plan contract or

[1:16:58] services from San Mattel Berlin gain

[1:17:03] uh you you allude to the fact that it

[1:17:05] cannot be predictable

[1:17:08] that's not true right they should the

[1:17:11] agency should look at their capital

[1:17:13] improvements and their business business

[1:17:15] model anticipate like we do about the

[1:17:17] five years out how they're going to be

[1:17:20] expecting their operations and so forth

[1:17:24] and as a courtesy share that with

[1:17:27] customers which we are right uh to their

[1:17:31] services. Is that the the fact or is it

[1:17:33] not?

[1:17:35] >> Yes. So just to clarify um I was stating

[1:17:38] their external cost. So, you're right.

[1:17:40] They're uh external agency under their

[1:17:42] control and the information that we have

[1:17:46] includes what the town has budgeted thus

[1:17:48] far and uh we'd have to revisit what

[1:17:51] they've communicated how far in advance

[1:17:53] of what those costs are.

[1:17:56] >> All right. So, is that a questions for

[1:17:58] um Jan or Paul regarding the

[1:18:01] conversation with our sister cities?

[1:18:06] Great question and uh the details are

[1:18:09] all covered in the the joint hours or

[1:18:13] the multi-ity partners agreement uh one

[1:18:15] for Sonteo and the clean water program

[1:18:17] that just was signed recently and then

[1:18:19] uh recently also for Berlingame the

[1:18:22] annual cost for CIP are very direct and

[1:18:28] any increase beyond what's allowed there

[1:18:30] has to come back to you or the other uh

[1:18:33] cities for changes beyond on that

[1:18:35] regular CPI cost for actual operations

[1:18:38] um and uh staff is also in there. So

[1:18:42] you're correct. Anything beyond those

[1:18:43] parameters needs to come back to you the

[1:18:46] appointing bodies for significant

[1:18:48] improvements. So since the new both

[1:18:50] treatment plants went through a CDO

[1:18:51] recently I don't expect uh any changes

[1:18:54] on that.

[1:18:55] >> Thank you. So it's just a comments I

[1:18:58] mean it's really it's the operation and

[1:19:00] you're helping us to shape um you know

[1:19:03] in terms of the cost of operation it is

[1:19:05] a pass through we're not anticipating to

[1:19:08] make revenues on this. So to the extent

[1:19:11] that we can anticipate and be able to um

[1:19:14] understand the other agency, we rely on

[1:19:17] them to be able to calculate those

[1:19:19] factors, I think it's the better for us

[1:19:23] to have a a clear clarity on our um

[1:19:26] charges. So thank you.

[1:19:30] >> Thank you, Council Member Trong, Council

[1:19:31] Member Crowley.

[1:19:33] >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. I have a

[1:19:34] question for Paul and while you come up

[1:19:36] just one comment um to build on what

[1:19:39] council member Adams said we said this

[1:19:41] before with the commercial sewer rate

[1:19:43] increase we are a small town and it's I

[1:19:45] think the the the importance of personal

[1:19:48] outreach to each one of those um

[1:19:50] customers will be really important and I

[1:19:52] think the city manager had um city

[1:19:56] manager the city manager city manager

[1:19:59] had noted that before the importance of

[1:20:01] personal outreach to our commercial

[1:20:03] customers. Thank you. So Paul, I just

[1:20:06] have one question. Um, how many years

[1:20:08] does the sanitary sewer master plan span

[1:20:12] and where are we in that timeline?

[1:20:14] >> So, initially, I think we first started

[1:20:16] in 2013, it was a 20-year plan and we've

[1:20:20] recently in the last two years, Natalie

[1:20:22] canir, we've gone back just to make sure

[1:20:25] we're on pace uh to meet those goals.

[1:20:28] When we initially started it, the town

[1:20:30] was under a cease and desist order where

[1:20:32] we had to do certain improvements. And

[1:20:34] we've checked off all those boxes. We're

[1:20:36] no longer under a microscope. We still

[1:20:39] do get annual visits from the regional

[1:20:42] board. But since we do have a program

[1:20:45] and a plan of how to fix the system and

[1:20:47] continue to improve it, we haven't faced

[1:20:49] any other, you know, fines or or

[1:20:52] anything.

[1:20:53] >> Is it a 20-year plan, 25 year plan,

[1:20:55] 30-year plan? It's it's a 20-year plan

[1:20:58] that we but we continue to review it

[1:21:00] every few years to make sure that we're

[1:21:02] on pace.

[1:21:04] >> So it's so originally

[1:21:07] supposed to finish up around 2033.

[1:21:10] >> So no, that that's a great question. We

[1:21:12] wish engineers wish we could do

[1:21:14] everything in 20 or 30 years, but in

[1:21:16] most cases it's more like a hundred

[1:21:18] years before you could replace it

[1:21:19] because if we're only replacing a mile

[1:21:21] of pipeline a year and we have 98 miles,

[1:21:24] well it's going to take a long time. But

[1:21:26] what we do similar to the streets is we

[1:21:28] pinpoint the worst performing areas, the

[1:21:30] areas that have INI that are prone for

[1:21:34] environmental damage and we fix those

[1:21:36] first.

[1:21:37] >> Okay. So it's ongoing basically.

[1:21:39] >> So not in my lifetime.

[1:21:41] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:21:45] >> Is that it?

[1:21:46] >> Yeah. Thank you, Council Member Crowley.

[1:21:47] Vice Mayor Rexdale.

[1:21:49] >> Uh yes. Uh thank you. And again, thank

[1:21:51] you for the slides in advance. Super

[1:21:53] helpful. you didn't go too fast because

[1:21:55] we had them in advance so that was

[1:21:56] great. Um, a quick observation I guess

[1:22:00] with regard to the Berlin game and San

[1:22:02] Mato, you know, I presume we can we can

[1:22:04] at least look at what they are charging

[1:22:07] their customers to know if they're

[1:22:09] having a big increase. Then we can we

[1:22:12] can say what's up with that. Um, so we

[1:22:15] won't hopefully be too surprised. Um uh

[1:22:18] I had a question with regard to the

[1:22:22] decrease in the residential use.

[1:22:27] Do we know are is it a post pandemic

[1:22:30] people are not home during the day? Uh

[1:22:33] is or and or is it the increase of

[1:22:36] lowflow toilets or do we not know? Yeah,

[1:22:39] the quick answer to that is that the

[1:22:43] current analysis takes into account the

[1:22:45] last three years and it's more informed

[1:22:48] than ever with the town's work with CADC

[1:22:52] who looked at a more precise

[1:22:54] representation

[1:22:56] uh to determine indoor water use. um how

[1:23:00] it was previously set is something that

[1:23:02] was done before 2016 and not something

[1:23:06] that uh really HFNH was a part of. So

[1:23:10] it's been you know over a decade since

[1:23:12] this was last analyzed at a minimum.

[1:23:16] >> Oh since the rate of use but it has

[1:23:18] changed.

[1:23:20] >> Exactly. It's gone unaccounted for,

[1:23:22] right? I mean, so I don't want to say

[1:23:24] unaccounted for, sorry.

[1:23:27] It was not looked at during the previous

[1:23:28] cost of service study,

[1:23:31] >> nor in 2016 as well.

[1:23:33] >> So there's been a lot more lowflow

[1:23:35] toilets installed since then,

[1:23:37] >> right? in and in in a way it also um

[1:23:40] correlates to the water use patterns

[1:23:42] that Rick showed during the water use

[1:23:45] presentation where you had that peak in

[1:23:47] 2012 2013 where um water use whether it

[1:23:50] was discretionary or indoor was u at a

[1:23:54] premium.

[1:23:55] >> Okay, that's super helpful. Um then I

[1:23:58] was wondering um back to the commercial

[1:24:00] customers

[1:24:02] um is there an opportunity and I don't

[1:24:05] know who this question is for um is

[1:24:07] there an opportunity for them to

[1:24:09] challenge the assumption since there are

[1:24:11] so few and say you are looking at our

[1:24:16] water use and basing you know guessing

[1:24:18] our sewer use

[1:24:21] off of that. Hey we never flush the

[1:24:24] toilets. we only water our lawn or we uh

[1:24:30] do a lot like maybe the racket club we

[1:24:32] do a lot of dishes and we have like two

[1:24:35] tiny little bathrooms that aren't really

[1:24:37] used that much. So I don't know is there

[1:24:39] a way for them to um uh challenge that

[1:24:43] assumption.

[1:24:45] >> I'll just speak first to the fact that

[1:24:47] the same folks that calculated the

[1:24:49] indoor water use for residents are doing

[1:24:51] that on an annual basis for commercial

[1:24:53] customers. So that's been the current

[1:24:56] practice. So they're using the same set

[1:24:57] of assumptions,

[1:25:01] but as far as the challenge, maybe I'll

[1:25:03] turn it to Jen

[1:25:03] >> and and also it's using the AMI data

[1:25:08] from our own from our own measuring

[1:25:10] system as the as the back background on

[1:25:13] that. That's also uh more precise,

[1:25:16] right, with the

[1:25:17] >> and that shows how much water they're

[1:25:20] using but not how much they're using the

[1:25:23] sewer

[1:25:25] >> indoor use.

[1:25:27] >> Yeah.

[1:25:28] Oh, so we're so indoor use. So

[1:25:31] then it would really be like the racket

[1:25:33] club saying we have two small bathrooms

[1:25:35] but we do tons of dishes.

[1:25:38] Maybe not so much the country club.

[1:25:47] Yeah, I I do believe that we have a uh

[1:25:51] formula that we're factor in the three

[1:25:54] uh month of the winter sessions and the

[1:25:57] formula to calculate the sewers, right?

[1:25:59] So, it's pretty consistent and in fact

[1:26:02] some of the schools have

[1:26:05] uh lower in terms of their uh sewer uh

[1:26:09] or water usage. Correct. Yes, there is a

[1:26:12] so first it's using the AMI data time of

[1:26:16] use and then there's a formula that CADC

[1:26:20] is that um developed to look at taking

[1:26:25] that usage and then applying it to

[1:26:28] indoor usage. So we're not able to say

[1:26:31] that sink was on at that hour and they

[1:26:33] use that shower on that day. um but they

[1:26:36] have taken a very good look at their

[1:26:38] data to come up with these assumptions

[1:26:41] that um would be used for this rate

[1:26:46] making purpose. Um I think if someone

[1:26:50] really wanted to understand on an

[1:26:51] individual basis, you know, that

[1:26:54] analysis, we could absolutely sit down

[1:26:56] with them and and talk them through

[1:26:58] that.

[1:26:59] >> Okay, that that's super helpful to know.

[1:27:01] Thank you so much.

[1:27:02] >> Thank you. Um I have just one more

[1:27:06] question um regarding the treatment

[1:27:08] costs. Was that ever factored into the

[1:27:10] sewer rates in the past or has it it has

[1:27:13] it continues to be factored into the

[1:27:15] sewer rates?

[1:27:15] >> Yes. Yes, mayor.

[1:27:17] >> Okay. Um

[1:27:21] I really don't have additional

[1:27:23] questions. I appreciate the other

[1:27:24] questions that's been submitted so far.

[1:27:26] And we actually need to hear from the

[1:27:29] public before we adjourn. So, um, I

[1:27:32] don't think we've had a chance to ask

[1:27:33] the public for their opinion on this. Do

[1:27:36] we have anyone from the public waiting

[1:27:38] to, uh, comment?

[1:27:39] >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor Cole.

[1:27:41] I'll just ask if there anyone on Zoom

[1:27:44] would like to provide comments

[1:27:48] and I don't see any a raised hand. Thank

[1:27:50] you.

[1:27:53] » Um, yes, you may go ahead.

[1:27:55] >> That was all for you guys. Any other

[1:27:56] questions? Other than that, we'll just

[1:27:58] take your direction and move forward.

[1:27:59] Any additional questions from the

[1:28:00] council or any specific

[1:28:03] >> the mayor?

[1:28:03] >> Yes, go ahead. Mayor Rex,

[1:28:05] >> if you are seeking direction on sewer

[1:28:07] rates, my guess is we probably might

[1:28:10] feel more comfortable than with regard

[1:28:11] to the water rates to give you

[1:28:13] direction. Uh I don't know if I I don't

[1:28:15] want to I can only speak for myself. I'm

[1:28:17] comfortable with the recommendation on

[1:28:20] the on the sewer.

[1:28:22] >> Um okay.

[1:28:23] >> So we we um support the recommendation

[1:28:25] that's presently in front of us

[1:28:27] regarding the sewer rates. Thank you. We

[1:28:30] will now adjourn this uh study session.

[1:28:32] Thank you very much. Thanks for the

[1:28:34] presentations. Excellent.

[1:28:38] We will be joining a close session. Um

[1:28:40] let me

[1:29:06] Mayor Cole,

[1:29:07] >> I'm trying I'm trying to call. Well, if

[1:29:09] you guys will stay seated, I will.

[1:29:12] >> Would you like me?

[1:29:15] >> Okay. I am I was curious why everybody

[1:29:18] got up and walked away. Okay, we will

[1:29:21] turn to close session. Um so let me do a

[1:29:24] public announcements of the close

[1:29:25] session items. Item A, conference with

[1:29:27] legal council existing litigation. Town

[1:29:29] of Hillsboro versus all persons

[1:29:31] interested in a matter of the

[1:29:33] proceedings for resolution number 22-83

[1:29:36] adopting maximum rates for water service

[1:29:40] charges.

[1:29:44] Item B, conference with legal council

[1:29:48] initiation of initiation of litigation

[1:29:50] pursuant to uh government code section

[1:29:52] 54956.9.

[1:29:54] Print D, print 4, one, potential case,

[1:29:56] consideration of appealing in existing

[1:29:58] litigation noted above. Item C, public

[1:30:02] employee performance evaluation pursuant

[1:30:04] to government code section 54957, pin B,

[1:30:08] pin one, city manager. Item D,

[1:30:11] conference with legal council,

[1:30:12] anticipated litigation pursuant to

[1:30:15] government code section 54956.9,

[1:30:18] print D, print two, one or more

[1:30:20] potential um cases.

[1:30:23] All right. Um any members of the public?

[1:30:29] >> Thank you, mayor. Call

[1:30:30] >> on any of the close session items?

[1:30:32] >> No. No public comment. Thank you.

[1:30:34] >> Okay. We will now adjourn to close

[1:30:35] session. Thank you.

[1:30:45] Good evening everyone. The regular city

[1:30:47] council meeting is now called to order.

[1:30:49] February 9th, 2026. The time is 6:12.

[1:30:54] Um, city clerk, may we please have the

[1:30:57] roll call.

[1:30:58] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Adams,

[1:31:01] >> present.

[1:31:02] Crow,

[1:31:03] >> present. Ragdale

[1:31:07] >> present.

[1:31:07] >> Cole

[1:31:08] >> present.

[1:31:09] >> Thank you.

[1:31:10] >> Um, please stand for the pledge of

[1:31:12] allegiance.

[1:31:32] Welcome everyone. It's good to see you

[1:31:35] all in chambers tonight. Um,

[1:31:40] do we have any report from close

[1:31:41] session? City attorney Diaz.

[1:31:43] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Just wanted to

[1:31:44] announce for the public that the council

[1:31:45] did convene in close session and

[1:31:47] consider four agenda items um as noted

[1:31:49] on the agenda and direction was given to

[1:31:51] staff, but otherwise there was no

[1:31:52] reportable action under the Brown Act.

[1:31:54] Thank you.

[1:31:55] >> Thank you. Um before we move on um the

[1:31:59] next item we have a couple of

[1:32:01] proclamations and I have asked my

[1:32:03] colleagues to join me in reading the two

[1:32:05] proclamations for the month of February.

[1:32:08] The first proclamation is um Black

[1:32:10] History Month for February 2026 and we

[1:32:13] will all take turns in reading this one.

[1:32:16] Whereas Black History was first

[1:32:18] acknowledged 100 years ago in 1926 as

[1:32:21] part of an initiative by writer and

[1:32:23] educator Dr. Carter G. Woodson to

[1:32:26] recognize the heritage and achievements

[1:32:29] of black Americans and to enhance

[1:32:31] knowledge about black American history.

[1:32:34] And whereas the 2026 Black History Month

[1:32:38] theme, a century of Black History

[1:32:40] commemorations honors the 100th annivers

[1:32:44] 100th anniversary of the celebration

[1:32:45] initiated by Dr. Woodson. The milestone

[1:32:48] theme examines the impact of marking

[1:32:51] black history, culture, and life on the

[1:32:53] status of black people today. And

[1:32:56] whereas work work is at the very center

[1:33:01] of much of black history and culture. Be

[1:33:05] it debates among black educators on the

[1:33:10] importance of vocational training,

[1:33:13] self-help strategies, and

[1:33:15] entrepreneursship

[1:33:17] in black communities or organized

[1:33:20] labor's role in fighting both economic

[1:33:24] and social injustice.

