[0:07] Hello everyone. Good afternoon. The

[0:08] Hillsboro City Council U meeting is

[0:10] called to order. Um, city clerk, may we

[0:13] please have the roll call.

[0:15] >> Thank you. Mayor Cole Adams

[0:17] present. Schwang Krick present. Bragdale

[0:21] present. Cole

[0:22] >> present.

[0:23] >> Thank you.

[0:25] >> So, um, we're here this afternoon. is

[0:27] 300 p.m.

[0:28] >> Yeah. 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon. Um the

[0:31] item on our agenda we're doing in the

[0:32] study session on proposed fiscal year

[0:34] 2026 2027 budget. um schedule of fees

[0:39] and charges and proposed revisions to

[0:41] general fund reserve policy. And that

[0:44] will be presented by finance director

[0:46] Jan Cook and assistant finance director

[0:48] Rich um Santiago and Drew Corbett and

[0:52] principal um DKG consultants.

[0:57] >> Good afternoon.

[1:00] First, we'll be going through the 2627

[1:03] budget.

[1:05] Perhaps

[1:12] we will.

[1:15] Oh, there we go. Okay.

[1:18] So, I'll be doing an executive summary

[1:20] and then we'll have Rich give you some

[1:22] more of the budget details.

[1:26] So, first the process starts with a city

[1:29] council goal session where city council

[1:31] prioritizes the goals for the coming

[1:34] year. Then in April we do the financial

[1:38] advisory study session and they did

[1:41] recommend the proposed budget and fees

[1:43] for adoption consideration of adoption.

[1:47] Today we'll be reviewing the budget

[1:49] study session for the budget and then in

[1:52] June the city council will hold a public

[1:54] hearing and and consider adoption of the

[1:56] budget.

[2:00] starting the process is the 26 27 city

[2:04] council priorities

[2:06] and there's really five kind of

[2:07] categories that we've put those into.

[2:10] First is improving community safety,

[2:12] emergency preparedness and resilience

[2:15] efforts. And the first is to improve

[2:18] access on the telecommunications service

[2:20] throughout town to prepare wild fire

[2:25] preparedness building code amendments

[2:26] for the councelor consideration.

[2:29] completing the design of the Highline

[2:31] water project and securing the grant

[2:33] funding. The good news on that is the

[2:35] brick uh grant is still on is back on

[2:38] the table. So, we'll be pursuing that.

[2:41] The other is advancing the technology

[2:44] for to improve public safety and

[2:46] transparency

[2:47] and ebike education and enforcement.

[2:52] Next is implementing the housing element

[2:55] and maintaining compliance with state

[2:57] requirements. developing the master plan

[3:00] for the for the Tobin Clark multifamily

[3:03] housing and the town hall complex and a

[3:07] comprehensive general plan update for

[3:09] the safety element and long-term town

[3:12] planning and implementing the housing

[3:15] element programs and fees.

[3:18] The third category is enhanced quality

[3:20] of life and this would be bolstering the

[3:24] code enforcement program to address key

[3:26] issues in the town. Executing the 40

[3:29] Baywood agreement and work toward

[3:32] operations

[3:34] forming formalizing the town's role in

[3:37] the annual Memorial Day parade.

[3:40] Update city the climate action plan

[3:44] pesticide use education efforts and

[3:48] updating the commercial and special

[3:50] event regulations.

[3:53] The next category is ensuring long-term

[3:55] financial security and that would

[3:57] include updating the water and sewer

[3:59] rates, implementing the long range

[4:02] financial funding analysis and

[4:05] implementing systems and processes and

[4:07] training. And the last query uh category

[4:11] is improving transparency, efficiency

[4:13] and customer service. And that is

[4:16] implement programs and software to

[4:18] improve the internal efficiencies.

[4:20] review the city council handbook,

[4:22] evaluate feasibility of paid family

[4:24] leave pilot program, and evaluate the

[4:27] feasibility of the internship program.

[4:32] So those are the priorities for the

[4:34] coming year and any resources that are

[4:37] necessary for executing those have been

[4:40] included in the budget.

[4:44] Giving some financial position and

[4:46] context for this coming year's budget.

[4:48] Some of the opportunities we're seeing

[4:50] is that the assessed valuation for real

[4:52] estate, which uh drives the property

[4:54] taxes, is growing at 5% on the assessed

[4:57] value role, which is a very uh good

[5:00] stable number uh for revenue on the

[5:03] general plan. Also, there was a building

[5:05] and planning cost of service study that

[5:08] the city council has studied and will be

[5:10] considering for adoption, I believe,

[5:12] tonight. Um and we have included revenue

[5:16] in the budget for for that opportunity.

[5:20] And then we just talked about the FEMA

[5:21] brick grant. So um the focus this year

[5:24] will be on securing that grant and

[5:27] ensuring that um the design of the

[5:30] project is completed this year. Some of

[5:33] the risks that we're seeing this year

[5:35] are in the inloo vehicle license fees

[5:38] and we'll continue to watch that. And

[5:40] then also there could be some

[5:42] uncertainty in the marketing economy. Um

[5:45] we're not seeing that right now

[5:47] significantly impacting the budget but

[5:49] we have budgeted conservatively for

[5:51] that.

[5:54] Looking at the budget at a glance, total

[5:57] budget is 82.3 million. That's for all

[6:00] funds. Uh the primary ones being the

[6:03] general fund, the water and the sewer

[6:05] funds, and then the street funds uh for

[6:07] capital improvements of the streets. And

[6:09] that's an 8% decrease primarily because

[6:12] the prior year had uh some capital

[6:14] improvements um that are higher than the

[6:17] current year that we're coming into. The

[6:19] general fund reserve is 26.5 million.

[6:23] And the budget overall funds the

[6:25] operations of the town as well as the

[6:27] city council goals and there's 11.6 6

[6:31] million of capital spending, which is a

[6:33] fairly significant amount um mainly in

[6:36] water and sewer uh operations. There's

[6:40] no headcount increase.

[6:42] There's no additional preunding in the

[6:44] 115 pension trust. And that trust covers

[6:48] about one year of the annual required

[6:50] contribution for the town's Kalpers's

[6:52] contribution.

[6:55] And the water and sewer funds are based

[6:57] on their projections are based on the

[6:59] new cost of service studies and rates

[7:02] that have been studied by city council.

[7:05] The budget does comply with the

[7:07] financial policies and debt covenants um

[7:10] for our our debt reserves.

[7:17] This is a view of our general fund

[7:19] reserve projection. On the left is how

[7:22] it's formatted in the current policy. On

[7:24] the right is how it's formatted for the

[7:27] proposed policy that we'll be having a

[7:29] discussion on later uh this afternoon.

[7:32] And it's we're not going to spend a lot

[7:34] of time on that here on this slide, but

[7:36] I just wanted to show you how it would

[7:38] look in the budget context. on the left

[7:41] for the current policy which is how the

[7:43] budget book is currently prepared shows

[7:45] that there's a contingency reserve

[7:48] minimum of 30% of operations to 50% of

[7:51] operating costs. That gets us to a $19.7

[7:55] million reserve required by policy. In

[8:00] addition to that, we have a restricted

[8:02] reserve for the balance in the 115

[8:04] pension trust. Those can only be used

[8:07] for pension related costs and that's 6

[8:10] million. There's an assigned amount in

[8:13] here for 750,000

[8:16] which is proposed uh to help fund the

[8:20] transition of the general fund when the

[8:23] safer grant for central county fire uh

[8:26] is ended in a couple of years. We'll

[8:28] have kind of a runway to help us with

[8:30] that budget impact. And then the last is

[8:33] the unassigned amount for a total

[8:35] general fund balance of 26.5 million.

[8:38] On the proposed policy side, the biggest

[8:41] difference you'll see is really in the

[8:44] total proposed policy is about the same

[8:47] amount. However, it's in three different

[8:49] buckets. And we'll be going into more

[8:52] detail on that and having a more

[8:53] detailed discussion about that uh later

[8:55] in the afternoon.

[9:00] One of the goals for 2526 and 2627 is to

[9:04] implement the long range financial

[9:06] funding plan. And so I wanted to just

[9:08] quickly update you on that and also tie

[9:11] that back into what do we have

[9:14] anticipated in our budget for the coming

[9:16] year. So the goals of that funding plan

[9:19] were to address the operational budget

[9:21] gaps that we had projected, also to

[9:24] safeguard against revenue volatility

[9:26] such as the VLF that we're seeing.

[9:29] Addressing the public safety funding

[9:31] needs for fire service. We know that

[9:33] Central County Fire is is growing and

[9:36] safer grant will be ending and so there

[9:38] there's an additional cost with that.

[9:41] The funding of existing capital

[9:43] projects. An example of that would be

[9:45] the storm brain capital plan and then

[9:47] funding new capital projects as defined

[9:51] potentially being a town hall complex.

[9:54] Uh Tobin Clark development um are two

[9:57] examples of that.

[9:59] So when the city council studied this in

[10:02] November last year, there were four

[10:04] areas that we they instructed staff to uh start implementing and one of

[10:10] those being the building planning fee

[10:12] study for cost recovery and that study

[10:16] has completed. We have anticipated that

[10:18] revenue in the budget for this year

[10:21] coming year. We've also analyzed the

[10:24] central county fire department

[10:25] contribution for finance services that

[10:27] are provided to central county fire and

[10:30] have included additional service fees uh

[10:33] in our revenue for that piece as well in

[10:35] the 2627 budget.

[10:38] The third one is considered changing

[10:40] conditions for CCFT that warrants a

[10:42] change in the cost sharing formula

[10:44] between the three cities which are

[10:47] Berling game, Milbury and Hillsboro. And

[10:52] the Central County Fire Board is

[10:54] conducting a study session I believe

[10:56] it's this week um to review that

[10:59] operating model and cost sharing uh

[11:01] opportunities.

[11:03] And then the last is conducting polling

[11:05] of the community for revenue via a new

[11:08] tax and that is in process and this will

[11:11] be reported out uh I believe in the June

[11:14] meeting in more detail this whole update

[11:16] on the long range financial funding

[11:18] plan. But I just wanted to kind of tie

[11:20] that back into what's actually in the

[11:21] budget for this for next year.

[11:24] With that, we're going to hand it over

[11:26] to Rich for proposed budget details.

[11:29] >> Thank you. Good afternoon, Council.

[11:33] All right. So, um you can see there the

[11:35] total budget resources for fiscal year

[11:37] 2627 is 83.9 million. Majority of is

[11:41] from the water and sewer funds uh

[11:43] revenue as well as property taxes. Those

[11:45] make up the two primary sources. Um as

[11:48] Jan mentioned earlier, there was a cost

[11:50] of service study for building planning.

[11:52] So, the 5% of permits is an increase uh

[11:55] shown in the budget for fiscal year

[11:56] 2627.

[11:58] uh intergovernmental that's made up of

[12:01] VLF as well as well as um special

[12:04] revenue funds like measure A, measure W,

[12:06] gas tax and the police grants fund and

[12:09] then use of other assets uh primarily as

[12:12] investment income, rents and franchises

[12:15] as well.

[12:17] And then the budget expenditures uh

[12:20] total 82.3 million. Again, you can see

[12:23] the majority of it comes from water and

[12:24] sewer um as well as public safety.

[12:27] makes up 35% of that as

[12:29] well.

[12:31] And then this just slices it up by the

[12:33] different funds again reflecting the

[12:36] 82.3

[12:37] million that Jan was mentioning for

[12:39] general fund. The primary drivers of

[12:41] that increase are contractual and labor

[12:44] increases as well as the CCFD uh

[12:47] contributions that's going up 14% or

[12:50] about 1.5 million. um as well as funding

[12:53] city council goals. Um capital and asset

[12:57] replacements, those tend to fluctuate

[12:58] just with the timing of capital for

[13:00] those. Uh water, the increase primarily

[13:03] is the SFPC rate where we purchase our

[13:06] water. Uh that's increasing 7.4%.