[1:33:27] can

[1:33:28] >> whereas black history is American

[1:33:30] history and understanding and

[1:33:32] appreciating the experiences of black

[1:33:35] individuals is crucial to understanding

[1:33:37] the full story of our town and our

[1:33:40] country. And

[1:33:42] >> whereas today, black Americans lead

[1:33:44] industries and movements for change,

[1:33:47] serve our town and nation at every level

[1:33:51] and advance every field across the

[1:33:53] board, including art and sciences,

[1:33:55] business and law, health and education,

[1:33:58] and many more. And

[1:34:00] >> whereas the town of Hillsboro believes

[1:34:02] every person has the freedom to feel

[1:34:05] valued and respected and condemns racism

[1:34:08] in rhetoric or action. Now therefore, be

[1:34:12] it resolved that the city council of the

[1:34:14] town of Hillsboro hereby proclaims the

[1:34:16] month of February 2026 as Black History

[1:34:20] Month, signed by Sophie Cole, mayor,

[1:34:22] February 9th, 2026.

[1:34:25] >> Thank you. Um the next proclamation um

[1:34:28] is um National Slavery and Human

[1:34:30] Trafficking Awareness Month and um again

[1:34:34] I will ask my colleagues in joining me

[1:34:36] to read this proclamation.

[1:34:38] Whereas since 2010 the month of January

[1:34:42] has been proclaimed as National Slavery

[1:34:44] and Human Trafficking Prevention Month.

[1:34:46] And whereas human trafficking is a human

[1:34:49] rights violation and a violation of both

[1:34:52] federal and California law. It also

[1:34:54] promotes the breakdown of families and

[1:34:56] communities, fuels organized crime,

[1:34:59] deprivives countries of human capital,

[1:35:01] undermines public health, and imposes

[1:35:04] large economic costs. And whereas the

[1:35:08] crime of human trafficking is present in

[1:35:13] every country and every US state and

[1:35:17] whereas San Monteo County is considered

[1:35:20] a high-risk corridor for trafficking

[1:35:23] because of its proximity to

[1:35:24] international airports and location

[1:35:26] along major north south transit routes.

[1:35:30] And

[1:35:31] >> whereas although human trafficking is

[1:35:34] illegal, victims often do not recognize

[1:35:36] their victimization, do not know that

[1:35:39] help is available or where to seek

[1:35:41] assistance. And

[1:35:42] >> whereas public awareness about human

[1:35:45] trafficking still needs to reach broader

[1:35:47] communities and communicate more

[1:35:49] information about the nuances of this

[1:35:51] crime. And whereas the town is committed

[1:35:55] to increasing public awareness of the

[1:35:57] injustice of force, fraud, and coercion

[1:36:00] that is used to exploit the victims of

[1:36:02] this heinous crime and to provide

[1:36:04] resources and support to victims through

[1:36:06] the county of San Mato Human Trafficking

[1:36:09] Prevention and Enforcement Initiative.

[1:36:12] Now therefore be a resolve that the city

[1:36:15] council of the town of Hillsbor hereby

[1:36:18] proclaims the month of January 2026 as

[1:36:22] national slavery and human trafficking prevention month signed by

[1:36:28] our mayor Sophie Cole dated February 9th

[1:36:31] 2026.

[1:36:33] >> Thank you all. Thanks to my colleagues

[1:36:35] um these are not just words they do

[1:36:37] reflect our values and our principles in

[1:36:39] a town. Thank you very much. Much

[1:36:40] appreciated. Um the next um item that is

[1:36:45] um town update

[1:36:50] by our city manager, Doug Davis.

[1:36:56] Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[1:37:00] We have our H&N speaker series that's

[1:37:02] coming up. This will be uh Wednesday,

[1:37:03] February 11th, and it starts at 6:30

[1:37:05] p.m. And our speaker this time will be

[1:37:08] Heather Vandenberg, who's going to come

[1:37:10] in and talk about her experience uh

[1:37:12] during the Paradise Fires and uh or I'm

[1:37:15] sorry, Palisades Estates. Uh she

[1:37:17] evacuated from that area. And if you've

[1:37:19] never heard her presentation, it's quite

[1:37:20] harrowing all the stuff that she went

[1:37:22] through. A lot of lessons learned that

[1:37:23] are there. It's it's a great

[1:37:25] presentation. I've seen it before and

[1:37:26] I'd encourage anybody to come down and

[1:37:28] see this. Uh February 11th, 6:30.

[1:37:33] We have our Hillsboro Youth Commission

[1:37:35] is going to be taking an ebike survey

[1:37:36] and putting it out to the community. So,

[1:37:38] the deadline to get that in will be uh

[1:37:41] March 1st. And they're encouraging all

[1:37:44] of our school people, fifth graders

[1:37:45] through 12th graders, to fill this out.

[1:37:47] So, it's a a chance for them to get a

[1:37:49] kind of a an idea of exactly how they

[1:37:51] feel about ebikes. It's a controversial

[1:37:53] topic that's that's pretty uh front and

[1:37:55] center right now with everyone. and

[1:37:57] they're working with our city council,

[1:37:59] city manager's office, and the

[1:38:00] superintendent of schools as well. And

[1:38:02] later on tonight, you'll hear our

[1:38:03] assistant city manager, Mandy Brown,

[1:38:05] talking a little bit more about ebikes

[1:38:07] as well. On that same topic, there's an

[1:38:10] ebike video contest uh held by the Cal

[1:38:13] Associ California Association of Youth

[1:38:15] Commissions. And uh this deadline is uh

[1:38:19] looks like March 10th and it's a $500

[1:38:21] prize for anybody who turns in a 30

[1:38:24] secondond video that gets selected as

[1:38:26] the best video in there. And again, you

[1:38:28] can refer to the website there to see

[1:38:30] how to submit that. Um and it's open uh

[1:38:33] for students to submit grades 5 through

[1:38:35] 12.

[1:38:37] The Samaritan House is having their

[1:38:39] annual youth coat drive. Uh this will be

[1:38:42] January 4th through March 2nd. And we

[1:38:44] have a box right out here at town hall

[1:38:46] there. Most of the town halls here in

[1:38:48] Sonteo County have this as well, but

[1:38:50] ours is located out front. If you have

[1:38:52] any coats that you would like to donate

[1:38:54] towards the youth, uh that would be

[1:38:56] where to do it. Again, sponsored by

[1:38:57] Samaritan House.

[1:39:01] We have a joint venture with U Hillsboro

[1:39:04] and the city of Berlingame. And this is

[1:39:06] for if you've ever been to the voting

[1:39:08] booth and you get the I voted today

[1:39:09] sticker. Uh this is to create a design

[1:39:11] for that. It's for students uh age 18

[1:39:14] and under are encouraged to enter the I

[1:39:16] voted contest. So they'll be uh writing

[1:39:19] artwork for the I voted sticker and

[1:39:21] residents 19 and older will be making a

[1:39:23] sticker for future voters. And these are

[1:39:25] the ones that are handed out to some of

[1:39:27] the children that attend the voting

[1:39:28] booths with their parents and it's a

[1:39:30] sticker that they can place on them as

[1:39:32] well. The deadline for that is April 6th

[1:39:35] and you can enter the contest at the

[1:39:36] below email address there.

[1:39:41] And our leadership council or LEAD is

[1:39:44] having uh an event on February 19th uh

[1:39:48] and that'll be at uh Pholi and this is a

[1:39:52] uh worldclass gardens and an immersive

[1:39:56] art and culture day that'll be held

[1:39:58] there at the grounds. Obviously many

[1:40:00] people have been there. It's a beautiful

[1:40:01] area to have there and there's going to

[1:40:03] be a couple of uh creativity and

[1:40:05] leadership practices that are going to

[1:40:06] end there and also some mindfulness

[1:40:08] training that'll happen there as well.

[1:40:12] Our SER program is still running. This

[1:40:14] will be February 3rd through the 28th

[1:40:17] and this is for residents of Berlingame

[1:40:19] Milbury and Hillsboro put on by our

[1:40:22] central county fire department. If

[1:40:23] you're interested in joining this and

[1:40:25] getting into that first stage of citizen

[1:40:27] and emergency response team, I encourage

[1:40:30] you to go to the website there or use

[1:40:32] the QR code as well.

[1:40:37] And finally, we have the El Camino Rail

[1:40:39] Roadway Renewal Project that is still

[1:40:41] ongoing. Uh the dates here aren't set in

[1:40:44] stone, but it's looking like it'll be

[1:40:45] February 23rd through March 6th will be

[1:40:48] the time period that'll probably most

[1:40:50] impact our residents here in Hillsboro.

[1:40:52] I want to thank our uh public works team

[1:40:54] for working closely with CALR to

[1:40:56] mitigate the traffic as much as

[1:40:58] possible. Uh unfortunately the El Camino

[1:41:01] is a main thoroughfare so in the end it

[1:41:03] will be a much better uh roadway that

[1:41:05] we'll have. There will be some slight

[1:41:07] inconveniences that are happening during

[1:41:08] that time. For more information you can

[1:41:10] go to the Department of Transportation

[1:41:12] website which talks about the project.

[1:41:16] And then our slide for upcoming events.

[1:41:17] I would just highlight that uh February

[1:41:19] there, February 23rd, we're going to

[1:41:21] have our annual goal setting session

[1:41:23] with the city council which is open to

[1:41:25] the community. And this is where we set

[1:41:27] our goals for the following year with

[1:41:29] our city council. So it'll be staff and

[1:41:30] city council talking about some of the

[1:41:32] projects they've worked on over the last

[1:41:34] year and what they're doing in the

[1:41:36] coming year as well. And finally, our

[1:41:38] slide here for all our notification

[1:41:40] programs, SMC Alert, Genesis, Nixel,

[1:41:43] Watchd Duty, and MyShake. Uh again, as I

[1:41:46] always say, if you're going to pick one

[1:41:47] that you're going to join, I would say

[1:41:48] SMC Alert is probably the most

[1:41:50] important. I would also say that Nixl is

[1:41:52] probably the easiest to use. And from

[1:41:54] there, you can choose your entry point

[1:41:56] as you like.

[1:41:57] >> Thank you.

[1:41:58] city manager Davis.

[1:41:59] Appreciate that. Um next item is um

[1:42:02] public comment on items that are not on

[1:42:04] the agenda. Do we have any um anyone

[1:42:07] either in chambers or remotely with

[1:42:09] public comments?

[1:42:10] >> Yes, Mayor Cole. John Lockton.

[1:42:13] >> Hello, Mr. Lockton.

[1:42:18] Welcome.

[1:42:21] >> Thank you and thank you for the

[1:42:22] opportunity to address you. Uh I have

[1:42:25] been at this podium along with members

[1:42:28] of our group uh since the spring of 2015

[1:42:33] talking about water rates. You believe

[1:42:36] 2015? And I understand that uh you may

[1:42:40] be looking at uniform rates now. uh

[1:42:43] array of hope. Uh thank you very much

[1:42:45] for looking at that. Uh but I'm here uh

[1:42:48] really about uh uh a hope on our part

[1:42:51] for settling this terrible litigation.

[1:42:55] Uh it has wasted a lot of town money.

[1:42:58] It's wasted a lot of money of our group.

[1:43:01] Um we wish it hadn't started. Uh my

[1:43:05] purpose in being here today is to say

[1:43:07] what I said in an email to you uh which

[1:43:10] is uh I am here now. Our group is ready

[1:43:13] to talk. Uh we would uh we're open to

[1:43:16] anything. Um we u we believe maybe

[1:43:20] wrongly that uh Hillsboro when you

[1:43:23] brought this action had some sort of a

[1:43:26] plan what you would do if uh you didn't

[1:43:28] weren't successful. We're happy to

[1:43:30] negotiate off whatever your plan may be,

[1:43:34] but we'd like to uh start the

[1:43:36] negotiation, which is why we're here. Um

[1:43:39] just just as an aside, uh uh we do not

[1:43:42] understand why the litigation was

[1:43:44] brought. Um we wouldn't have sued and we

[1:43:49] were barred from suing by a statute

[1:43:51] which said that you had to sue within uh

[1:43:54] 60 days and that time had passed. So, we

[1:43:57] couldn't sue and you brought this suit

[1:44:00] and uh uh had you not brought it, you

[1:44:02] would have been able to take uh the same

[1:44:05] rates for five years without any uh

[1:44:08] challenge. Uh but anyway, it's happened

[1:44:11] and we would like to uh uh move ahead

[1:44:15] and have a negotiation.

[1:44:17] Whoever gave you that advice to bring

[1:44:19] the suit, I think gave you poor advice.

[1:44:22] We we we didn't need to have that suit.

[1:44:25] we didn't need to spend all Hillsboro

[1:44:27] money. Um, if they're giving advice on

[1:44:30] an appeal, please don't. You're going to

[1:44:33] lose an appeal. I assure you, I'm not

[1:44:35] going to get into the legalities of it,

[1:44:37] but uh that is that's what's going to

[1:44:39] happen and it'll just be a waste of more

[1:44:41] money. So, we hope you don't appeal. We

[1:44:44] hope you'll uh talk settlement to us and

[1:44:46] we hope uh there isn't a lot of

[1:44:48] animosity towards us. You know, a

[1:44:50] validation um proceeding is an

[1:44:54] invitation of the town to participate in

[1:44:57] finding the facts of something. Um we

[1:45:00] didn't sue. This was the town wanting to

[1:45:02] find truth about the water rates. And uh

[1:45:06] in such a proceeding, the town is

[1:45:09] invited to participate and we

[1:45:11] participated. and we gave our views of

[1:45:13] the facts and you gave your views of the

[1:45:14] facts and the town came down uh in one

[1:45:18] direction and uh could have come down

[1:45:20] the other direction. But uh we love the

[1:45:23] town. We do not want anything bad to

[1:45:26] happen to the town. We are as I said

[1:45:29] very unhappy the water rate suit was

[1:45:31] brought because it's wasted a lot of

[1:45:33] money and had it not been brought uh we

[1:45:36] would have uh not sued you.

[1:45:38] >> Thank you.

[1:45:39] >> Now I just want to reate reiterate that

[1:45:42] I'm we're willing to talk and thank you

[1:45:45] very much for the time.

[1:45:46] >> Thank you so much, Mr. Lton. Any

[1:45:49] additional comments from the public on

[1:45:51] items that are not on the agenda?

[1:45:53] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. I'll just check

[1:45:54] to see if there are any raised hands on

[1:45:56] Zoom and I'm not seeing any. Thank you.

[1:46:03] Okay, I will now close um public comment

[1:46:08] and the next item on our agenda is

[1:46:11] announcement of conflicts of interest.

[1:46:13] Um do any of my council members have a

[1:46:15] conflicts of interest to disclose

[1:46:17] related to any item on the agenda?

[1:46:22] Seeing none through the mayor, I do have

[1:46:26] on agenda. I'm not jumping ahead but the

[1:46:29] agenda item nine. Uh I am recusing

[1:46:33] myself from agenda item nine on

[1:46:37] tonight's agenda. Um as I have a real

[1:46:41] property interest within 1,000 ft of the

[1:46:46] 1200 Jaclyn

[1:46:48] drive.

[1:46:49] >> Thank you council member Chuang.

[1:46:52] Um

[1:46:55] any other conflicts of interest?

[1:46:58] Um so city attorney, will we um remove

[1:47:00] that item um before we vote on the

[1:47:02] consent calendar?

[1:47:03] >> Yeah, thank you, Mayor Cole. Agenda item

[1:47:05] nine is actually a public hearing, so

[1:47:06] you'll hear that item and when we get to

[1:47:08] that item, uh council member Chuang will

[1:47:09] step out of the room and the rest of the

[1:47:11] council can decide that the matter.

[1:47:13] Thank you.

[1:47:15] >> Okay. Um

[1:47:18] any items to be removed from the consent

[1:47:20] calendar? I

[1:47:22] >> Council member Krley,

[1:47:24] >> I just have a question on item one uh

[1:47:26] and a comment on item six, but it's a

[1:47:28] quick question. I don't think we need to

[1:47:30] remove it.

[1:47:32] >> I through the mayor.

[1:47:33] >> Any other items?

[1:47:34] >> I also have a comments on item five,

[1:47:39] but not doesn't have to remove it.

[1:47:42] >> Um any items to be removed specifically

[1:47:44] just these are just comments on item

[1:47:46] one, five, and six and six. any

[1:47:49] additional items to be removed.