[13:09] Uh sewer timing of capital as well. So

[13:12] that's why you see that one down. And

[13:13] then all others, uh special revenues,

[13:16] that's primarily for police grants. Um

[13:19] this year they're funding for the drone

[13:21] program uh as well as equipment for

[13:24] radios and cameras.

[13:26] And as Jan mentioned earlier, there is

[13:29] no new um no new uh personal headcount.

[13:34] And then onto the general fund, you can

[13:36] see 42.8 million for the revenue um with

[13:40] strong property tax growth about 1.3

[13:43] million based on the tax 5% increase. Um

[13:47] and then also the increase that we

[13:49] mentioned for the billing and planning

[13:51] uh revenue for the cost of service study

[13:54] that was implemented as part of the uh

[13:55] fiscal year 2627 budget. Um and then the

[13:59] increases for the expenditures again

[14:01] it's the labor uh and contractual

[14:04] increases as well as CCFD contributions

[14:07] uh ending in a net operating excess of

[14:09] 1.8 before transfers. Um we do have

[14:12] capital transfers of 2.2 2 million and

[14:15] that's funding storm drains, uh, various

[14:18] facilities, phases of the general plan,

[14:22] uh, as well as the town hall complex,

[14:25] uh, planning.

[14:28] And then here's the general fund

[14:30] revenue. Again, it shows kind of the

[14:31] different sections. Majority of it comes

[14:34] from property taxes, which is stable, as

[14:35] well as the public safety tax. Those two

[14:37] remain stable. And then the big change

[14:40] again is the permits u and billing and

[14:42] planning fees from the cost of service

[14:44] study.

[14:46] For expenditures

[14:48] um again it's personnel with the

[14:50] majority of the increase um or majority

[14:53] of the budget as well as CCFD. The 2.2

[14:56] capital transfers that is um where is

[14:59] it? It's it's less than the current

[15:01] fiscal year about 5.7 million. this

[15:04] current fiscal year, we had two big uh

[15:06] budget amendments for the Charton Trail

[15:09] Bridge and the Parkside Bridge um

[15:12] funding those from the general fund. So

[15:13] that's why there's much uh of a

[15:15] difference between what we're budgeting

[15:17] this year for the capital transfers

[15:21] and then links to um budget items to

[15:25] goals. Here's a few of them directly

[15:27] linked to the city council goals. A few

[15:30] examples uh for committee service,

[15:32] committee and customer service improved

[15:34] telecommunication

[15:36] uh a dedicated budget for the parade and

[15:38] looking into establishing a fundraising

[15:40] foundation. Uh Jen mentioned earlier for

[15:43] financial stability the uh long range

[15:46] funding study um for planning continuing

[15:49] the safety element and uh other regional

[15:52] partnerships like the chipping program.

[15:58] And then this is our five-year CIP

[16:00] overview. Uh you can see starting in

[16:03] fiscal year 2627 and for the next five

[16:06] years it's about 60.7

[16:08] million uh to be funding infrastructure

[16:11] facility improvements as well as asset

[16:13] replacements. Uh majority of it is water

[16:16] and sewer which are for the rateayer

[16:18] CIPs uh followed by storm drains and

[16:21] streets.

[16:24] And then for the current year uh Jan

[16:26] mentioned 11.6 6 million for water.

[16:28] Majority of that is water main

[16:30] replacements as well as other proposed

[16:32] projects. Uh for sewer, majority of that

[16:35] is priority basins. Um and then we're

[16:38] continuing to fund storm drain uh

[16:40] through the general fund. There is no uh

[16:43] street resurfacing this upcoming fiscal

[16:46] year. We go on a bianial uh spending

[16:48] program and so we did street resurfacing

[16:51] this fiscal year 25 26 and we'll do it

[16:53] again in 2728.

[16:56] Um all of them are based on master plans

[16:58] that help prioritize spending for each

[17:01] program uh each year. And then for

[17:04] facilities and equipments uh fire

[17:06] station improvements as well as other

[17:09] equipments uh are proposed. There's also

[17:11] funding of uh portions of that safety

[17:14] element um and the town hall complex

[17:17] remodel that I was speaking about. And

[17:18] then about 1.2

[17:21] is to replace vehicles uh IT equipment

[17:24] and hardware. And then the police

[17:27] equipment that I mentioned, the drone

[17:28] program, the cameras, and the radios.

[17:34] And then uh I think back to you, J.

[17:40] So in summary, it meet the budget funds

[17:43] all the operations and the city council

[17:46] goals and it meets all the policies and

[17:49] debt covenants that are needed. Um, and

[17:52] the FAC does recommend the budget for

[17:55] approval. And with that, we'd be happy

[17:58] to answer any questions that you have.

[17:59] And the recommendation is to provide

[18:02] feedback to staff on the budget in

[18:04] anticipation of the public hearing in

[18:07] June.

[18:10] » Um, thank you. Thank you for the

[18:12] presentation. Um, I just have one

[18:14] question before I, um, turn to the

[18:15] council. Did you say we will hear more

[18:18] about the reserve of the three buckets?

[18:20] Would that come after qu questions on

[18:23] this phase and then we'll

[18:24] >> Yes, it's it's the third segment. So,

[18:27] we're we're finishing the budget segment

[18:28] and then we're going to go to the fees

[18:30] and then we'll have a whole discussion

[18:32] on the general fund reserve.

[18:34] >> Okay. Just one clarification. Thank you.

[18:36] Um I will turn to the city council and

[18:39] ask um do any of my colleagues have any

[18:41] questions based on what's been presented

[18:43] so far?

[18:46] >> Okay. Yes, Council Member Kroll.

[18:48] >> Thank you so much again. a very readable

[18:51] and thorough budget book. Great job

[18:53] finance. Um it looks like uh this is

[18:56] under the city manager um bucket. Um

[18:59] that we have an IT strategic plan. So my

[19:02] question is with all the rumblings about

[19:06] AI being such a threat to cyber

[19:09] security, do we feel that um this IT

[19:13] strategic plan takes that into

[19:14] consideration? Have we have we budgeted

[19:16] enough for cyber security?