[1:47:55] » Okay. Um we we will um so

[1:47:59] >> we're not removing any of these items

[1:48:01] except for item nine which council

[1:48:03] member council will recuse. So item one

[1:48:06] council member question for the city

[1:48:07] clerk on uh under on the minutes on page

[1:48:11] 44 in our packet at the top of the page.

[1:48:15] It's under um old business item 11. I do

[1:48:19] have the last name of the resident on

[1:48:21] Moralboro Road. Is there a reason why we

[1:48:23] don't want it published?

[1:48:24] >> I didn't include it because he didn't

[1:48:26] state it for the record.

[1:48:28] >> Um and so I I just I didn't include it

[1:48:30] for that reason. When he was at the

[1:48:31] podium, he didn't. Um I noted that I

[1:48:34] said it out loud, but then he didn't say

[1:48:36] it out loud, so I chose not to include

[1:48:38] it in the minutes.

[1:48:39] >> Okay, that was my question. Thank you.

[1:48:41] >> Thank you.

[1:48:42] >> Okay. Um item five.

[1:48:45] >> Item five. Thank you. Um, I just want to

[1:48:49] um commend the staff for continuing to

[1:48:54] really identify the HMGP

[1:48:57] program grand funding for the Highland

[1:49:00] project. I know that Highland project,

[1:49:03] Highline project has been a very

[1:49:05] important project for our town. It was

[1:49:08] most unfortunate that FEMA grant the

[1:49:10] brick grant did not come through and it

[1:49:13] is a a huge project, $45 million. So,

[1:49:17] thank you so much for identify those uh

[1:49:20] grant funding and continue to move

[1:49:22] forward with this project. Thank you.

[1:49:26] >> Um I echo those statements.

[1:49:29] >> These are

[1:49:29] >> Yes, I think we all echo those

[1:49:31] statements

[1:49:32] >> and we're very grateful.

[1:49:33] Mandy. Thank

[1:49:34] you to you and the team for working on

[1:49:37] that item six.

[1:49:38] >> And I just wanted to say that even

[1:49:40] though it's on consent cal calendar,

[1:49:42] these cyber security controls are so

[1:49:44] important. So, um, I thank you, William,

[1:49:47] and for pursuing those.

[1:49:52] And with that, I make a motion to

[1:49:54] approve the consent calendar items 1

[1:49:57] through eight. And we have a second.

[1:50:00] >> Second.

[1:50:02] >> Okay. Um, all those in favor say I.

[1:50:05] >> I.

[1:50:12] Um we have unanimous consent for the

[1:50:15] consent calendar.

[1:50:19] » You're moving into agenda item nine.

[1:50:21] >> No.

[1:50:22] >> Yes. Okay. We will start with um agenda.

[1:50:25] We'll move on to public hearing for um

[1:50:27] agenda item nine.

[1:50:40] All right. Uh, good evening, mayor. Good

[1:50:42] evening, council members. My name is

[1:50:43] Doug Belchick, and I am the associate

[1:50:45] civil engineer for the town of

[1:50:47] Hillsboro. And tonight's public hearing

[1:50:49] item is for council to consider the

[1:50:51] adopt adoption and summary vacation of

[1:50:55] easements at 1200 Jaclyn Drive. um

[1:50:59] staff, property owner, property owner

[1:51:01] rep, and uh other technical staff are

[1:51:04] available for any questions after the

[1:51:06] presentation.

[1:51:09] Uh so getting started, the red dot shown

[1:51:12] on the screen is the approximate

[1:51:13] location of the property. As you can

[1:51:16] see, it's in the northernmost portion of

[1:51:18] Hillsbor, right along the border of

[1:51:20] Berling.

[1:51:24] The property itself consists of three

[1:51:26] parcels shown here on the left. Um it's

[1:51:29] the current and existing conditions.

[1:51:32] The applicants recently submitted an uh

[1:51:35] lot line adjustment application that

[1:51:37] would modify the existing three property

[1:51:41] shown on the left to something that

[1:51:42] would look more on the right. Um, as

[1:51:45] part of that lot line adjustment, the

[1:51:47] applicant is proposing to vacate and

[1:51:50] relocate existing easements shown here

[1:51:52] in red. Um, as well as dedicate some new

[1:51:56] easements, which are depicted here on

[1:51:58] the right. Effectively, this would place

[1:52:01] public utility easements along all

[1:52:03] interior property lines, which is more

[1:52:05] consistent of a typical property in

[1:52:07] town.

[1:52:12] The reason we're here tonight is because

[1:52:14] of code section 163650D,

[1:52:18] which states that if the proposed lot

[1:52:20] line adjustment includes the dedication

[1:52:22] or abandonment of easements, the city

[1:52:24] engineer shall not approve the lot line

[1:52:26] adjustment map until city council has

[1:52:29] accepted the offer dedications or

[1:52:31] abandonments in a public hearing. Uh so

[1:52:34] in short, council must consider and

[1:52:36] approve the easement dedications and

[1:52:38] abandonments before the city engineer

[1:52:40] can consider the law line adjustment.

[1:52:45] Again, tonight uh tonight's public

[1:52:48] hearing item is for council's

[1:52:49] consideration of the easements, not

[1:52:51] considering the lot line adjustment

[1:52:53] itself. Acceptance of the easements will

[1:52:56] permit town access for future

[1:52:58] installations, operation, and

[1:53:00] maintenance of any public utilities. As

[1:53:03] of now, there are no current public

[1:53:05] utilities that the town owns. Uh other

[1:53:07] public utility providers have confirmed

[1:53:09] acceptance of the easements. Um they as

[1:53:12] well don't have any any u uh any

[1:53:14] utilities. Uh and town staff have

[1:53:16] addressed inquiries regarding the lot

[1:53:18] line adjustment and process and have

[1:53:20] also clarified that no development is

[1:53:23] being proposed at this time.

[1:53:26] And with that, I can take any questions.

[1:53:29] >> Thank you, Mr. Pilchic. Um, any

[1:53:32] questions from the council regarding the

[1:53:35] presentation?

[1:53:37] Yes, council member Crowley.

[1:53:38] >> Thank you, Doug. Can you go back to the

[1:53:41] map, please?

[1:53:44] >> So, on the left, the current, that

[1:53:48] yellow slice,

[1:53:50] and the orange slice. So, who do they

[1:53:52] belong to?

[1:53:54] >> It's all part, sorry, it's all part of

[1:53:57] 1,200 jackling. Uh it's one property but

[1:54:01] three parcels. Actually it's technically

[1:54:03] four but the lot line adjustment is just

[1:54:05] for three.

[1:54:06] >> So the property belongs to 12200 Jaclyn

[1:54:08] but there's a utility easement

[1:54:12] >> existing. Correct. The red line it goes

[1:54:14] pretty much all around the existing

[1:54:16] orange property.

[1:54:18] >> But we don't actually have any utilities

[1:54:20] there. Is that what you're saying?

[1:54:22] >> Correct. It was probably done when the

[1:54:24] property was subdivided at some point.

[1:54:26] Uh but the town hasn't had any need for

[1:54:28] it as of yet.

[1:54:28] >> Okay. So there's no change in ownership.

[1:54:32] >> All right.

[1:54:33] >> Correct.

[1:54:33] >> Uh thank you.

[1:54:35] >> Thank you. Um Council Member Adams. Oh,

[1:54:38] any question?

[1:54:39] >> Um just a comment. I really appreciate

[1:54:43] having this public discussion. I think

[1:54:45] it's obvious where this probably will

[1:54:49] lead and I think it's really good for us

[1:54:51] in terms of transparency

[1:54:54] to be talking about the importance of

[1:54:56] the easements but also the importance of

[1:54:59] understanding the changes uh that this

[1:55:02] will represent. So I appreciate this

[1:55:05] opportunity to again have transparency.

[1:55:11] » Thank you. Um, Vice Mayor Rexdale.

[1:55:14] >> Um, two questions. One, just to follow

[1:55:17] up on Council Member Kick's question.

[1:55:19] So, is it probably that in the past on

[1:55:22] the left, that bottom left portion maybe

[1:55:24] was an individual lot and that's why it

[1:55:27] had easements all around it and then it

[1:55:29] was bought up and combined.

[1:55:32] >> Correct. It could be any number of

[1:55:33] different things, but yes, most likely.

[1:55:35] >> Okay. Um and then my question is um if

[1:55:38] it if we accepted the uh new easements

[1:55:42] and the vacation of easements um and um

[1:55:46] then the lot line was not uh the lot

[1:55:49] line change was not approved by the

[1:55:52] public works director.

[1:55:54] What happens to those easements? They

[1:55:56] can they can just stay the new easements

[1:55:59] or do they that's just a separate issue?

[1:56:03] >> That is a great question. Uh my guess is

[1:56:06] that they most likely will not get

[1:56:10] dedicated. Uh they need to be stamped

[1:56:12] and signed and and there'd need to be a

[1:56:14] whole bunch of processes. This is just

[1:56:15] to to accept them. Um they haven't been

[1:56:19] approved or or anything like that. Um

[1:56:22] that would take a whole a whole separate

[1:56:23] process which is what would happen after

[1:56:26] if they do get approved.

[1:56:27] >> Okay. Oh, that that's a good answer.

[1:56:30] Thank you.

[1:56:31] >> Um thank you. Um just a quick followup

[1:56:34] regarding the modifications in the

[1:56:36] easement. It looks like we now have

[1:56:38] access potentially if infrastructure is

[1:56:41] needed or easement is needed um within

[1:56:44] the property as well. So I assume the the width of those access is

[1:56:50] appropriate for the work we may need to

[1:56:52] do in the future if necessary.

[1:56:54] >> Yeah. Uh it's a typical 5 foot wide

[1:56:57] public utility easement that is across

[1:57:00] town

[1:57:01] >> and and and that access would be deed

[1:57:03] indefinitely for the town. In other

[1:57:05] words, the town owns that 5-ft access.

[1:57:09] >> They have the right to access it. It

[1:57:10] would still be part of the property. Uh

[1:57:12] it's just that the town has access to to

[1:57:15] it.

[1:57:15] >> Okay.

[1:57:17] >> And and that access basically belongs to

[1:57:18] the town indefinitely is your Yeah.

[1:57:21] Until the council abandons it or

[1:57:23] approves abandonment.

[1:57:25] Okay. Um All right. Those are the

[1:57:28] clarifying questions. I have any um

[1:57:31] Go ahead, Council Member Crow.

[1:57:33] >> One more question. Looking at this,

[1:57:34] Doug. So, the street on the left,

[1:57:36] looking at this, that's Fagan Drive,

[1:57:38] right? Is that Fagan?

[1:57:40] >> Yes.

[1:57:41] >> And then the street at the top is

[1:57:43] Armsby, right?

[1:57:44] >> Correct.

[1:57:44] >> So, h how did we get 1200 Jackling out

[1:57:47] of that? And does is the is the address

[1:57:50] going to change?

[1:57:52] Uh yes, there is a there is an

[1:57:54] application for an address change to

[1:57:56] make it more current

[1:57:58] at some point. I believe the subdivision

[1:58:00] was done in 1960 something.

[1:58:03] >> Um so it's most likely that the access

[1:58:06] was off of Jaclyn at some point, but

[1:58:08] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:58:09] >> Subdivide.

[1:58:12] >> Any additional questions? Okay. Do we um

[1:58:15] have a motion to accept this? Um,

[1:58:18] >> Mayor Cole, uh, this is a public

[1:58:20] hearing, so we'd want to open up the

[1:58:21] public hearing and see if there's any

[1:58:22] public comment.

[1:58:23] >> Any public comments from the public?

[1:58:25] >> Yes,

[1:58:35] my name is Gordon Newman and I've been a

[1:58:37] resident on Pagan Drive since 1974.

[1:58:41] >> And um, I also am a civil engineer with

[1:58:45] a professional license. state of

[1:58:47] California. I have built thousands of

[1:58:50] homes and apartments in the state of

[1:58:52] California and in the uh other parts of

[1:58:55] the country. Um I have some concerns and

[1:59:00] I represent some uh residents of Fagan

[1:59:03] Drive that have similar concerns. We

[1:59:06] understand this is a preliminary

[1:59:08] hearing. We also understand that

[1:59:10] ultimately the homes will be built and

[1:59:13] most probably be approved by the city

[1:59:15] council. We have one major concern and

[1:59:18] that is the uh ability of uh Fagan Drive

[1:59:22] to allow emergency services to be uh

[1:59:26] accessed to Fagan uh during this perhaps

[1:59:31] four-year construction period of the two

[1:59:33] homes. Um I have spoken to Chief Colola

[1:59:38] and she has similar concerns about

[1:59:40] emergency services during that

[1:59:42] construction period. Um, I would

[1:59:46] therefore like to recommend to the city

[1:59:48] council

[1:59:49] uh if possible uh during the approval

[1:59:52] process that a construction easement be

[1:59:57] provided to the present homeowner and

[1:59:59] developer of these lots so that the

[2:00:03] construction vehicles and necessary

[2:00:06] parking etc be on their property not on

[2:00:09] Fagan Drive which would interfere with

[2:00:11] emergency services. Thank you.

[2:00:16] Um,

[2:00:17] >> any questions?

[2:00:19] >> Um, just for clarification on your

[2:00:21] comment, I I realize your time is up.

[2:00:24] Specifically, you are asking for the con

[2:00:28] uh an exception for the construction

[2:00:30] vehicle to be located within the

[2:00:34] property as opposed to Fagan Drive.

[2:00:36] >> Yes.

[2:00:36] >> Okay. Just wanted to clarify that. Any

[2:00:40] questions for the neighbor? No. Any

[2:00:44] other comments from the public?

[2:00:47] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. I'll Is there I

[2:00:49] just checked to see if there's anyone on

[2:00:51] Zoom who would like to provide comments

[2:00:52] to raise their hand. And if there's

[2:00:54] anyone in the room who would like to

[2:00:56] provide comments, you can

[2:00:58] >> complete a speaker card or let me know.

[2:01:02] I'm not seeing any raised hands on Zoom

[2:01:06] and I'm not seeing anyone else in the

[2:01:07] room who would like to provide comments.

[2:01:14] » Okay, seeing no additional questions I

[2:01:16] have qu I have um coming back to the

[2:01:18] council um could we put the map up

[2:01:20] again? Um and also I guess the question

[2:01:22] is for you Mr. Belch or Paul.

[2:01:26] Have we ever asked the developer or

[2:01:29] builder to um not use the right of way

[2:01:33] and provide access for construction

[2:01:35] vehicles within the property itself? Is

[2:01:38] that a reasonable requ?

[2:01:42] » Yeah. Uh it's it's uh it is reasonable.

[2:01:46] I will say that typically during

[2:01:47] development the contractor will choose

[2:01:49] the the most appropriate way um which is

[2:01:52] all taken cons into consideration during

[2:01:55] design review. Um if the properties were

[2:01:58] to get developed they would still go

[2:01:59] through the proper design channels and

[2:02:01] have to go through ADRB and and planning

[2:02:04] building engineering all the permits. Um

[2:02:06] and at at that time if um if there were

[2:02:09] concerns about access off of Fagan, we

[2:02:11] can definitely condition the project

[2:02:13] that the contractor come through off of

[2:02:16] Arms Beer or any other way not to affect

[2:02:20] any anything off of Fagan.

[2:02:22] >> Then just to add a little bit to what

[2:02:24] Doug Belch has shared, um the

[2:02:25] application before you is really a lot

[2:02:27] line adjustment. Um so really just

[2:02:29] moving parcel lines on the various

[2:02:31] parcels. No development is proposed at

[2:02:33] this point with the application, but the

[2:02:35] opportune time I think for council or

[2:02:37] ADRB depending on where it lands in

[2:02:39] terms of the approvals. If there's

[2:02:40] future homes that are proposed, that

[2:02:43] would be the appropriate time for either

[2:02:44] of those bodies to basically impose a

[2:02:46] condition as outlined by the commonour.

[2:02:48] But tonight it would be a little

[2:02:49] premature just because if you if if

[2:02:52] ultimately you approve the easements and

[2:02:53] accept them and let's say our city

[2:02:55] engineer does approve the lot line

[2:02:56] adjustment, these lots could sit just as

[2:02:59] they are without any development for

[2:03:01] decades. Um and so I wouldn't want you

[2:03:02] to impose the condition now, but I think

[2:03:04] when it does come back for future

[2:03:06] development and homes are actually being

[2:03:08] proposed at that point. I think our

[2:03:10] director of building and planning is

[2:03:11] hearing the comment tonight. Um, and so

[2:03:13] they will ensure that obviously ADRB

[2:03:15] looks at that. If it ultimately comes to

[2:03:16] you at the council level, that's

[2:03:18] something you can impose at that point

[2:03:19] as a condition of approval.

[2:03:23] » Um, any question? Yes. Um, council

[2:03:25] member Adams. Thank you, Christopher,

[2:03:27] for that clarification, but I think your

[2:03:30] question was, do we have a precedent or

[2:03:32] have we ever done that? And I saw some

[2:03:34] head shaking. So, in time, that would be

[2:03:38] a good thing to make sure that we don't

[2:03:41] forget and that we hear from you again.

[2:03:44] So, um I think we're ready to take a

[2:03:48] vote.

[2:03:49] >> Yeah. I I think to to respond to the

[2:03:51] resident, it's a it's a valid concern

[2:03:54] and for the the neighbors on Fagan when

[2:03:57] if construction commences on these lots,

[2:04:00] it's a narrow entrance to the road and

[2:04:02] um building and planning um I think

[2:04:05] should and will take that into

[2:04:07] consideration and make sure that there

[2:04:09] is a plan that is safe and the least

[2:04:12] amount of disruption possible for the

[2:04:15] neighbors.

[2:04:18] » Thank you. Any additional comments?

[2:04:20] Okay. Then do I have um and no questions

[2:04:24] from the public? No additional questions

[2:04:25] from the public. Correct.

[2:04:27] >> No, Miracle. Thank you,

[2:04:29] >> Mr. Belchick. Do I um recommendation is

[2:04:32] to adopt a resolution accepting a 5 foot

[2:04:35] wide public utility easement on three

[2:04:37] parcels at 1200 Jaclyn Drive, APN's

[2:04:40] number listed. um and contingently

[2:04:43] summarily vacating an existing public

[2:04:46] utility easement on two parcels at 1200

[2:04:48] Jaclyn Drive

[2:04:50] pending relocation under secret

[2:04:52] guidelines.

[2:04:54] >> So move second.

[2:04:57] >> Could we take a roll call please?

[2:04:59] Council member Adams.

[2:05:01] >> Yes.

[2:05:02] >> Council member Kwick.

[2:05:04] >> Yes.

[2:05:05] >> Vice Mayor Rexdale.

[2:05:06] >> Yes.

[2:05:08] >> Mayor Cole says yes. Thank you.

[2:05:11] Mr. Belchure.

[2:05:12] >> It's a very special property. Good luck

[2:05:14] with that.

[2:05:15] >> Yeah.

[2:05:20] Hey,

[2:05:28] the next item on our agenda is a

[2:05:30] discussion on ebikes andformational

[2:05:32] updates and that will be presented by

[2:05:34] assistant city manager Mandy Brown.

[2:05:39] Good evening, Mayor Cole, Vice Mayor,

[2:05:41] and council members. Uh the E stands for

[2:05:44] efficient. Tonight is a very efficient

[2:05:46] meeting. Moving right along. Um I'm here

[2:05:49] to present a briefformational update on

[2:05:51] ebikes. Uh trying to provide a broad

[2:05:54] overview of what's the landscape is and

[2:05:57] uh open the discussion for council and

[2:05:59] residents to provide some feedback and

[2:06:01] ideas. Um and also just to promote that

[2:06:04] there are this is the beginning of the

[2:06:06] conversation. There are lots more

[2:06:08] discussions to be had both at the county

[2:06:10] level and higher. Um so uh if if we do

[2:06:13] not capture everything tonight uh we

[2:06:15] will continue the conversation.

[2:06:28] This is just to provide um an overview

[2:06:30] of the different types of ebikes. Um I

[2:06:33] will note that it may be difficult to

[2:06:35] tell with the eye when you're seeing

[2:06:37] these ebikes go around whether it's a

[2:06:39] class one, class 2, or class 3. Um but

[2:06:42] these are the technical definitions and

[2:06:44] it's also included um as a chart in

[2:06:47] attachment one um just to give an

[2:06:49] overview of what we're talking about and

[2:06:51] the speeds um pedal assist and there's

[2:06:54] some other details but this is really

[2:06:56] just a high level

[2:07:01] again not meant to be exhaustive but

[2:07:03] just to say why are we having this

[2:07:05] conversation ebikes do have a lot of

[2:07:07] benefits especially for a town like

[2:07:08] Hillsboro where there is a a challenges

[2:07:11] with that last mile connectivity between

[2:07:13] homes and transit stations like Cal

[2:07:16] Train station or bus stations. They're

[2:07:18] very helpful to improve accessibility

[2:07:20] especially on our beautiful hills um

[2:07:23] here in town. And it's also a very nice

[2:07:26] uh alternative to vehicular traffic,

[2:07:28] getting people out of their cars um and

[2:07:31] just be having more access to different

[2:07:33] places.

[2:07:36] That said, they do come with some risks

[2:07:38] because they do go fast and they are so

[2:07:40] efficient. there is a greater increase

[2:07:42] of injury especially when you're not

[2:07:44] using proper helmets um if you're

[2:07:47] speeding. Um also there are ways to

[2:07:50] modify the equipment to make them go

[2:07:52] faster than they're supposed to be um

[2:07:54] ridden and so that increases uh injury

[2:07:58] as well. lack of education and training.

[2:08:01] Unlike driving where you're required to

[2:08:04] get a license and go through specific

[2:08:06] training, uh there isn't necessarily

[2:08:08] formalized training and education,

[2:08:11] though this is improving and I'll go

[2:08:12] through a couple of those resources

[2:08:14] tonight, but it's not mandated the same

[2:08:16] way it is um with driving vehicles.

[2:08:21] Um and then the enforcement of the

[2:08:22] regulations. Um our uh wonderful HPD

[2:08:26] does a wonderful does a great job of

[2:08:28] making sure that they have resources and

[2:08:30] they're going out proactively to the

[2:08:32] community. Um but there are a lot of

[2:08:34] ebikes um around town and so uh HPD

[2:08:38] can't be everywhere. And so um also

[2:08:40] offering some tools to uh just increase

[2:08:43] the public education for some self-p

[2:08:45] policing as well.

[2:08:49] Just a broad overview of what I'll talk

[2:08:51] about tonight. The staff report has a

[2:08:52] lot of detail. I've kept it a little bit

[2:08:54] higher level for the PowerPoint. Um, so

[2:08:56] I'll just go over kind of big to small

[2:08:59] what's being done at the state level,

[2:09:00] some other counties in the state, what's

[2:09:03] being done in Samonteo

[2:09:05] County in the town, and then offering

[2:09:07] some tools and resources.

[2:09:12] So there is a lot that's been done um at

[2:09:15] the state level and also continuing to

[2:09:17] be done even since we did this published

[2:09:21] the staff report. Um there is new

[2:09:23] legislation that we're actively

[2:09:25] monitoring and will uh continue to

[2:09:27] monitor. Uh but the first three bullet

[2:09:30] points are a summary of some of the

[2:09:33] ebike laws that passed and have gone

[2:09:35] into effect this year. Um, so

[2:09:38] prohibiting the selling a class 3 ebike

[2:09:40] to anyone under 16, requiring the rear

[2:09:43] red reflector, um, and then prohibiting

[2:09:46] the sale of applications to modify an

[2:09:48] ebike speed capabilities. Um, and I

[2:09:51] think we've talked about the rear red

[2:09:53] reflector in the past and whether or not

[2:09:55] that's really a feasible way to promote

[2:09:58] safety. What it does is it um it does

[2:10:01] sort of give HPD um the opportunity to

[2:10:06] begin the safety conversations if the

[2:10:08] reflector is not there. Um so it does

[2:10:10] help with enforcement and at least um

[2:10:12] some education uh in that way even if it

[2:10:16] the rear reflector may not on its face

[2:10:18] seem like the the most efficient safety

[2:10:21] measure. Um so new proposed legislation

[2:10:24] AB1557

[2:10:26] um by PAPEN is there's a multitude of

[2:10:29] things. This is really just a high

[2:10:31] level. Um we did link um the full

[2:10:33] language um in the staff report. So

[2:10:35] giving local law enforcement clear

[2:10:37] authority um to address these ebikes. Um

[2:10:41] and then Davies some ebike safety

[2:10:43] requirements at schools which is being

[2:10:46] done in our Sono County uh schools

[2:10:49] resources. um it's just not required

[2:10:51] right now.

[2:10:55] There are some other counties uh in

[2:10:57] California that have obtained pilot

[2:10:59] programs uh to limit uh safety

[2:11:02] regulations. So um Marin County and San

[2:11:06] Diego County you'll probably hear about

[2:11:08] a lot and this is allowing jurisdictions

[2:11:11] to essentially opt in to more

[2:11:13] restrictive age restrictions. And these

[2:11:16] pilots are really supposed to run

[2:11:18] through January 1st, 2029 with the idea

[2:11:20] that once the pilot period concludes,

[2:11:23] they will consider rolling it out to

[2:11:25] other counties. Um there has been a lot

[2:11:28] of interest from counties that are not

[2:11:30] in the pilot program to be allowed into

[2:11:33] the pilot program or to develop their

[2:11:35] own. Um and so we are monitoring seeing

[2:11:38] how these are going and the various

[2:11:40] cities within these counties are uh in

[2:11:42] the process of sort of adopting those

[2:11:44] measures. And so I've provided a a

[2:11:47] summary of the cities that have have

[2:11:48] joined in. But there's a lot of

[2:11:50] interest. I think most of the cities in

[2:11:51] San Diego County are at least discussing

[2:11:54] it if not taking tangible steps towards

[2:11:57] um joining the program.

[2:12:02] Santo County is also doing a lot in

[2:12:04] terms of resources. The San Monteo

[2:12:07] County Office of Education has a whole

[2:12:08] library of ebike toolkit and trainings

[2:12:12] um with webinars and resources for

[2:12:14] parents uh translated into multiple

[2:12:17] languages. Um and I'll speak a little

[2:12:19] bit more about the town's efforts, but

[2:12:21] this is something that has been promoted

[2:12:23] both through our school district as well

[2:12:24] as through town communications.

[2:12:28] We also hear a lot about other cities

[2:12:30] that have passed regulations or ebike

[2:12:32] bans locally. We hear about Berling game

[2:12:35] and we hear about Milbre. Uh these it's an important clarification that

[2:12:40] these um ordinances prohibit the

[2:12:43] operation of ebikes in public areas uh

[2:12:46] and in park or recreation areas or

[2:12:48] sidewalks. They do not prohibit their

[2:12:51] use on the actual roads. So those are

[2:12:53] governed not by town ordinances. So the

[2:12:56] town of Hillsbor does not have a large

[2:12:59] number of parks or trail system. um that

[2:13:02] would be what an ordinance if we were to

[2:13:04] adopt something would really govern. It

[2:13:06] would not impact riding ebikes along the

[2:13:09] actual streets of Hillsboro. So, I just

[2:13:11] wanted to make that clarification uh

[2:13:13] because I do think sometimes it get

[2:13:15] could become confusing in news articles

[2:13:18] um and word of mouth.

[2:13:21] Um, again,

[2:13:23] some cities that that don't uh haven't

[2:13:25] have opted to not adopt an ordinance do

[2:13:28] have moreformational

[2:13:30] resources and then additional town halls

[2:13:33] and listening sessions. Um, I think our

[2:13:35] weekly bulletin has been 60% ebike town

[2:13:39] halls lately um promoting them. Uh, we

[2:13:42] had Josh Becker, Diane Papin had one

[2:13:44] with um Ana um the lead of our Hillsboro

[2:13:47] Youth Commission speaking at it. Um

[2:13:49] there's two events tomorrow on ebikes um

[2:13:53] that Vice Mayor Ragn and I are tag

[2:13:55] teaming. So it it's continuing to gain

[2:13:58] some traction and so hopefully that will

[2:13:59] result in some some meaningful change.

[2:14:06] Now what is being done at the town

[2:14:07] level? So we are tracking that

[2:14:09] legislation at the state level meeting

[2:14:11] with our legislative consultant. Our

[2:14:13] legislative platform does have language

[2:14:16] uh to limit the ability for users to

[2:14:18] alter ebikes. We also are doing this

[2:14:21] through the League of California Cities.

[2:14:23] Um they have a strong initiative to

[2:14:25] monitor this legislation. Um, but having

[2:14:28] that in our platform means that as these

[2:14:30] proposed bills are moving very quickly

[2:14:32] through Sacramento, we are able to write

[2:14:35] letters of support um, and be very

[2:14:37] nimble to make sure that we're showing

[2:14:40] um, that we want to see that legislation

[2:14:42] pass. And so that's very helpful um,

[2:14:45] making sure that our voice is being

[2:14:47] incorporated in that conversation.

[2:14:51] As you know, uh you guys passed and

[2:14:53] adopted the bicycle and pedestrian

[2:14:54] master plan, uh with a huge thanks to

[2:14:56] the public works and building and

[2:14:58] planning staff for helping spearhead

[2:15:00] this. Uh this master plan contains some

[2:15:04] policies for consideration to be um

[2:15:06] adopted by the city in the future,

[2:15:09] including prohibiting riders from riding

[2:15:11] unsafe speeds, encouraging safety

[2:15:14] courses, um and additional helmets and

[2:15:16] bike lights. Uh, I do want to address I

[2:15:19] know the council received a public

[2:15:20] comment regarding some infrastructure

[2:15:22] improvements and the bike and ped master

[2:15:24] plan does contain um some some

[2:15:28] infrastructure improvements. Uh so

[2:15:32] was not ignored. Uh it was meant to be

[2:15:34] captured. Each one of these bullet

[2:15:36] points could probably be their own

[2:15:37] presentation in themsel. Um so we're

[2:15:40] just trying to capture it at a high

[2:15:41] level. But the bike ped master plan does

[2:15:43] also have recommendations for physical

[2:15:45] barriers and improvements and things to

[2:15:47] improve safe biking in the town of

[2:15:49] Hillsboro.

[2:15:53] I mentioned HPD before. They have done

[2:15:55] three specific trainings on ebikes and I

[2:15:58] did include their PowerPoint as an

[2:16:00] attachment to the staff report um most

[2:16:02] recently just in January. Um and and had

[2:16:06] very good attendance at Crocker Middle

[2:16:08] School.

[2:16:12] Um, additional public education

[2:16:14] outreach. We have a ebike website. So,

[2:16:17] hillsboro.net/ebikes

[2:16:19] which just has a summary um of a lot of

[2:16:21] the information here tonight. All of

[2:16:23] those resources from the county and

[2:16:25] otherwise the HPD presentation is on

[2:16:27] there as well. Uh and so it's a easy

[2:16:30] place uh to and as we get more

[2:16:32] information uh and these webinars come

[2:16:34] out we'll make sure to update it with

[2:16:35] the record links to recordings the youth

[2:16:38] commission survey uh for example we'll

[2:16:40] make sure to plug here just so it will

[2:16:42] be a living library of ebikes in

[2:16:44] Hillsboro.

[2:16:50] I did to want to just while we're on the

[2:16:52] topic um offer a couple of just best

[2:16:55] practices uh both for parents and for

[2:16:58] kids uh not just ebikes but um all

[2:17:02] biking uh in town. Um ensuring that

[2:17:05] you're wearing a helmet and that it

[2:17:07] fits. Um making sure that you're

[2:17:09] practicing passenger safety. Um and

[2:17:12] reminding that carrying a passenger is

[2:17:14] legal only if your ebike has a seat for

[2:17:16] another person. I know that we often see

[2:17:19] that is not the case riding around

[2:17:20] Hillsboro. I know I've seen it. Um and

[2:17:22] so just making sure that everybody's

[2:17:24] aware of the legal rules.

[2:17:27] Being responsible not just as a a bike

[2:17:29] rider but also on in a vehicle. Um being

[2:17:32] aware of ebikes and being responsible,

[2:17:35] predictable and visible, wearing bright

[2:17:37] colors and lights uh when you can and uh

[2:17:41] slowing the speed. So higher the speed,

[2:17:43] the higher the risk. So, I'm just

[2:17:45] encouraging folks to ride at safe speeds

[2:17:47] and please do not modify your ebike to

[2:17:50] ride at an unsafe speed.

[2:17:54] This is another resource from safe

[2:17:56] routes that we'll link um on the

[2:17:58] website, but uh specifically geared

[2:18:01] towards parents. So, a lot of these

[2:18:03] resources are geared towards specific

[2:18:04] audiences.

[2:18:07] Again,

[2:18:09] just another plug for our our website

[2:18:11] and this is the basic information of

[2:18:13] what is on our website. So, the rules of

[2:18:15] riding an ebike, ebike and bike safety

[2:18:17] tips, how to report illegal or

[2:18:20] concerning bike behavior. We do get that

[2:18:21] question a lot and then access to that

[2:18:24] library of tools and resources.

[2:18:28] So, with that, I'll open up uh for

[2:18:30] discussion or questions to keep the

[2:18:32] conversation going. Thanks for your

[2:18:33] time.