[19:21] That's a great question and always on

[19:23] our mind and the strategic plan will u

[19:28] be very comprehensive

[19:30] and um but we already have a very robust

[19:35] cyber program in place. So there's

[19:38] testing and all kinds of um

[19:44] firewalls and I'm not the IT expert, but

[19:47] there's all kinds of things that are put

[19:48] in place to protect uh anything from coming in. Um and then there's also

[19:54] testing that we have with employees on

[19:58] uh emails and education. Everyone takes

[20:01] an education every year. Um so it is uh

[20:04] something that we focus on every year.

[20:07] Um and then the strategic plan will just

[20:10] be a way to shore that up with more you

[20:12] know with anything else that we could we

[20:14] have an opportunity to keep on top of

[20:16] that.

[20:18] So if you would like more specifics I'd

[20:20] be happy to have William

[20:23] uh provide

[20:26] more color to that.

[20:34] Hello. Good afternoon, council members.

[20:36] Yes, everything Jan said is accurate and

[20:39] with the strategic plan part of

[20:42] reviewing our cyber security, our

[20:44] firewall, our network switches um is

[20:46] going to be part of the review process

[20:48] that is well underway. First now with

[20:51] the department reviews and that includes

[20:54] our um managed services provider Eaton

[20:57] and with them they went into detail

[21:00] about certain um certain checks and

[21:02] balances we have with our firewall with

[21:04] our network. you know, how we identify

[21:07] um bad agents trying to infiltrate our

[21:09] system. So, that will all be included in

[21:11] the report and eventually we will uh

[21:14] come back to the city council and do a

[21:16] presentation with the results of that

[21:18] strategic plan.

[21:21] >> Thank you. I just have

[21:23] >> Thank you. Thank you, William and Jen. I

[21:24] just have one additional question with

[21:27] 40 Baywood. Hopefully, we know the

[21:29] agreement's been signed and hopefully um

[21:32] that comes online, but we will need to

[21:35] do some ADA compliance so that we could

[21:39] um bring the public in hopefully as soon

[21:40] as possible. Do we need to budget

[21:43] anything for that or is there a bucket

[21:45] that those improvements could come out

[21:47] of?

[21:51] I think there would probably be a buck a

[21:54] bucket that those can come out of andor

[21:57] we would u bring forward a budget

[21:59] amendment once we know get our arms

[22:02] around what those those assessments are

[22:05] um and and also what the whole program

[22:08] programmatic side would be for Baywood.

[22:10] So, I think once it's signed, we we'd

[22:13] have to assess and look at the whole

[22:15] kind of whole picture and then bring

[22:17] that back for consideration.

[22:20] >> Thank you. I think it's signed, but

[22:22] we're waiting for the property tax issue

[22:24] to be settled, right? All right. Thank

[22:26] you very much. That's all I have.

[22:28] >> Sure. Thank you. Um, any additional

[22:30] questions from the council?

[22:33] >> Yes. Um,

[22:39] sure. Uh ju just to tack on on council

[22:42] member Kwick's uh comments regarding 40

[22:44] Baywoods. I think my understanding is

[22:46] that uh so far the contract has been

[22:50] signed but there is the pending um

[22:53] outstanding tax um that uh 40 Baywoods u

[22:59] foundation or whatn not have to pay up

[23:02] on that but have the staff an

[23:05] opportunity to be able to uh walk

[23:08] through the property and be able to uh

[23:10] address some of the issues that council

[23:12] member Kle have talked about. uh the ADA

[23:16] has that been in place or is it

[23:19] something that hasn't been done?

[23:23] >> The staff has been to the property, but

[23:25] it hasn't been a full assessment of the

[23:27] property and what it would take to get

[23:29] uh ADA compliant if that's in fact the

[23:31] direction we go. So, I would say we

[23:33] we've been there and seen it

[23:34] peripherilally, but it'll take a much

[23:36] deeper dive into it uh once this is uh

[23:39] passed over. And uh to Council Member

[23:42] Krollik's point, the the agreement has

[23:44] been signed. There's just the condition

[23:46] in the agreement that we're waiting to

[23:47] be fulfilled working uh with the state

[23:49] right now. After that point is once we

[23:52] get to that point, which will hopefully

[23:54] be soon, we'll have to have the staff

[23:55] come in there and take a look at it and

[23:57] then determine uh using our community

[23:59] partners and and the council as to

[24:02] exactly how we want to run 40 Baywood at

[24:04] that point. Whether we bring in a a

[24:06] third party charitable organization or

[24:08] we run it as a city or or what condition

[24:11] we want to do, that'll play a big role

[24:12] in how what the next steps will be and

[24:14] what those costs will be. So hopefully

[24:17] we'll have some budgetary items to

[24:20] discuss um before the council regarding

[24:23] the assessments of uh those projects and

[24:27] the services that we're going to provide

[24:28] for our community.

[24:30] >> Yes, I would think uh the way I envision

[24:32] that would be that we would there'd be a

[24:34] variety of ways to manage the property

[24:36] that would be presented to the council.

[24:38] Each one of those would come attached

[24:39] with a certain cost and a benefit if you

[24:42] will and then the council would then

[24:44] make a decision as to how they think

[24:46] would be the best way to manage the

[24:47] property for the benefit of the public.

[24:49] So when we come back with that that may

[24:51] include a budget amend amendment as well

[24:53] in order to cover any of those costs if

[24:56] it gets to that point.

[24:57] >> Thank you. And through the mayor if I

[24:59] may just follow up. Um Rich, you talk

[25:02] about um at one of the columns there was

[25:05] a library contribution that is basically

[25:09] I think zero. What what does that mean?

[25:11] Is that the account that the funding

[25:14] remains the same?

[25:16] >> Which one? Uh sorry.

[25:21] Right. Right there.