[2:18:34] >> Thank you, Mandy. Um, thank you so much

[2:18:37] for the work you've been doing on this.

[2:18:38] And before I open it up to my

[2:18:39] colleagues, I would like to first also

[2:18:41] take the opportunity to thank our vice

[2:18:43] mayor, uh, Leslie Ragdale has been not

[2:18:47] only representing the town quite well in

[2:18:49] moving this discussion forward, but

[2:18:50] she's just been very diligent and

[2:18:52] persistent working with HPD as well as

[2:18:55] the school, the the schools and the

[2:18:58] stakeholders at the school to move the

[2:19:00] education and information on this

[2:19:02] project. Thank you so much, Leslie. I've

[2:19:03] been quite impressed with the speed and

[2:19:05] elacrity you've moved this whole

[2:19:07] discussion forward. Um I will now open

[2:19:10] it up to my colleagues for questions for

[2:19:12] clarifications on the presentation. Um Caswell Adams and just a quick

[2:19:19] question about the ordinance that uh is

[2:19:21] in Berling game about restricting

[2:19:24] driving to roads.

[2:19:27] We have a few places in Hillsboro that

[2:19:30] would be tempting that are off-road. Um

[2:19:34] would it be within our purview to create

[2:19:37] legislation

[2:19:38] similarly that you must use these bikes

[2:19:42] on roads?

[2:19:45] » I can look into it especially if you

[2:19:47] have specific areas and we can work with

[2:19:49] the city attorney's office to see what

[2:19:51] capabilities we have. Certainly.

[2:19:56] Council member uh Trunk,

[2:19:58] >> thank you. Um thank you for the

[2:20:00] presentation and thank you Vice Mayor uh

[2:20:02] Rexels for um you know um spearheading

[2:20:06] it. Um there are certainly a lot of

[2:20:09] discussions regarding this and my

[2:20:11] question is this one. Um and that that's

[2:20:15] sort of dubtail to uh our uh chief. Uh

[2:20:18] perhaps you can come up to the podium

[2:20:20] and talk a little bit about um the um

[2:20:24] the meeting with um the students, the

[2:20:27] Kroger students. I think um the

[2:20:30] education piece is fantastic and the

[2:20:33] peer-to-peer discussions with the

[2:20:35] officers has been very effective.

[2:20:38] >> Yes, that's correct. Uh we had our first

[2:20:42] session uh in the beginning of the

[2:20:45] school year and that was uh widely

[2:20:48] attended. A lot of kids came. Uh we had

[2:20:52] our second session uh last week or the

[2:20:55] week before sorry and uh that was also

[2:20:59] uh very well attended. uh the officers

[2:21:02] give a wonderful presentation

[2:21:04] and uh really give that personal uh

[2:21:09] level to the to the students. Um we

[2:21:13] recently had a uh parent uh before

[2:21:17] Christmas break for the kids for the

[2:21:19] parents who are going to buy uh bikes

[2:21:21] for the students just to give them heads

[2:21:23] up and what to look for and you know

[2:21:26] most importantly it's the education for

[2:21:29] the students and uh to help them make

[2:21:33] right decisions

[2:21:35] >> and and I I I maybe you want to talk a

[2:21:38] little bit about the assembly that you

[2:21:40] intended to push push out uh maybe at

[2:21:43] the uh later of this year uh so that

[2:21:46] people would actually bring their bikes

[2:21:48] in and then be able to have u sort of a

[2:21:52] pure conversation

[2:21:54] um among the students with parents and

[2:21:57] also with the officers.

[2:21:59] >> Correct. So we're going to have we're

[2:22:01] not calling it a a bike rodeo. It's more

[2:22:04] like a skills session where the officers

[2:22:07] will be there. where they'll be able to

[2:22:08] check the students bikes and make sure

[2:22:10] they haven't been modified or if they

[2:22:13] have any questions on how to ride them.

[2:22:16] Uh we'll put them through a little kind

[2:22:19] of an obstacle and just be there for the

[2:22:22] students in case they need any help. And I think this is would be a good

[2:22:27] point for me to just kind of bring it

[2:22:29] up. One of the observation I had is when

[2:22:32] you have more than three cyclists

[2:22:36] um on the road literally they're the you

[2:22:39] know the formation of a size of a

[2:22:41] vehicle and as drivers we don't know how

[2:22:45] to approach them. you don't know how to

[2:22:47] pass them or you want to follow them

[2:22:49] behind them and they also seem like that

[2:22:52] they are not sure exactly how they are

[2:22:56] able to move forward with their

[2:22:59] formation. So I think that that would be

[2:23:02] something either in our website or in

[2:23:05] the presentation to have conversation

[2:23:07] regarding the formation so that they

[2:23:10] will keep themselves safe and it's also

[2:23:14] uh less of a frustrations for the driver

[2:23:16] trying to pass them by and create

[2:23:19] potential accidents.

[2:23:21] >> Sure. And that is uh something that they

[2:23:23] discussed during the uh presentations

[2:23:25] that we gave earlier.

[2:23:27] >> Thank you. Thank you chief.

[2:23:28] >> Sure.

[2:23:29] >> Thank you chief. Um, Council Member

[2:23:32] Kwick,

[2:23:35] >> thank you. Thank you, Mandy, for the

[2:23:37] presentation and also thank you, yeah,

[2:23:39] Leslie, and and everybody that's been

[2:23:41] working up for and and Chief, and that

[2:23:45] is all the things that have been done so

[2:23:47] far to try and keep our residents and

[2:23:49] especially our youth safe. So, I just

[2:23:51] have two questions, Mandy. Um, it said

[2:23:53] class one, no throttle, class two

[2:23:56] throttle, and then class three is no

[2:23:58] throttle again.

[2:24:00] So why is um what makes class three I

[2:24:03] assume that's more powerful?

[2:24:11] Let me pull up them. There's an

[2:24:12] attachment with a bit more um

[2:24:16] specificity. Um the attachment one which

[2:24:22] has

[2:24:24] I'll have to get back to you. I I'm

[2:24:27] still learning a lot of these these

[2:24:28] terms and stuff. There's kind of its own

[2:24:30] world.

[2:24:31] >> I didn't mean to play stump the deputy

[2:24:33] city manager. Yeah.

[2:24:34] >> All right. So, we'll we'll table that.

[2:24:36] And then my second question is for

[2:24:38] Christopher. What what uh our city

[2:24:40] attorney, what parameters are we

[2:24:43] permitted to set around this?

[2:24:46] >> Yeah, it's a complicated question and I

[2:24:48] know Mandy's done some of the research.

[2:24:49] Uh Leslie attended a call with one of my

[2:24:51] associates who's dug into the ebike

[2:24:53] regulations. We have seen some

[2:24:55] ordinances that we've adopted uh for

[2:24:57] certain cities within the state limited

[2:25:00] kind of um scope um and I could probably

[2:25:02] bring more to you if you are interested

[2:25:04] in looking at an ordinance just kind of

[2:25:06] what the parameters would be um but yes

[2:25:08] it is limited the state has set some of

[2:25:10] the requirements um and you don't want

[2:25:12] to deviate from what the state has set

[2:25:14] but there are certain things that we can

[2:25:15] regulate and I can come back with more

[2:25:16] specificity if if that's desired of the

[2:25:18] council.

[2:25:19] >> Thank you. Those are all my questions. I

[2:25:21] have thoughts but that's after public

[2:25:22] comment. Um, Vice Mayor Rexdale,

[2:25:26] >> um, uh, with regard to class three, they

[2:25:30] they're age 16 and up by state law. Um,

[2:25:33] but they can go up to 28 miles per hour.

[2:25:36] And I'm not sure if you have to pedal

[2:25:38] assist on a class three. I think you

[2:25:41] might just be able to ride it with the

[2:25:43] throttle

[2:25:44] and and not pedal assist. You do have to

[2:25:47] pedal still on the three. Okay. But

[2:25:51] on the three, that's the thing that

[2:25:52] confuses me. Well, there's a lot that's

[2:25:54] confusing, but yeah. So, the class three

[2:25:56] um can go up to 28 miles per hour. And

[2:26:00] when they talk about miles per hour, if

[2:26:02] you're going downhill, even not

[2:26:04] modified, even a legal bike, you you you

[2:26:07] could be going faster. Um so, um

[2:26:11] I have more opinions than questions, so

[2:26:14] I'm going to wait. But I just want to

[2:26:16] thank you so much, Mandy, for this

[2:26:18] amazing presentation that I've already

[2:26:20] mentioned to a couple of people. Um and

[2:26:22] point out um in case everyone leaves

[2:26:24] before my opinions um that the town hall

[2:26:28] tomorrow is at 2 o'clock um with the

[2:26:31] county supervisors led by supervisor

[2:26:34] Spear and uh Supervisor Muller at 2

[2:26:37] o'clock tomorrow um down in Rabbit City.

[2:26:40] >> Thanks for that reminder. I will get to

[2:26:42] you in one second. I I just have one

[2:26:44] clarifying question for Mandy or whoever

[2:26:46] has the answer regarding the pending

[2:26:49] legislation. um that is looking at age.

[2:26:54] Are they actually talking about license

[2:26:56] that would prove the age that you are?

[2:26:59] Is that included? I think this is the

[2:27:01] Papen um legislation. Do we know?

[2:27:05] >> Yes. And and at her most recent town

[2:27:07] hall, I believe she received quite a bit

[2:27:10] of feedback on on this legislation. So,

[2:27:14] I I hesitate to opine on on what that

[2:27:16] means in terms of the actual

[2:27:18] enforcement. Um, and I do I do

[2:27:21] anticipate and our legislative

[2:27:22] consultant anticipated that there may be

[2:27:24] some

[2:27:26] changes coming and and what has been

[2:27:27] proposed based on some feedback that

[2:27:29] she'd received. So, we'll um get a an

[2:27:31] update and we'll either make sure to

[2:27:33] include it in the legislative report

[2:27:35] that is in your packet each month or um

[2:27:37] send it um to you separately.

[2:27:39] >> Okay. Thank you. And I will um turn it

[2:27:42] over to uh

[2:27:44] >> Hi. Hi.

[2:27:45] >> Good evening. I'm Naen Taylor Barnes, a

[2:27:48] longtime Hillsboro resident.

[2:27:50] >> Hello, Nadine.

[2:27:51] >> And u the reason I'm here is also to

[2:27:54] help with the hopefully help with the

[2:27:56] ebike issue. I've been working a lot

[2:27:58] with UCSF and then also with Marin

[2:28:02] County. We've been in the middle of all

[2:28:04] of of this for quite a while. Uh and

[2:28:07] also I have had to learn a lot. But

[2:28:10] basically, uh, I do want to thank

[2:28:12] Christine because I got her attention,

[2:28:15] uh, also on this issue. And then Leslie,

[2:28:18] I haven't met you yet, even though we've

[2:28:19] emailed extensively. Uh, and then of

[2:28:22] course Anna and even Brody who've done a

[2:28:24] lot of work on the upcoming article. I

[2:28:26] think that will really help matters.

[2:28:29] Okay? Because you have to educate the

[2:28:31] parents. They are buying these bikes.

[2:28:34] They don't know um, they don't know what

[2:28:37] they're buying. All right? The kids are

[2:28:39] saying, "Oh, my friend has this. Please

[2:28:42] get it for me." This is what we saw in

[2:28:44] Marin. Uh there is actually even fraud

[2:28:48] where uh bikes are being sold as ebikes,

[2:28:52] but they're not. They're much more

[2:28:54] highowered. You have the software that

[2:28:57] can modify even the the legal bikes. So,

[2:29:01] this is very very confusing for parents

[2:29:04] and you know, we can wait for the

[2:29:06] legislation. And there's a lot of

[2:29:08] legislation. There are a lot of studies

[2:29:10] now. But I think you have to get to the

[2:29:14] parents and to the kids, which you know,

[2:29:16] it's so good to see the extensiveness of

[2:29:19] this of the program that Hillsboro is

[2:29:22] planning. And let me tell you why.

[2:29:24] because I don't know how many of you

[2:29:27] have seen the big New York Times uh the

[2:29:30] cover story, the Sunday magazine cover

[2:29:32] story uh with Amelia Stafford who was 15

[2:29:36] at the time. My son operated on her when

[2:29:40] she came into the hospital in Marin um

[2:29:45] having just suffered you know an ebike.

[2:29:47] She was on they think a class two which

[2:29:50] was a legal you know illegal ebike but

[2:29:52] she had jumped on just to try it just to

[2:29:56] go down the block. She fell off and had

[2:30:00] severe traumatic brain injury and this

[2:30:03] is the thing. This is what parents have

[2:30:05] to understand. the injuries are far more

[2:30:10] you have more injuries much more in the

[2:30:13] way of traumatic brain injuries and then

[2:30:16] on top of that you know you're talking

[2:30:19] about extensive hospitalizations you're

[2:30:22] talking about u rehabilitation

[2:30:26] uh and so and that's if you survive okay

[2:30:31] you're looking at a lifechanging event

[2:30:33] it's not one and done and then of Of

[2:30:36] course the death rate is so much higher.

[2:30:38] They found in Marin one in eight you

[2:30:41] know and then now some new statistics

[2:30:44] are that two to three you know this is

[2:30:46] just on the the ebikes uh two to three

[2:30:50] times more likely to have traumatic

[2:30:52] brain injury and then the death rate

[2:30:55] four to five times more. Now part of why

[2:30:59] I also wanted to discuss this is because

[2:31:02] the misnomer it's called an ebike and in

[2:31:05] Europe uh all of almost all of what is

[2:31:09] sold here as ebikes would be classified

[2:31:14] as mopeds and under strict regulations

[2:31:18] in Europe. So you have the misnomer

[2:31:21] where parents are feeling maybe more

[2:31:23] casual about it. uh you have fraudulent

[2:31:27] advertising and then on top of that now

[2:31:30] what Marin encountered and also we're

[2:31:34] seeing at these presentations

[2:31:36] is the ebike advocates are trying to say

[2:31:41] the problems are with illegal bikes and

[2:31:44] it's not the case. You have legal bikes

[2:31:48] and they're being used improperly and of course you know kids not having

[2:31:53] the education and whatnot. Okay. Um,

[2:31:55] Nadine, thank you for those comments.

[2:31:57] I'm not sure. Have you written anything?

[2:31:58] We're happy to include that into um our

[2:32:01] records. Did you submit anything in

[2:32:03] writing? I appreciate everything you

[2:32:05] just stated. Well, everything you just

[2:32:06] stated is recorded. That would be part

[2:32:08] of the record as well. But thanks thanks

[2:32:10] for the information you just provided.

[2:32:12] It's extremely helpful and thanks for

[2:32:14] your work in educating the community

[2:32:16] about this subject. Thank you so much.

[2:32:18] >> You're welcome.

[2:32:20] >> Any any other additional public comments

[2:32:23] on this issue? Thank you, Mayor Cole.

[2:32:25] I'll just ask if anyone on Zoom would

[2:32:26] like to provide comments on this item.

[2:32:31] I'm Oh, yeah. Yes, please.

[2:32:40] » We started Abe Matar 110 Redwood Drive.

[2:32:43] Um, we started a petition and we have

[2:32:45] over 800.

[2:32:46] >> Do you mind just stating your name? I

[2:32:48] have met you before, but do you mind

[2:32:49] just saying your name for the record?

[2:32:50] >> Yes. Abe Matar.

[2:32:52] >> Okay. Sorry, I didn't hear it. Go ahead.

[2:32:54] >> Uh, so um I'm passionately against

[2:32:57] ebikes.

[2:32:59] My kid doesn't ride one, but um I had

[2:33:01] two friends die on motorcycles growing

[2:33:04] up and uh I see these kids how they use

[2:33:07] them on the streets. It's really

[2:33:08] horrible. Uh one of my my son's friends

[2:33:12] got injured on a bike and it forced us

[2:33:15] to come up with this petition that Amar

[2:33:18] presented. We have over 800 people in

[2:33:21] Hillsboro out of 3600 homes that are

[2:33:24] very opposed to having ebikes without

[2:33:26] permit. If I need a permit to drive a

[2:33:29] car and a motorcycle needs a permit to

[2:33:31] ride a motorcycle, you should have

[2:33:34] anybody who's riding something faster

[2:33:35] than a regular bike use some kind of

[2:33:39] permitting. So, uh, the petition we we

[2:33:42] put out was you need to be 16 or older

[2:33:45] to ride, I think, you know, bikes and,

[2:33:48] uh, I think they should be banned,

[2:33:50] especially in Hillsboro because we have

[2:33:52] no bike lanes like they do have in San

[2:33:55] Diego with all these new developments.

[2:33:57] We have no bike lanes. have up and downs

[2:33:59] and you see them going to school in the

[2:34:01] morning and it's you know you see them

[2:34:03] like somebody was saying three at a time

[2:34:05] and they're they think they're cool and

[2:34:07] they're just you know what are we going

[2:34:09] to wait for them to die before we make a

[2:34:11] change. I mean we ban you know we ban

[2:34:13] jeweled and we don't want our kids to

[2:34:15] smoke but we want them to ride bicycles

[2:34:17] at 30 miles an hour makes no sense. Um

[2:34:20] so I I'm very very much supportive of

[2:34:23] banning ebikes in Hillsboro. Thank you.

[2:34:25] >> Thank you Aiden. Um, any additional

[2:34:30] public comments before we move forward

[2:34:32] with a discussion on this?

[2:34:34] >> Thank you, Maricole. I'll just ask if

[2:34:36] there's anyone else in the room who

[2:34:37] would like to provide comments.

[2:34:40] >> No, Miracle. Thank you.

[2:34:41] >> Okay. Oh, yes. Um,

[2:34:46] » yeah. Hi. Uh, my name's Mitch Wong. I

[2:34:49] didn't really prepare anything here, but

[2:34:51] it was my son Katon Wong that was riding

[2:34:55] to school

[2:34:57] uh down Chateau. I guess this was in

[2:35:00] October. And then he basically I was out

[2:35:04] of town. So then his mom let him ride

[2:35:07] the ebike. It was her ebike. And so he

[2:35:10] took the ebike down Chateau and then had

[2:35:14] an accident on Chateau. blocked the

[2:35:18] whole the whole street

[2:35:21] and an ambulance came rushing to him and

[2:35:25] took him to Stanford Hospital.

[2:35:28] He had abrasions on his head, his face.

[2:35:33] He lost two of his the two top of his

[2:35:36] front teeth. Uh he missed a week of

[2:35:40] school. Um, I mean, he's 12 years old

[2:35:45] and all, ever since he's been in fifth

[2:35:47] grade at South, all he's been dreaming

[2:35:50] about is, "Dad, when are you going to

[2:35:52] buy me an ebike?"

[2:35:54] Yeah. So, the kids all want ebikes.

[2:35:58] Uh, parents want to buy ebikes

[2:36:01] to make it convenient for themselves.

[2:36:06] We have so many ebikes in our homes now.

[2:36:11] We don't even want to use them.

[2:36:14] I think we have four ebikes.

[2:36:17] We would go from the slow ebike, the

[2:36:20] class one, and then say, "Oh, the kids

[2:36:23] would be saying, "This is not fast

[2:36:25] enough, Dad. This is not fast enough,

[2:36:27] Mom. Let's get a class 2 ebike where you

[2:36:31] have the throttle." We have that

[2:36:34] throttle. I know what you're talking

[2:36:35] about. So,

[2:36:39] I mean, yeah, we have this petition. I

[2:36:42] would definitely think that kids should

[2:36:45] have to go through some sort of

[2:36:46] education

[2:36:48] and I think they should have some sort

[2:36:50] of age requirement because I mean

[2:36:53] driving around Hillsboro taking our kids

[2:36:55] to school, we see these ebike kids and

[2:37:00] they're, you know, they're popping

[2:37:02] wheelies going down up and down the

[2:37:05] street. They're really at like Ape says,

[2:37:09] they're like treating it like a

[2:37:10] motorcycle.

[2:37:13] So I think uh if you know whatever we

[2:37:16] need to do we will be happy to support

[2:37:20] and help convey this message to uh kind

[2:37:25] of we don't want to ban it but we want

[2:37:28] to have some sort of

[2:37:30] kind of some sort of monitoring and we

[2:37:33] don't want kids to just be you know I

[2:37:36] mean at South I remember when my kid

[2:37:40] Katon was riding he wanted a ebike.

[2:37:43] Other kids were like I think they were

[2:37:45] fourth or fifth grade and they already

[2:37:46] had ebikes.

[2:37:48] >> Yeah.

[2:37:48] >> And those ebikes are extremely powerful.

[2:37:50] Oh, I'm sorry. I'm out of town. I

[2:37:52] >> That's okay. Um I just also would

[2:37:54] encourage um you Mr. Wong um Keith,

[2:37:57] right? Is it

[2:37:58] >> Katen Wong?

[2:37:58] >> Ken Wong um and Abe as well as Nadine if

[2:38:02] you haven't done so already just to be

[2:38:04] able to reach out in the future if you

[2:38:06] could if you wouldn't mind filling out

[2:38:07] the yellow form so we'll have a contact.

[2:38:09] It could be your phone number or email I

[2:38:11] suppose is what we usually request. But

[2:38:14] um I really we all really appreciate you

[2:38:16] being in here today and sharing this um

[2:38:19] this you know sharing this information

[2:38:20] with us. Um as Naen pointed out I

[2:38:24] completely agree. The traumatic brain

[2:38:25] injury is not just a one time and it you

[2:38:29] recover especially these young

[2:38:30] individuals whose brains are still

[2:38:32] developing. They can have very long-term

[2:38:35] consequences as a physician. I've seen

[2:38:37] that on the front line as well. So, we

[2:38:39] will continue to um work on this issue

[2:38:42] and and note for now um I haven't

[2:38:46] commented. So, as we move into

[2:38:47] discussion, I've been in close contact

[2:38:50] with um Vice Mayor Ragdale on this. We

[2:38:54] every time we run into a state

[2:38:55] legislature, this is often the first

[2:38:57] discussion we have with them. What are

[2:38:59] they doing in Sacramento to move this

[2:39:01] issue as quickly as possible? As a city

[2:39:04] council, we're somewhat limited in terms

[2:39:06] of legislating. for example, permits.

[2:39:09] That was my first reaction the first

[2:39:11] meeting I went to. I said, "Well, why

[2:39:12] don't we just have everybody have a

[2:39:13] permit?" Well, we don't have the

[2:39:14] authorities outside of our jurisdiction.

[2:39:17] However, some of the other issues that's

[2:39:19] come up in terms of maybe banning it in

[2:39:21] certain areas that could restrict that

[2:39:23] could significantly restrict students

[2:39:25] writing it at out of the house in the

[2:39:27] first place. That's something our city

[2:39:29] attorney and our staff will continue to

[2:39:31] look into. and um just want to reassure

[2:39:33] you that we are really all in on this

[2:39:37] issue and doing the maximum we can to

[2:39:40] constrain this in addition to education

[2:39:43] of course um and I will open it up for

[2:39:46] further discussion or comments from any

[2:39:48] of my colleagues but yes um and and I'm

[2:39:51] going to and I I realize I'm not

[2:39:53] following the rules at this point but I

[2:39:54] will ask Nine to go ahead and make a

[2:39:57] comment. Yes.

[2:39:58] >> The um I think uh when we were all

[2:40:01] learning how to drive, right, and you

[2:40:04] would see um a car that had crashed.

[2:40:07] >> Use the mic so we can

[2:40:08] >> Okay. Sorry. Recording.

[2:40:09] >> Um I think there's one photograph that

[2:40:12] was in the New York Times that if

[2:40:14] parents saw this, you know, it it would

[2:40:17] speak and and have them understand the

[2:40:21] gravity of what we're dealing with. The

[2:40:23] photograph is uh a replica of Amelia

[2:40:29] Stratford's skull. And this is the piece

[2:40:34] that my son had to remove from her skull

[2:40:38] in order to save her life. And I think

[2:40:41] if parents saw that one photo, you know,

[2:40:44] photo is worth a thousand words. I think

[2:40:46] that would do it. Because when I saw

[2:40:48] that photo, I said, "Oh my god."

[2:40:51] So, you know, before because I know

[2:40:54] legislation takes time and and in fact

[2:40:57] with Marin, they had so much push back

[2:41:00] and it was so it got so limited to a

[2:41:03] pilot and they wanted so much more. So,

[2:41:06] there's a lot of resistance

[2:41:08] >> but but the feedback we're getting from

[2:41:09] the state legislature is they also

[2:41:11] starting to move more quickly,

[2:41:13] especially in the past couple of months.

[2:41:14] I think is um

[2:41:16] >> I think it was Mandy who pointed out

[2:41:18] even as of the past 3 or 4 days there've

[2:41:20] been new legislation. So I think they

[2:41:22] finally getting the message from the um

[2:41:26] communities and from the ground up

[2:41:28] saying they need to move more quickly.

[2:41:30] Um any additional comments otherwise um

[2:41:34] thank you all for being here and and

[2:41:36] nudging us along. Oh, I'm sorry. Vice

[2:41:38] Mayor Ragdale.

[2:41:39] >> Oh that's right.

[2:41:44] Um, okay. I'll try not to take up too

[2:41:46] much time, but I have a lot of opinions.

[2:41:48] Um, I want to start though by thanking

[2:41:51] you guys so much for your public

[2:41:53] comment, for your advocacy, for the

[2:41:55] petition, which this was something we

[2:41:57] had already been talking about, but I

[2:41:59] think the petition, and I'm so sorry for

[2:42:01] your son's injuries. Um, but that

[2:42:05] petition did wake us up to be u more

[2:42:08] motivated on this issue and to press our

[2:42:12] um supervisors and our state legislators

[2:42:16] even more. And so thank you. And um we

[2:42:20] happen to all be parents. Four of us are

[2:42:23] grandparents. One of us is not. Um and we hear you. One of us raised a

[2:42:29] doctor. So very good job. Um but anyway,

[2:42:33] so thank you so much. I hope that um if

[2:42:36] you can't go tomorrow, I know it's two

[2:42:38] o'clock in the middle of the day, but

[2:42:40] they uh usually have online comment

[2:42:43] available. They're calling it a town

[2:42:44] hall. I I presume they will also still

[2:42:47] have online comments available um before

[2:42:50] Supervisor Spear. She's also um very

[2:42:53] accessible and you can email her and um

[2:42:56] I have the email of her legislative aid

[2:42:59] who's working on this if if you want

[2:43:00] that. Um, I would hope that you would

[2:43:03] also contact Diane Papin's office

[2:43:05] because she is working on this

[2:43:07] legislation, which is great and which is

[2:43:10] limited, but hopefully less limited now.

[2:43:13] um especially after the um town hall

[2:43:16] that she had and there were a lot of

[2:43:18] council members there and we all felt

[2:43:21] the same that

[2:43:23] Marin had a pilot and that pilot uh they

[2:43:27] tried to get it statewide and there was

[2:43:29] just too much resistance from the

[2:43:31] manufacturers and the biking community

[2:43:33] and um we're like all of us are like we

[2:43:37] want that pilot. San Diego has a pilot

[2:43:39] also. The San Diego pilot is um age 12

[2:43:42] and up for all ebikes. The Marin pilot

[2:43:45] is age 16 for class two. Um I'll have

[2:43:50] more on that in in a minute. But um but

[2:43:52] anyway, this issue has has risen up uh

[2:43:56] and uh we are we are doing what we can

[2:43:58] but keep keep doing what you can and um

[2:44:02] you know you are the you are the voters

[2:44:04] for uh you know Senator Becker, Assembly

[2:44:06] Member Papen, uh Supervisor Spear and

[2:44:08] they want to hear from you. Um you know

[2:44:11] we we have some say and some sway but uh

[2:44:15] your your stories are especially

[2:44:18] valuable. Um, I I want to also say that

[2:44:23] wanting to regulate ebikes doesn't mean

[2:44:26] we're anti-bicycle,

[2:44:28] doesn't mean we're anti-kid

[2:44:29] independence, doesn't mean we're um

[2:44:32] anti-ex exercise, getting out of the

[2:44:34] car. It just means these particular

[2:44:39] they some people call them emotos. I

[2:44:41] know Bob Middle and and Moran calls them

[2:44:43] emotos.

[2:44:45] They are, unless they're illegally

[2:44:47] modified, they are legal. And our kids,

[2:44:50] a nine-year-old can legally ride one of

[2:44:53] these. And that's crazy. Uh, in in my

[2:44:57] opinion, um, and I think in a lot of

[2:44:59] people's opinions, you can be very, um,

[2:45:02] supportive of um, bicycling and bike

[2:45:06] lanes and safety and everything. Um but

[2:45:09] also want regulations

[2:45:11] on ebikes and who can ride them and how

[2:45:13] they can ride them. Uh our schools and

[2:45:16] our uh Hillsboro Police Department are

[2:45:18] working so closely together and I went

[2:45:21] to the presentation for parents. There

[2:45:23] weren't tons of people there, but the

[2:45:25] ones who were there really heard it. Uh

[2:45:27] and hopefully they spread the word, you

[2:45:29] know, and it was before the holidays.

[2:45:31] was such smart timing that uh you really

[2:45:34] need to think about what you're buying

[2:45:36] and if you buy one just buy a class one

[2:45:40] and make sure your kid is not modifying

[2:45:41] it. And you know I think the first time

[2:45:44] we ever heard about modifications was

[2:45:45] when we when we had our um bike ped

[2:45:49] first meeting and one of the middle

[2:45:50] schoolers who's this amazing kid who's

[2:45:53] also working on this issue told us and

[2:45:55] we're like what we didn't we didn't

[2:45:56] understand you can modify it so easily

[2:45:58] with an app or a dongle. Um and then um

[2:46:02] Anidal, the chair of our youth

[2:46:04] commission and and Brody are working on

[2:46:07] an article for our newsletter about the

[2:46:09] topic and through the California

[2:46:12] Association of Youth Commissions, uh

[2:46:14] city manager had mentioned there's a

[2:46:16] survey of kids. They've already gotten

[2:46:18] some responses uh fifth grade through

[2:46:20] 12th grade. They are focusing on the

[2:46:24] teen perspective, which is so important

[2:46:26] because the kids know they're supposed

[2:46:28] to ride a helmet, wear a helmet. They

[2:46:30] know they're not supposed to ride

[2:46:32] recklessly. They know if they don't have

[2:46:34] a seat behind them, they're not supposed

[2:46:36] to take a friend and they're definitely

[2:46:38] not supposed to take a friend if they're

[2:46:40] don't have a helmet to give them. They

[2:46:42] know they're not supposed to do leaves.

[2:46:44] So, she's trying to get at this in this

[2:46:46] survey.

[2:46:48] Why do you do this? I mean, there's peer

[2:46:50] pressure and all of that, but um I think

[2:46:52] that's so valuable. Education is is

[2:46:55] important. Education, educating the

[2:46:57] parents, or the ones who buy the bikes

[2:46:58] is so important, but this teen

[2:47:00] perspective, I think, is really crucial.

[2:47:03] And I'm so happy that she spoke at um

[2:47:05] Diane Pepin's uh town hall and um and uh

[2:47:10] is on this issue. Um so, just a couple

[2:47:14] other things. Um

[2:47:18] well,

[2:47:19] I will give you okay one thing to note

[2:47:22] that just people don't talk about but um

[2:47:25] I didn't know until I started going to

[2:47:26] these different webinars that electric

[2:47:30] scooters apparently there's tons of them

[2:47:32] I don't know if they're at our schools

[2:47:33] but there's tons of them at schools this

[2:47:36] man who's working on it Bob Middlestad

[2:47:37] he's a lawyer in Marin who's he's a

[2:47:40] bicycle advocate but he said he went

[2:47:42] around to different schools in Marin

[2:47:44] County San Monteo County he sees these

[2:47:46] electronic scooters

[2:47:48] they're actually illegal unless you're

[2:47:50] 16 and you have a driver's license. So,

[2:47:53] that was something that I didn't know.

[2:47:55] Um, but that's just something also

[2:47:57] spread the word about that. The e

[2:47:59] scooters, no, actually just not allowed.

[2:48:01] Doesn't matter. There's not a class,

[2:48:03] there's not anything not allowed. So,

[2:48:04] that's just something that I think it's

[2:48:06] important to get the word out there. Um,

[2:48:09] if your kid has an ebike, just I think

[2:48:13] you should tell them whether or not you

[2:48:15] can they can fit a person behind them,

[2:48:18] tell them don't. They're too heavy. So,

[2:48:21] even if you have a seat and even if your

[2:48:23] friend has a helmet, they're very very

[2:48:26] heavy vehicles. And, you know, just

[2:48:30] don't don't ride with a friend. Uh,

[2:48:32] don't ride three a breast either. And

[2:48:35] don't do wheelies. Now, the police can

[2:48:37] pull you over if you're driving in an un

[2:48:40] riding your bike in an unsafe manner.

[2:48:43] The police, they will they will do what

[2:48:45] they can, but they're also not going to

[2:48:47] unsafeely chase a bunch of teenagers and

[2:48:49] cause them to crash. So, we have to

[2:48:51] understand that there's only so much

[2:48:53] that we can do. And the more tools that

[2:48:55] we give them, for instance, the

[2:48:57] requiring a reflector, etc. the more

[2:48:59] tools that we give them um the easier it

[2:49:02] is for them to have these um these

[2:49:05] conversations.