[25:22] >> Yes. Yeah. Sorry. Excuse me. Yeah. Um

[25:24] exactly. There's there's just no

[25:25] projects for that one in particular.

[25:27] >> I see. So the so the fee the membership

[25:30] fees that we pay into the both libraries

[25:32] remain the same as how it reflected

[25:35] >> right and and this uh is just for

[25:38] capital programs. So yeah, there there's

[25:40] nothing related to the libraries for

[25:41] that for Yeah.

[25:45] >> So So just for clarification, this is

[25:47] purely for capital spending, not for the

[25:49] annual donation that we give to the

[25:51] library, correct? Yes, I I believe

[25:53] that's what you're saying. All right.

[25:54] Thank you. Um any question? Any

[25:56] additional questions? We have uh Council

[25:58] Member Adams. Yes.

[26:00] >> Thank you. Uh yes, I appreciate the

[26:03] thoroughess of your beautiful budget

[26:06] books. Uh the question I have is about

[26:10] the town hall complex. There is it's

[26:14] hard to figure out exactly what uh that

[26:18] amount is. And I just want to make sure

[26:21] we're talking still about planning.

[26:24] Uh and if you could find out where that

[26:28] number is.

[26:30] >> Yes, it's it's still all planning. Um

[26:33] sorry, I'm just trying to pull it up for

[26:35] you right here. Um yeah, this is just

[26:37] the second portion of it that was

[26:39] budgeted of it. There was an initial

[26:41] portion in 2526 that was budgeted for

[26:44] about 400,000 that actually hasn't been

[26:46] awarded yet as well. So this would be an

[26:49] additional to it um if they get to that

[26:51] phase during the fiscal year, but um it

[26:53] was part of the plan from building and

[26:55] planning to have that as this the second

[26:59] phase of the the remodel uh planning. So

[27:02] first we'll use the money that we've

[27:04] already appropriated and this is a

[27:05] contingency in case we want to go

[27:07] forward correct

[27:08] >> in some direction. Okay.

[27:10] >> Yeah. So this fiscal year we transferred

[27:12] from the general fund 400,000 for that

[27:14] project and then we're budgeted to do

[27:16] the second part which is the 420,000 if

[27:19] we get to that uh in the fiscal year.

[27:24] » Thank you.

[27:26] Um before I um turn it to um Vice Mayor

[27:30] Ragdale, I I'm still not clear on the

[27:33] numbers for um the town hall, did you

[27:36] say how much have we spent and how much

[27:38] is still left in the budget is basically

[27:42] >> so for the project for the uh town hall

[27:44] complex remodel in 2526 there was

[27:47] budgeted 400,000 which has not been

[27:50] spent yet. Um and then in fiscal year

[27:53] 2627 there's another 420,000.

[27:56] Um you might be confused with what

[27:58] they've spent so far as part of the uh

[28:01] plan uh general plan which they were

[28:04] doing consulting work with the the whole

[28:07] campus and I'm not sure if Liz is on she

[28:10] might be able to answer that better.

[28:12] Okay. Yes. I think I was conflating the

[28:15] two. So

[28:17] currently you have 400,000 that was

[28:19] approved in last year's budget and

[28:21] currently another 400,000.

[28:24] >> Yes.

[28:24] >> Is that an automatic 400,000 is approved

[28:28] every year for this project?

[28:30] >> I'm just

[28:33] >> No, it was it was added as part of the project uh as a request from um from

[28:38] building and planning.

[28:39] >> Oh, from building Yeah.

[28:43] >> Okay. Um and and that's specifically for

[28:45] town complex for the town complex

[28:47] redesign.

[28:49] >> That's right. Yes.

[28:50] >> I was not aware of that. So it's Thanks

[28:52] for clarifying that. Okay. Um go ahead.

[28:55] Um Vice Mayor Rexdale,

[29:00] » thank you so much. Um another Mother's

[29:03] Day spent with your your budget book

[29:05] that I I greatly appreciate. I I got I

[29:08] had fun also. Um, not that this isn't

[29:11] fun, but uh greatly greatly appreciate

[29:13] um the details, the different ways of

[29:16] presenting the information with words,

[29:18] charts, um the graphs. It's it's um it

[29:21] is a thing of beauty. And speaking of

[29:23] which, I wanted to make sure to

[29:26] recognize on page

[29:30] back at page 13, of course, the budget

[29:32] award, which you guys get every year for

[29:35] the um fiscal year that began July 1st,

[29:39] 2025. So, just wanted to make sure we

[29:42] mention that in um public session. You

[29:45] guys always win that award. Um I had a I

[29:49] had a couple of questions. Um the first

[29:52] is with regard to the um my favorite

[29:54] topic of the um inloo VLF. Um on page 18

[30:01] uh you mentioned that page 18 of the

[30:04] packet that um the budget is prepared on

[30:06] the assumption that the state will fund

[30:08] these monies.

[30:10] Um which is

[30:14] I mean we just don't know. So, what do

[30:16] we do? We have kind of contingency plans

[30:18] in place or or we will once we once we

[30:23] find out if if we're not getting it.

[30:27] >> Yes. So, uh the budget includes two

[30:30] pieces. One is the BLF and one is the um

[30:35] the amount that is um

[30:44] » um

[30:45] >> no it's not okay.

[30:46] >> Oh 18 of the

[30:49] >> second

[30:50] >> okay

[30:52] under what's it

[30:56] » yeah it's you have 18 of the the very

[30:59] beginning of the binder,

[31:01] >> right? Okay.

[31:02] >> Yeah, this I'm Yeah, an introduction.

[31:05] >> Okay. Yeah. So, the the VLF has two

[31:08] components. One is the part that will be paid because it's not a

[31:12] shortfall. Then there's the shortfall

[31:14] piece, which is the question that we

[31:15] have every year. Last year, they paid

[31:17] twothirds of what was due on the prior

[31:20] year's um shortfall. It's a timing

[31:24] difference, right? So the we won't know

[31:27] that answer until probably the state

[31:31] adopts their budget in June last year. I

[31:33] think it came as a trailer bill maybe

[31:37] even. So it comes very last last minute.