[2:49:07] I think um the last thing that I will

[2:49:11] say just because

[2:49:14] here I am with my wish list that I sent

[2:49:17] to Diane Papen, I can only hope that

[2:49:19] maybe maybe some of it will go into her

[2:49:22] legislation. Um, but this is this is my

[2:49:25] wish list um for the state of California

[2:49:29] to combine the San Diego and Marin um

[2:49:32] pilot age restrictions and don't wait

[2:49:36] until the pilots are over and we have

[2:49:37] data. Oh, that did that is one more

[2:49:40] thing I want to talk about. Um, don't

[2:49:41] wait on that because that's a long time.

[2:49:45] And Diane Papin really seemed to get

[2:49:47] that from just the look she was getting

[2:49:49] from the council members in the audience

[2:49:52] that we want the pilot now. And they and

[2:49:55] they know um that we want these age

[2:49:58] restrictions because they did try to get

[2:49:59] it uh statewide. Um but anyway,

[2:50:04] uh I would like to combine. So for class

[2:50:07] one age 12 and up, class two age 16 and

[2:50:11] up and uh class three is is already 16

[2:50:15] and up. So no changes. I would actually

[2:50:18] like to outlaw tandem riding. I don't

[2:50:20] care if your bike can or not. I I think

[2:50:23] it's really unsafe. Um, I think they

[2:50:26] need to add enforcement, uh, teeth for

[2:50:29] the retailers, uh, and really look at

[2:50:32] some national legislation with regard to

[2:50:36] online retailers because a lot of these

[2:50:37] bikes are bought online and you can put

[2:50:39] them together in your garage. They're

[2:50:41] not that hard to put together. Um,

[2:50:43] because these bikes can be so easily

[2:50:46] modified. and you you go online and you

[2:50:50] can see that they say, "Oh, this this

[2:50:52] one will go up to 45 miles per hour,"

[2:50:53] which is not legal, but they put it

[2:50:55] online and they tell you how to how to

[2:50:57] modify it. So, I think we really need

[2:50:59] help also on the national level. Um, one

[2:51:04] thing that um, in the discussion from

[2:51:07] Diane Papin's uh, session, people were

[2:51:10] talking about, you know, you're just

[2:51:11] walking along or you're driving, all of

[2:51:13] a sudden they're doing wheelies or

[2:51:14] whatever, but also you don't hear them.

[2:51:17] And remember when they made the when

[2:51:19] Prius was the first electric car and

[2:51:21] they made them make a noise because all

[2:51:23] of a sudden it's upon you. They should

[2:51:26] make a noise. So, uh, especially, you

[2:51:28] know, you're walking along, you're you're older and all a sudden

[2:51:31] there's this bike there. It could make

[2:51:32] you fall. Um, so I think they should

[2:51:35] make a noise. Um,

[2:51:38] in some places, including the

[2:51:40] Netherlands and New York City, they have

[2:51:42] said ebikes should not be allowed to go

[2:51:44] over 15 miles per hour.

[2:51:47] I I think that's something that should

[2:51:49] be considered. Um, they just can't go over. Again, ebikes are there.

[2:51:54] It's it's fantastic to get up our hills,

[2:51:56] but we need to just keep our kids safe

[2:52:00] and our adults safe. Um, and um, with

[2:52:04] regard to the modifications,

[2:52:06] uh, I think that the state and national

[2:52:10] can work through the app stores because

[2:52:13] the app stores actually have to approve

[2:52:15] your app before they'll sell it in the

[2:52:17] store. So, there shouldn't be apps where

[2:52:19] you can modify an ebike illegally. Uh so

[2:52:22] I think that that there should be

[2:52:23] legislation on that. Again, town of

[2:52:25] Hillsboro really can't do that, but this

[2:52:28] but we can advocate for it with our

[2:52:30] representatives. Um and then oh the last

[2:52:33] thing I just wanted to say uh with

[2:52:35] regard to data, you had mentioned data

[2:52:37] collection in the packet. Um it would be

[2:52:41] helpful um if there is an accident if

[2:52:46] to have data on what class they were

[2:52:48] riding you know their age what class

[2:52:50] they were riding um and as many details

[2:52:54] as possible uh because there is some

[2:52:57] push back from the Manetta Institute

[2:53:00] report

[2:53:01] basically said oh well cars are cars are

[2:53:04] so much worse and um we really do need

[2:53:07] the data and I know in Marin and they're working on UCSF is working on um

[2:53:12] making sure that data is collected when

[2:53:14] people end up in the hospital. But even

[2:53:15] if there's a you know someone gets

[2:53:18] really scraped up on the side and HBD is

[2:53:20] there and helps them up, any data that

[2:53:22] we can have I think would be really

[2:53:24] helpful. And now I'm done with my

[2:53:26] opinions. Thank you. Thank you for

[2:53:27] indulging me.

[2:53:28] >> Yeah. Thank Thank you, Vice Mayor

[2:53:30] Rexale. Um any additional um comments

[2:53:33] from the council?

[2:53:35] Okay, Council Member Crowley.

[2:53:38] Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank Thank you

[2:53:40] so much to the parents who are here and

[2:53:42] um Naen, I think what Blake is doing is

[2:53:45] incredible. Blake Taylor went to went to

[2:53:48] school, went to Crocker with our kids

[2:53:49] and and we have wonderful children, but

[2:53:52] they're not neurosurgeons. So, thank

[2:53:54] you. Um and and I hope that Ethan has

[2:53:57] recovered. Um and I applaud that you are

[2:54:00] out here trying to help other people

[2:54:02] avoid what what he went through. Um, you

[2:54:05] know, my initial thoughts about this

[2:54:06] that I jotted down before listening to

[2:54:08] public comment, um, was that if we, um,

[2:54:12] try and craft some Hillsboro focused

[2:54:15] legislation around this that it either

[2:54:16] has to be bottom up from our residents

[2:54:19] or top down from the state. And so here,

[2:54:23] you know, we're hearing bottom up that

[2:54:26] this is something our residents are

[2:54:28] asking for. you know, um I don't know if

[2:54:31] you've ever heard this as a physician,

[2:54:32] but I have heard that physicians have

[2:54:34] called motorcycles donor cycles because

[2:54:37] so many of their organs when they do

[2:54:40] organ um transplants come from uh

[2:54:44] relatively young victims of motorcycle

[2:54:47] accidents because on a motorcycle you're

[2:54:49] not protected. There's no airbags around

[2:54:51] you even with a a helmet. And the

[2:54:53] thought of putting our children on a

[2:54:56] motorcycle, which is essentially what

[2:54:59] we're allowing to have happen, is

[2:55:01] ludicrous. I mean, we're just, no matter

[2:55:04] how much training we're giving them,

[2:55:06] that's not going to mitigate the the

[2:55:08] inherent danger of being on a vehicle

[2:55:12] that goes very fast with no protection

[2:55:15] around you. So, I think that a lot of

[2:55:18] parents in Hillsboro would be relieved.

[2:55:21] And I think some kids would be relieved

[2:55:24] too. Remember we had that safety session

[2:55:26] when you were police chief still Doug

[2:55:28] and you sat down and talked to a couple

[2:55:30] of kids or maybe you were our new city

[2:55:32] manager at the time but just coming off

[2:55:34] a police chief there are kids Crocker

[2:55:36] kids who were asking um for us to get

[2:55:38] the word out that these they were

[2:55:40] worried about their peers riding on

[2:55:42] this. So it seems to me a class one is

[2:55:46] plenty. If it was up to me, it would be

[2:55:48] a class one up to age 18, but I don't

[2:55:51] know how much discretion we would have

[2:55:54] around this. But, um, I'm really glad

[2:55:57] that we're having this discussion and

[2:55:59] really grateful for your advocacy. Uh,

[2:56:01] you know, one of the things that I think

[2:56:03] gives us more responsibility,

[2:56:06] um, just as is the case with Marin,

[2:56:08] we're an affluent community, so our

[2:56:10] families can afford these at a greater

[2:56:14] percentage among our youth than many

[2:56:16] other communities. So, I think we really

[2:56:19] do have a responsibility to be

[2:56:22] aggressive and to lead the way on on

[2:56:24] safety on this. Thank you.

[2:56:26] >> Thank you.

[2:56:27] >> Um, Council Member Adams.

[2:56:30] Thank you, mayor. Uh, just three things.

[2:56:34] First, do not discount the wonderful

[2:56:36] comment about photos. When I saw your

[2:56:39] presentation, Mandy, there was a picture

[2:56:42] of some police officer lecturing to a

[2:56:47] bunch of students who were sitting

[2:56:48] there. It was all text.

[2:56:52] This does not communicate doesn't

[2:56:54] communicate to most humans, but

[2:56:56] definitely not kids. So real pictures

[2:57:01] are the story we need to tell number

[2:57:03] one. So that was a great comment. Number

[2:57:06] two, a police presence at commute hours

[2:57:09] for the schools. Just a squad car, just

[2:57:13] a presence might discourage some of this

[2:57:17] as an idea. But third, I think you're

[2:57:20] hearing that we're really committed to

[2:57:23] doing something before we have to name

[2:57:25] the law after the person who's gone.

[2:57:28] We're not doing that. We want to do

[2:57:31] something now. And I heard us ask or at

[2:57:34] least I heard a nice offer from our city

[2:57:39] attorney to give us the full menu of

[2:57:42] things that we can do. Even if they're

[2:57:46] incremental and small, we want to see

[2:57:48] that menu. And that's a at least a a

[2:57:52] start at showing our real seriousness

[2:57:57] about this.

[2:57:59] >> Thank you. Um any additional comments?

[2:58:04] >> Just really quickly, I mean I think I

[2:58:06] think that you speak volumes in the

[2:58:07] audience regarding the incidents that

[2:58:09] you experienced and I think you speak

[2:58:11] volumes when you speak to other parents.

[2:58:14] I think that is gradually now come to

[2:58:17] all the family members and you know

[2:58:19] adults or kids that ebike is a misnomer

[2:58:24] uh is really a motorcycle uh in disguise

[2:58:27] um because of the speed and because of

[2:58:29] the throttle. So I do applaud that um

[2:58:32] our police uh departments have been on

[2:58:35] the forefront to do the outreach uh to

[2:58:38] the students. U Crocker kids are perfect

[2:58:41] age groups and maybe now we need to look

[2:58:43] into you know fourth graders and fifth

[2:58:45] graders because that that that that

[2:58:47] whole group needs to have the

[2:58:50] understanding and I think often times as

[2:58:53] much as we're approaching this

[2:58:55] multiprongs

[2:58:57] with the regulations with the

[2:58:59] legislators with the enforcement for

[2:59:01] that matters I think the self-awareness

[2:59:04] and then self sort of you know in terms

[2:59:07] of the the group trying to you know

[2:59:10] understand this better um so to keep

[2:59:12] themselves safe is important so I also

[2:59:15] applaud uh the chief to talk about the

[2:59:18] future assembly where there's

[2:59:20] opportunity for the Crocker students the

[2:59:22] middle you know the fourth and fifth

[2:59:24] graders come together and then to be

[2:59:26] able to actually actually experience

[2:59:28] what are the proper ways what are the

[2:59:30] proper rules to keep themselves safe

[2:59:33] when they use the the e- motor pets or

[2:59:37] whatever that we want to name them. We

[2:59:40] have to name them so that it's not going

[2:59:42] to be a bicycle as we like to say but

[2:59:46] need to understand that and then you

[2:59:48] know multi-prongs approach with the

[2:59:51] advocacy

[2:59:53] with the education with the practice to

[2:59:56] keep our community safe. So

[2:59:58] >> thank you. Um the only thing I will add

[3:00:01] is maybe staff could also including HPD

[3:00:04] reach out to the all parents group to

[3:00:06] expand the education to the parents

[3:00:08] directly. I think APG um when parents

[3:00:11] hear the stories like Nadine is talking

[3:00:15] about as well as hear what's in the

[3:00:17] pipeline and what can be done. Um just

[3:00:20] being able to discuss with all the

[3:00:22] parents who are many of the people on in

[3:00:25] APG are very involved in the schools.

[3:00:26] they want the best for all our students.

[3:00:28] That would also be another platform we

[3:00:30] can continue the education. So, we'll

[3:00:32] work on bringing the information to the

[3:00:34] all parents group as well. Um, no

[3:00:37] additional comments and I will you have

[3:00:40] a comment?

[3:00:40] >> Yeah, one more quick one. I'm sorry. Um,

[3:00:42] and uh vice mayor alluded to this. I

[3:00:44] don't think it's a an eitheror issue

[3:00:47] about promoting uh walking and bike

[3:00:50] riding. It's a both and. We can promote

[3:00:53] bike riding and keep it safe. Yeah.

[3:00:56] Thank you. All right. So, um, thank you

[3:00:59] for being here. Um, we hear you and

[3:01:01] we're working aggressively with all the

[3:01:03] stakeholders to move this issue. Um, and

[3:01:06] keep continue to focus on the safety of

[3:01:09] our students and our children. Thank you

[3:01:10] so much. The next item, what public

[3:01:13] comment, well, we already did public

[3:01:15] comments and you guys are here. Nothing

[3:01:16] on Zoom, correct?

[3:01:19] >> That was correct.

[3:01:20] >> Okay. Um,

[3:01:23] oh, I'm sorry. It looks like someone

[3:01:26] just um

[3:01:27] >> It looks like Yeah, it looks like Mike

[3:01:29] Swire just raised his hand.

[3:01:31] >> Yes. And I don't mind. Yeah, let's let's

[3:01:33] take that. We may have just missed it

[3:01:34] because we were involved in our

[3:01:36] discussion. Hello, Mike.

[3:01:39] >> Yeah. Hi. Can you hear me?

[3:01:40] >> Yes.

[3:01:41] >> Awesome. Sorry, I I thought came in late

[3:01:43] and I thought I missed it, but um yeah,

[3:01:44] thanks for taking my my message. Um, I

[3:01:47] didn't hear everything, but um, I do

[3:01:49] want to applaud the council for being

[3:01:51] proactive and trying to address

[3:01:53] proactively um, street safety and

[3:01:56] prevent um, crashes from happening. Um,

[3:01:59] I've attended all the city council

[3:02:01] meetings and all or sorry the um, the

[3:02:03] legislator meetings and also we've

[3:02:05] discussed this at the CCAG BPAC. Um, and

[3:02:08] I just wanted to um reiterate that the

[3:02:12] largest problem we face on our streets

[3:02:15] is um is drivers hitting people on foot

[3:02:18] and people on bike and that includes

[3:02:20] people on ebike. And if you read the

[3:02:22] Manetta Institute report, they show that

[3:02:24] the majority of crashes, although the

[3:02:26] data, as you said, is not perfect, uh,

[3:02:28] involve drivers hitting kids on ebikes.

[3:02:30] And there's a lot of reasons that

[3:02:32] happens, including kids not knowing how

[3:02:34] to control the machines. But um I do

[3:02:37] find it a little frustrating. I'm not

[3:02:39] talking about you because it's happening

[3:02:40] everywhere that um we're spending so

[3:02:42] much time and energy on um ebikes and so little on the larger problem um

[3:02:50] of pedestrians and regular bicycle

[3:02:52] riders uh dying on our streets. Um I've

[3:02:55] talked to two different families in the

[3:02:57] last two weeks um that have uh lost

[3:03:00] loved ones. Uh uh one was a a 4-year-old

[3:03:03] boy who died on a sidewalk in

[3:03:05] Berlingame. The other was a 63-year-old

[3:03:08] grandmother of 14 grandchildren who was

[3:03:11] crossing El Camino and San Mateo and was

[3:03:14] um uh run down while in the crosswalk.

[3:03:17] Um these are uh fatalities. If you look

[3:03:20] at nationwide, we have about 40,000

[3:03:22] people dying uh getting hit by cars or

[3:03:26] in cars. Um, ebikes are rising, but it's

[3:03:29] still only a couple hundred. That

[3:03:30] doesn't mean we don't focus on it, but I

[3:03:33] do think that we have to think and be

[3:03:35] data uh driven and focus on where the

[3:03:38] problem is because everything that we do

[3:03:40] to make the street safer makes it safe

[3:03:42] for all users, pedestrians, cyclists,

[3:03:44] and ecyclists. And again, a lot of the

[3:03:46] problems with ebikes is we don't have

[3:03:49] safe places for kids to get around. One

[3:03:52] of the things that these things one of

[3:03:53] the reasons these things are so popular

[3:03:55] is because it provides kids with a sense

[3:03:57] of independence and they don't have to

[3:03:59] rely on mom and dad to to get

[3:04:01] everywhere. Um we need develops to

[3:04:03] develop safe spaces for them to do so

[3:04:06] hopefully on machines that don't go more

[3:04:08] than 20 m an hour. Um but the problem

[3:04:11] the larger problem that we face is uh

[3:04:14] the streets are not safe and I applaud

[3:04:15] the bike and pedmaster plan that we've

[3:04:18] recently developed but my understanding

[3:04:20] is there's no funding for for those

[3:04:22] projects. I haven't heard of more

[3:04:23] projects coming out of that. So in

[3:04:26] conclusion I just uh in addition to this

[3:04:28] energy that we have here I'd really

[3:04:29] encourage you to focus on street safety

[3:04:32] because it benefits all road users. Um

[3:04:36] and uh I think that's where we're going

[3:04:37] to get the most bang for the buck.