[31:39] So uh what we recommend is adopting the

[31:41] budget uh as it's presented here. uh and

[31:46] then if it does not come through, we

[31:50] will need to come back with an action

[31:52] plan for adjusting the budget should it

[31:56] be necessary. And I think we would

[31:58] probably be doing that uh in the midyear

[32:01] budget review

[32:03] because we'll be watching you know

[32:05] what's what's happening with all the

[32:07] other expenditures and have a better

[32:09] sense of how the year is going to

[32:10] complete. And so by mid year we we will

[32:13] be able to pro provide some decision-

[32:16] making for you um should it be necessary

[32:19] in the budget process.

[32:21] >> So so there is we will get some we think

[32:25] we'll get some BLF just not all of it.

[32:28] >> We will get at least a million

[32:30] >> okay

[32:31] >> of the 1.7 because that's not the

[32:33] shortfall piece of it. So the shortfall

[32:37] piece is the is the part that is always

[32:40] under discussion.

[32:42] >> Okay.

[32:42] >> And just to add a brief comment about

[32:45] how it's done through the budget. Um

[32:47] last year and in previous years cities

[32:49] in San Monteo County had been estimating

[32:52] different assumptions. No, not getting

[32:55] the VLF, getting a partial of the VLF or

[32:57] getting the full VLF. And it was kind of

[32:59] all over the place. Um, I think there

[33:01] was concern that the story was going to

[33:03] be told, okay, if you can if you can

[33:05] only if you can budget without having

[33:07] the VLF in your budget, then why do you

[33:09] need it? Um, if you can budget it with

[33:11] that 2/3, why should we fulfill the

[33:13] entire amount? And so, strategically, as

[33:16] um a coalition of the Sano County

[33:18] cities, uh, we kind of have a unified

[33:21] approach to the budget this year of

[33:22] including the full amount um because

[33:24] that's what we're fighting for.

[33:27] >> Okay. All right. So, we're we're

[33:29] budgeting the full amount because that's what we need.

[33:34] Okay. Yeah, that's that's very helpful.

[33:36] I know it's Yeah.

[33:40] Um let's see the next um Oh, I had one

[33:45] uh suggestion. So, I think I'm still in

[33:47] intro. So, page 24 in the intro, I

[33:50] guess. Did the numbers restart? Is that

[33:52] what you were saying?

[33:53] >> They do.

[33:55] >> Okay. So in the introduction section

[33:57] page um 24

[34:01] uh just a suggestion because you were

[34:03] saying suggestion for when you come back

[34:05] in June um in describing the general

[34:10] fund reserve um in that whole paragraph

[34:14] it talks about the long-term pension

[34:16] liabilities and the post-employment

[34:18] benefits um completing the financial

[34:21] picture. Um,

[34:23] but if you if you're not really paying

[34:26] attention, it looks like they're part of

[34:29] the reserve.

[34:31] Um, but really what you're saying, I

[34:33] think, by completing the financial

[34:35] picture is those are other things we

[34:38] need to be keeping track of. Those are

[34:42] other expenses that are that are out

[34:43] there. So don't look at this reserve and

[34:47] think, "Oh, you're sitting on all this

[34:48] money because the true financial picture

[34:51] is these other things." Um, so I just um

[34:56] might add another sentence there to make

[34:58] that to make that clear because when I

[35:00] first looked at it, I'm like, "Wait,

[35:02] those are in the reserve." So um,

[35:05] >> thank you. We'll make that change. I

[35:07] understand that.

[35:08] >> Thank you. Um,

[35:10] >> let's see if I had

[35:14] Um, okay. I will just ask I think just

[35:16] one more question. Um,

[35:19] uh, again, introduction. I did read the

[35:21] whole thing, I promise. Um, I've got all

[35:23] sorts of pages marked. Um, page 27 in

[35:25] the introduction, we were talking about

[35:27] the storm drain, um, annual fee of $7.34

[35:31] per parcel.

[35:33] Is that something we're considering

[35:36] increasing

[35:38] or seek go through the voters?

[35:43] that would also uh require a a full

[35:46] process. Um and so um this is something

[35:52] that was has been charged at the same

[35:53] amount for many many years. Um we have

[35:57] looked at that in the past with with

[35:59] councils and I think um it could be

[36:02] something that we could consider in the

[36:04] future as well um just in the portfolio

[36:07] of long-term financial funding plan

[36:10] items.

[36:11] Okay.

[36:13] Thank you.

[36:15] >> Like a phase two.

[36:20] » Um I have a few questions. Um some of

[36:23] them clarifications on what's been

[36:26] discussed already. Um regarding the

[36:29] brick um uh grants, do we need to submit

[36:33] a new application or are they still

[36:35] operating on the old application and

[36:37] reassuring us that the funding will come

[36:39] through?

[36:41] This is for the old application. So,

[36:43] they're reviewing that and if we need to

[36:45] make any amendments or adjustments to

[36:47] the amount or scope. Uh they've

[36:50] indicated that it might reset us in the

[36:52] process. Um but we still are sort of

[36:54] entitled to that review um based on how

[36:57] much work we've already put in and our

[36:58] status of nearly award by by the end

[37:01] when the program was discontinued. So, it's actually um just a promise that

[37:08] we're in a process of being reviewed.

[37:09] It's not a promise that the funding is

[37:11] coming through. Is that

[37:13] >> We haven't ever formally been awarded

[37:15] the grant. We got to the very last step

[37:17] pre-awward. So, um it's anticipated that

[37:20] we would get the award, but they're

[37:22] doing that review once and they have

[37:24] because of uh the partial shutdowns,

[37:26] it's taking longer um than they thought

[37:29] by to get the process reopened.

[37:32] >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks for that

[37:34] clarification. And also um regarding BNP

[37:37] um spending, well, first I I would like

[37:40] to know since we did the fees studies

[37:42] and I think it was last month or two

[37:45] months ago we reviewed it and approved

[37:47] it. How much um in terms of revenues by

[37:51] what percent? 10% 5% how much more

[37:54] revenue did we generate from that?

[37:57] >> It it's uh will be approved this evening

[38:00] I believe. Um but in the 262 27 budget

[38:04] we've added 1.8 million to the to the

[38:08] fees which is very significant.

[38:10] >> Right. Exactly. And and I was a bit

[38:12] confused why the um spending I mean I

[38:15] just need clarification. What caused the

[38:17] spending to go from 625 to 775,000?

[38:22] » I'm sorry which

[38:23] >> that's BNP building and planning.

[38:26] >> Are you talking about their department

[38:27] budget? did spending the spending for

[38:30] the department. Correct. And I believe

[38:33] that's on page

[38:36] 25.

[38:38] Um,

[38:42] and I think this is where I may be

[38:45] confused on this. The slide that's in

[38:46] front of us says 775,

[38:50] correct? And on page 25, it says 625.

[38:56] I'm just

[38:57] >> The one on page 25 is the capital

[39:00] spending.

[39:01] >> Oh, is it capital spending?

[39:03] >> Yes. And I'm assuming the other one is

[39:05] operating spending.

[39:07] >> That's right. Yeah, the the 625 um for

[39:11] this capital spending. That's what we

[39:13] were talking about the um pretty much

[39:15] the town hall complex and then um

[39:18] general plan uh more fun more money uh

[39:21] transferred for the general plan other

[39:23] phases of the general plan. So those two

[39:25] make up that 625 amount

[39:28] and then the spending is operating

[39:30] that's separate from it.

[39:32] >> So the chart that's in front of us for

[39:35] 775

[39:37] does that include the 625? I think

[39:39] that's

[39:39] >> I'm sorry. I'm trying to um add them

[39:42] together right now. It's the town hall

[39:44] complex and then the general plan and um

[39:51] what else is it?

[39:55] I think on page 25 that's 26 27 and the

[39:59] chart on the screen is a five-year

[40:01] capital spend.

[40:02] >> Yeah, thank you. Sorry. That's right.

[40:04] Thank you.

[40:04] >> Oh, so what's on the screen?

[40:06] >> It's a it's aggregate of fires. Thank

[40:08] you.

[40:08] >> Got you. Thanks. Thanks for that

[40:10] clarification. Um a few other questions.

[40:14] Um regarding um capital spending for

[40:17] water and sewer, I think the total it

[40:19] was I don't remember the slide. I didn't

[40:21] write down the slide. Sorry. Um it was

[40:24] early on 11.6 million. I was just

[40:27] curious what percent of that is water in

[40:30] terms of spending on out of the 11.6 you

[40:33] could see it's uh 2.5 as projected for

[40:36] this year for water and then 5.2 for

[40:38] sewer and majority of is like water main

[40:41] replacements and then the priority

[40:43] basins are majority of the 5.2 for

[40:45] sewer.

[40:46] >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks for that

[40:48] clarification. And regarding the 115

[40:50] pension trust, does that get funded

[40:52] eventually and we stop funding it or

[40:55] what is the timeline on that?

[40:59] >> There was a one-time funding when it was

[41:01] established and then it was uh agreed

[41:05] and instructed that we should look at it

[41:06] every year in the budget process based

[41:09] on available funds and priorities. Um,

[41:13] and the FAC has recommended in the past

[41:16] having about one year's worth of annual

[41:19] required contribution in there, which is

[41:22] where it is right now. Um, and the way

[41:25] that would work is if the budget if the

[41:28] budget was in need of additional money

[41:31] and uh that reserve could be used to pay

[41:35] for that annual required contribution

[41:38] and then that money is freed up from the

[41:40] general fund that could be used to help

[41:42] with the budget process. So that is one

[41:45] way that that could be used. Another way

[41:47] that it could be used, it could be held.

[41:49] Um, and as we step up the pension

[41:52] contributions uh that are stepping up

[41:55] over the the next several years, it

[41:57] could be used in partially to defay that

[42:00] budget cost in any one year, just a

[42:03] portion of it. So, it it's uh has many

[42:06] could have many uses. Um, but right now,

[42:09] we're holding it um unless it's needed

[42:13] for a significant reason.

[42:16] Okay. Um,

[42:19] regard under our goals, um, CCFD safer

[42:23] grant, I know I think we have two more

[42:25] years on that or one more year left.

[42:28] >> What is the estimate? Do we have any

[42:30] idea of that $2 million grant? What

[42:33] percent will be coming to us as an

[42:35] obligation regarding funding for CCFD?

[42:37] So, it's about $2 and half million

[42:39] dollars a year in total and our share of

[42:41] that is um 28%. So, it would be about

[42:48] $800,000

[42:50] per year step up.

[42:52] >> Okay, so it's actually it's actually two

[42:53] and a half, not two. Somehow I had in my

[42:56] previous notes on something else that it

[42:57] was two, but yeah, that may have just

[42:59] been my error. All right. So,

[43:00] approximately 800,000 will be an

[43:03] obligation in two years that's going to

[43:05] be fixed because it's associated with

[43:07] the I guess it's station 36.

[43:10] >> Yeah. Yes.

[43:12] >> Um under priorities

[43:24] we had climate action plan for 75,000.

[43:27] Is that a consultant fee? What

[43:30] Is the climate action plan a document?

[43:34] What I'm just curious what the estimates

[43:37] for 75,000 is.

[43:38] >> The climate action plan, I believe, is a

[43:42] portion of the of the general plan and

[43:45] requires a similar activity

[43:49] like the housing element but related to

[43:51] climate. And so it requires uh certain

[43:55] assessments and then that a plan be put

[43:59] in place related to uh the requirements

[44:02] of the climate plan. And um so usually

[44:06] you would hire an expert to help with

[44:09] that process.

[44:12] And and is it a long process? Is it is

[44:15] it something a consultant will work on

[44:17] for like six months, a year? Do we cuz

[44:20] the last time it was done I think was

[44:22] over 10 years ago. Is that

[44:24] >> I hear I hear something behind

[44:27] a few months. A few months.