[3:04:38] Thanks so much.

[3:04:40] >> Thank you, Mr. Squire. Mr. Swire, those

[3:04:42] are um great thoughts and and feedback.

[3:04:44] Appreciate that.

[3:04:46] >> Um ML, if I could just summarize the

[3:04:48] council direction. Um just make sure

[3:04:50] that I heard it appropriately. Um that

[3:04:53] we the city manager's office will work

[3:04:55] with the city attorney's office to

[3:04:57] return with a menu of options for um

[3:05:00] what ordinances or policies um the town

[3:05:03] could take advantage of. Um, as part of

[3:05:05] that report, we could con could include

[3:05:07] some additional data collection or at

[3:05:10] least information on what data is

[3:05:12] collected um, now and moving forward and

[3:05:15] then also some reports on additional

[3:05:18] education and enforcement activities

[3:05:21] that were summarized tonight. Does that

[3:05:23] capture everything?

[3:05:24] >> Um, as well as any feedback from the

[3:05:26] state legislature between now and then.

[3:05:28] Yes, I'm sure that that will certainly

[3:05:31] guide us in terms of what we can enact

[3:05:33] locally at this point.

[3:05:35] >> Sure. Great. Thank you.

[3:05:36] >> Okay. Thank you.

[3:05:40] >> I just want to point out um and I do

[3:05:42] applaud Supervisor Spear for doing the

[3:05:44] town hall, but anything that the county

[3:05:47] does only applies to unincorporated

[3:05:49] regions of the county. It's up to every

[3:05:51] city in the county to adopt their own

[3:05:54] regulations.

[3:05:55] >> Right. Unfortunately, that's sin. That's

[3:06:00] Yeah. Um, so next item is um city

[3:06:04] council items um which would would allow

[3:06:06] us to comment on any activities we may

[3:06:09] have been involved in as uh city council

[3:06:11] members in the county or at large.

[3:06:14] Starting with council member Adams.

[3:06:18] >> Thank you very much.

[3:06:20] Um, you'll notice pictures speak loudly

[3:06:24] in my presentations. That's just my my

[3:06:26] pitch for that. Uh, this is a winter

[3:06:29] scene from my backyard January. What did

[3:06:31] I do? Uh, for our council. Next slide.

[3:06:35] Uh, met with the Hillsboro

[3:06:37] Beautification Foundation. They are

[3:06:39] planning their 2026

[3:06:42] uh calendar now, working on Celebrate

[3:06:45] May. But I want to draw special

[3:06:47] attention to the daffodils that are

[3:06:49] poking up right now uh all over

[3:06:51] Hillsboro thanks to Hillsboro

[3:06:53] Beautification Foundation. Next slide.

[3:06:58] Uh I am on the board for Rethink Waste.

[3:07:02] And just as if you don't know how that

[3:07:06] works, there are two parts, two

[3:07:07] components to what Rethink Waste does.

[3:07:10] It collects the garbage and then it

[3:07:13] processes the waste. And those are done

[3:07:15] by two different companies under

[3:07:17] contract with rethink waste or in the

[3:07:21] case of collection there it is done by

[3:07:24] recology but with separate contracts

[3:07:27] with 11 different cities or entities. So

[3:07:31] rethink waste manages this relationship

[3:07:34] but there are a variety of contracts.

[3:07:37] Recology is currently in labor

[3:07:39] negotiations with its collectors uh now

[3:07:43] after the end of the previous seven-year

[3:07:46] contract. So, we'll see how that works.

[3:07:49] That is not something that Rethink Waste

[3:07:51] is involved in those negotiations. That

[3:07:55] is strictly with Recology and its

[3:07:58] contracts. Uh I'm was pleased to see uh

[3:08:03] new members of our board. Uh Jackie

[3:08:05] Spear is part of the board now and Lisa

[3:08:08] uh Diaz Nash is also a new member. Uh

[3:08:13] and the new appointments have come out

[3:08:15] and I've been appointed to the finance

[3:08:17] committee in addition to the outreach

[3:08:18] and education. Next,

[3:08:23] uh, council duties and meetings, uh,

[3:08:28] working on the subcommittee of Tobin

[3:08:31] Clark, committee ordinances,

[3:08:33] telecommunications, and undergrounding

[3:08:35] utilities. I just have to compliment our

[3:08:38] assistant city manager, Mandy Brown, has

[3:08:40] done just a wonderful job on working on

[3:08:43] that. But as commissioner of public

[3:08:46] works, I want to do a special shout out

[3:08:48] to public works uh for some of the night

[3:08:52] work that they get to do during this

[3:08:54] season and do so quietly and

[3:08:56] efficiently. Next slide.

[3:09:00] Uh leadership council San Mateo. Uh this

[3:09:03] was a day in Halfoon Bay to visit NOS's

[3:09:08] which is just so inspiring. Uh this is

[3:09:11] the uh Half Moon Bay Library which has a

[3:09:15] community space which is just wonderful.

[3:09:18] Um but mostly we walked from there to

[3:09:21] the wonderful places that are helping

[3:09:24] our citizens in San Monteo County uh

[3:09:28] with all of their variety of needs at

[3:09:30] the moment. Next

[3:09:34] and again a winter sky in the morning. I

[3:09:38] just after a year uh want to thank the

[3:09:42] town of Hillsboro for this opportunity

[3:09:43] to serve. And also I want to thank my

[3:09:47] fellow fella, my girly uh council

[3:09:53] members

[3:09:54] uh for being such great colleagues, but

[3:09:57] I wanted to take a moment to acknowledge

[3:10:00] that anniversary for me. Thank you.

[3:10:03] >> Thank you, Council Member Adams. I think

[3:10:06] I could speak for all of us. So, we feel

[3:10:08] the same. Um, council member Trunk.

[3:10:13] No, no, no slide deck. Um, I attended

[3:10:16] the emergency service council on behalf

[3:10:19] of town of Hillsboro and I also attended

[3:10:22] uh Sam Trans.

[3:10:24] Um, so both um actually both agency uh

[3:10:31] focus on human trafficking. um this this

[3:10:35] year actually I think that it's because

[3:10:39] of the Super Bowl this past week, FIFA

[3:10:44] uh in this whole year um and just the

[3:10:48] various activities I think that just

[3:10:50] brought to the forefront in terms of the

[3:10:52] human trafficking um awareness

[3:10:55] announcement

[3:10:57] um you know training their staff to

[3:10:59] notice the uh uh the the situations and

[3:11:04] to be able to report it and and render

[3:11:07] helps. Um so it was critical. Um and I

[3:11:11] also want to applaud uh the emergency

[3:11:13] service council for um uh activating the

[3:11:18] uh emergency um uh IO IC. I think that

[3:11:24] that's what they're doing um for the

[3:11:26] week of uh the Super Bowl um focusing on

[3:11:30] the safety of Cal Train and um our

[3:11:33] former chief uh Nelson Cordaway was uh

[3:11:36] very much involved in that and so it was

[3:11:39] um really nice to know that you know it

[3:11:43] we're in good hands um that they were

[3:11:45] really paying attention uh to that. Um

[3:11:48] the other thing that I want to mention

[3:11:50] is that um Sam trans I mentioned last month that uh Sam Tran is

[3:11:55] celebrating its 50th anniversary um or

[3:11:58] birthday for that matters. It started

[3:12:00] July of 1976.

[3:12:03] So there are going to be events that is

[3:12:05] coming into place namely uh on September

[3:12:08] 1st there will be riding the buses for

[3:12:10] 25 cents kicking back to the 76. Yes.

[3:12:14] And then the other thing is um on the

[3:12:17] 26th of September there will be a uh

[3:12:21] more of a a festive events um at their

[3:12:25] new headquarters in Milbury. Um so that

[3:12:27] would be really exciting. Um the other

[3:12:30] thing that I want to mention is that for

[3:12:31] people who are interested in riding um

[3:12:36] buses, Cal trains, there are Clipper

[3:12:39] cards. you now will be able to use it

[3:12:41] and you can have a app to use that and I

[3:12:44] think that is really helpful. Um then

[3:12:47] you can add money to it. It's

[3:12:49] counterless and then you can you know

[3:12:51] hop on the train, get onto the bar, hop

[3:12:54] onto the bus and it's seamless. So

[3:12:58] hopefully more more and more people will

[3:13:00] get out of the ebike and use um the

[3:13:03] public transit um to go to places. So

[3:13:06] that's the end of my support. Oh, and

[3:13:10] um H&N's um speaker series

[3:13:14] um Wednesday, this Wednesday, Nove uh

[3:13:17] not November, I'm sorry, uh February

[3:13:21] 11th. I know. Uh please do come. We have

[3:13:25] up to 65 RSVP right now and we have more

[3:13:30] rooms uh for people to come and please

[3:13:34] come and and hear the speakers. As our

[3:13:36] city manager says, she speaks from her

[3:13:39] own experience as to what works and what

[3:13:42] not. And I think it's it's going to be a

[3:13:44] really heartfelt discussion. So, please

[3:13:47] make time to come 6:30 to 8.

[3:13:52] >> Thank you, Council Member Chuang. I'll

[3:13:53] go slightly out of order. Um,

[3:13:56] Vice Mayor Rexdale,

[3:14:03] » I have a a few visuals. Um, okay. Next

[3:14:06] slide.

[3:14:08] Uh, ebikes. You've heard enough from me

[3:14:10] on ebikes, so I won't go into it. Um, I

[3:14:13] attended two, uh, webinars, uh,

[3:14:16] sustainable San Monteo County put on.

[3:14:18] They focus on a different issue every

[3:14:20] year, and this year is plant-based food

[3:14:23] policies. Um, and as you know, I'm a

[3:14:26] vegetarian. I'm not going to impose that

[3:14:28] on everyone. Don't worry. But it is

[3:14:30] interesting to learn to learn about

[3:14:33] there are options especially for big

[3:14:34] towns. West Hollywood where my daughter

[3:14:37] lives um they have for any town event it

[3:14:42] plant-based is the first option for

[3:14:45] food. So it's a subtle way to go but

[3:14:47] again I'm not going to impose it on

[3:14:49] people. um uh the ad hoc ordinance

[3:14:53] committee. We had a great meeting um

[3:14:56] working with um assistant city manager

[3:15:00] or assistant city attorney Mark Hudach

[3:15:03] and um council member Adams and we um

[3:15:06] will be coming back before the council

[3:15:08] before long. Next slide.

[3:15:14] uh Peninsula Clean Energy, you've

[3:15:16] probably you guys all read the E-News,

[3:15:18] but um PG Gene rates went down. It's a

[3:15:22] little complicated, but PG& rates went

[3:15:24] down and so Peninsula Clean Energy, we

[3:15:27] voted to also to change our rates um so

[3:15:31] we would continue the 10% discount um

[3:15:35] for now to um it's not only clean, but

[3:15:38] it's also a savings from PG&'s um

[3:15:41] electricity. Uh they officially signed

[3:15:44] the lease for their new location. I've

[3:15:46] mentioned the new location a couple of

[3:15:48] times, but it's in downtown San Monteo.

[3:15:50] They're hoping to move in in October. Um

[3:15:53] I joined the legislative committee,

[3:15:55] which I'm so excited about. Um there was

[3:15:58] a quorum issue because I'm on the

[3:16:00] executive committee and and one of the

[3:16:02] people on the executive committee uh

[3:16:04] decided he could he could go off and I

[3:16:06] got to join. So I'm very excited. Um and

[3:16:09] for um Bosa um I'm now the chair of the

[3:16:13] board policy committee. So very very

[3:16:16] exciting. Uh next slide. Um oh um the I

[3:16:21] did the homelessness count which is

[3:16:23] super easy. I I know that you've done it

[3:16:25] before. You guys have probably all done

[3:16:26] it before. Um getting up reporting there

[3:16:29] at 5 in the morning is hard because you

[3:16:31] really don't sleep because you're

[3:16:32] worried you won't wake up. Um but it was

[3:16:35] super easy. The hardest thing was how

[3:16:37] old I felt because this pregnant young

[3:16:39] woman was my daughter's best friend

[3:16:42] since kindergarten and uh she's one of

[3:16:44] the people in charge of it. So, um Loi

[3:16:46] Saba, she's fantastic. Um anyway, um I

[3:16:49] do recommend it. It was it was super

[3:16:52] easy and they train you really well. Uh

[3:16:54] next slide.

[3:16:58] Um oh, again, ebikes. Sorry.

[3:17:02] Um, but this was just one of the slides

[3:17:04] from our amazing uh, youth commission

[3:17:07] chair Anya Dal and she just brought such

[3:17:10] a unique perspective and talking about

[3:17:13] picture being worth a thousand words.

[3:17:14] This video contest I think is really

[3:17:16] going to be fantastic and she's offering

[3:17:18] a $500 prize. So that's um you know

[3:17:22] people will enter and um you just just

[3:17:25] think about scared straight and all the

[3:17:26] things that that um we learned when we

[3:17:29] um learned how to drive a car. I think

[3:17:31] this is going to be helpful. And I think

[3:17:33] that might be it.

[3:17:36] >> Okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor Rexdale. And

[3:17:38] I will um go next and I will have uh

[3:17:41] Council Member Cruic go after me. Um I

[3:17:44] don't really have much to uh report.

[3:17:46] Thanks to all of you. Um, and I did meet

[3:17:50] with several residents on issues

[3:17:52] pertaining to town that the staff is

[3:17:55] working very hard to help us address,

[3:17:56] but otherwise um the town continues to

[3:17:59] work very hard to uh keep things fur,

[3:18:02] keep the town working in perfect

[3:18:04] condition as best as as possible. So,

[3:18:06] I'm actually going to um uh before we

[3:18:09] adjourn final adjournment, council

[3:18:11] member Crowley has asked me that we

[3:18:12] adjourn the meeting in honor of the

[3:18:14] memory of someone special to her that

[3:18:16] has passed recently. So, I I will ask

[3:18:19] her to provide comments at this time.

[3:18:22] Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I

[3:18:24] just have two activities to report on.

[3:18:26] First, we had ADRB on January 26th um

[3:18:30] where we went over uh design review

[3:18:34] guidelines. um they are design we're

[3:18:37] looking at those and they will come

[3:18:39] before council I think um as part of a

[3:18:41] transparent process for fairness and

[3:18:43] consistency in those and then s uh San

[3:18:47] Francisco airport noise roundt the uh

[3:18:50] technical working group is working on

[3:18:52] the fly quiet program and um and the

[3:18:56] airport director reported that 2025

[3:18:59] uh number of passengers is almost back

[3:19:01] to 2019 levels um and Whimo has a pilot

[3:19:05] programmed to SFO they are dropping off

[3:19:07] and picking up in the rental car area.

[3:19:10] Um but now for my um personal note and I

[3:19:13] do want to thank the mayor for allowing

[3:19:14] me to pay tribute to a close friend of

[3:19:17] mine of over 50 years. We met when uh I

[3:19:22] was 12 years old. She was the new girl

[3:19:23] in the school. We became fast friends.

[3:19:25] She spent her life in my hometown of

[3:19:27] Doylesstown, Pennsylvania and was

[3:19:29] essentially a member of my family. My

[3:19:31] father considered her another daughter

[3:19:33] and she was like a sister to me. Um but

[3:19:36] more importantly she was a dedicated,

[3:19:39] creative and beloved elementary school

[3:19:41] teacher for almost 40 years making a

[3:19:44] positive impact on over a thousand

[3:19:46] students. Um she passed away in January

[3:19:50] at the age of 69 from cancer and left

[3:19:53] behind her wonderful husband and there's

[3:19:55] those three spectacular daughters. Um,

[3:19:59] so I uh respectfully request that we

[3:20:02] adjourn tonight in honor of my dear

[3:20:03] friend Claire Hennean.

[3:20:09] Oh, deepest sympathy.

[3:20:12] With that said, this meeting is now

[3:20:13] adjourned.

City Council Meeting - February 9, 2026

Transcript