[44:29] >> A few months. Okay.

[44:31] All right. I think those are all my

[44:34] questions for now. Do my colleagues have

[44:35] any more questions before I go to

[44:37] public? Yes. Um council member Chuang

[44:39] >> through the mayor. Thank you. Um so

[44:41] follow up on the uh page 28 regarding

[44:44] the community and customer services.

[44:47] There are estimates of the funding debt

[44:49] for the project that we the council has

[44:52] set priorities for. And my question is

[44:55] um

[44:58] if in the process

[45:00] uh we're not spending that much money uh

[45:04] the funding will go back to the general

[45:06] fund. Correct.

[45:09] >> Yes. And is this something that um that

[45:12] we will get an update on so that we have

[45:15] some idea or clarity on the sort of the

[45:19] estimate and whether we have the funding

[45:21] or is it just these are just sort of the

[45:26] um benchmark and then you will come back

[45:30] if if you need additional funding on the

[45:34] project that we need to enhance.

[45:37] Yes, we'll be tracking these projects

[45:40] and can report back at mid year if there

[45:42] or as needed um throughout the process.

[45:46] >> All right. And then um just on the page

[45:50] 15 since we're on the intro um on the on

[45:55] the graph of the flowchart,

[45:58] I I I just want to say that as much as I

[46:00] really am very grateful for the advisory

[46:04] bodies, I do think that um this council

[46:08] this uh this government uh format is

[46:14] council

[46:16] um and the uh city manager. That is the

[46:19] model. And so I find that this chart,

[46:22] the way that you place the advisory body

[46:25] is not quite in line of what we're doing

[46:28] because I think that the advisory body

[46:30] should be below the um city manager with

[46:34] the idea that um the the advisory body

[46:38] volunteers or committee members are

[46:41] advising the town and the council, but

[46:46] it just the sequencing of things. And

[46:49] also the other thing is the city manager

[46:51] also is very much engaged uh in the um

[46:57] central county fire board for that

[47:00] matters and it doesn't really reflect

[47:02] that. So I would ask that if we can

[47:04] provide some kind of edit to provide

[47:06] that clarity because I do believe the

[47:08] two cities city manager rotate in terms

[47:11] of being a CEO and it is uh critical in

[47:16] the policy uh for the CCFD fire

[47:19] departments um and the fire board. So

[47:22] just so that it would reflect that

[47:24] properly. Um so if we can make some

[47:27] amendment to that.

[47:28] >> Yes, thank you. We will. And if I I

[47:31] could just add just a few things of

[47:33] clarity before we go to public comment.

[47:34] One on the advisory committee thing.

[47:36] They are an advisory committee to you as

[47:38] the as the board. So that's kind of why

[47:40] their position is there. We can

[47:41] certainly make a change and having the

[47:43] uh CEO thing uh definitely makes sense

[47:46] as we rotate every few years between

[47:48] ourselves and Berling game at this

[47:50] point. And I just want to add a couple

[47:52] of other things here too on the town

[47:54] hall project to just make completely

[47:56] clear. If you remember the 2526

[47:59] goal setting sessions is really where we

[48:00] put the foundation in for what we wanted

[48:03] to do uh with the town hall at least in

[48:05] the design of it. And at that time it

[48:07] was brought before the council and there

[48:08] was 442,000

[48:10] that was approved in the design and

[48:12] planning portion of that. At this time

[48:14] there's 362,000 of that that has been

[48:17] spent to date and there's 80,000 left in

[48:21] that originally approved amount. the

[48:23] next if if it goes you know if and when

[48:26] we get to the next phase of this this

[48:28] would be the additional ask uh of the

[48:30] 400,000 which would become the next

[48:33] budget and also on the CCFD safer grant

[48:37] uh

[48:39] if anybody can get the grant approved

[48:41] twice it's probably our chief poochie uh

[48:44] that'll be the attempt that's going to

[48:46] be made to get that done uh we are

[48:48] having some goal setting that's coming

[48:50] up this week uh with the uh fire

[48:52] department and uh through a facilitated

[48:55] uh consultant there. Uh but that 800,000

[48:59] a year, I mean, that's a pretty

[49:00] substantial amount that if once that

[49:03] safer grant is up and essentially rather

[49:05] than looking at it as a station 36, it's

[49:08] 12 firefighter staff uh that that pays

[49:10] for. If indeed that the the T cities are

[49:13] going to have to make up for that

[49:14] difference because the safer grant is no

[49:16] longer going to be there, we in other

[49:18] words, we don't get it for the the next

[49:20] three-year period. My advice to the

[49:22] board and to the other cities would be

[49:24] that we start funding for that now uh so

[49:28] that it's not as big of a cliff when we

[49:30] get there so all the cities aren't all

[49:31] of a sudden having an $800,000 burden if

[49:34] we put a little bit away each year uh

[49:37] and we get the safer grant for a second

[49:39] time. That's great. You know, then we

[49:41] can use that money for other resources.

[49:43] if we don't get that safer grant, we're

[49:45] not going to be uh get caught on sort of

[49:47] a cliff of money there with that 800

[49:49] grand that we're going to have to pay

[49:51] into it. So, that'll be my advice in the

[49:54] fireboard meetings that are coming up

[49:55] and I'll work closely with uh Lisa

[49:57] Goldman on that as well.

[50:00] >> Well, thank you and thanks for those

[50:01] clarifications and I I appreciate your

[50:04] feedback on both of those issues. Thank

[50:06] you. Um

[50:06] >> I just ongoing questions. I'm sorry. Um

[50:09] Vice Mayor Ragdale have a question or

[50:11] did you have one? Just wanted to a ask

[50:14] uh Doug to the city manager to clarify.

[50:16] I'm sorry I didn't quite get what's the

[50:18] plan B if the safer grant doesn't come

[50:20] through. Sorry.

[50:21] >> If the well if the safer grant uh is not

[50:24] originally it was a three-year program

[50:26] that gave a certain amount of money to

[50:28] cover 12 firefighters. If in the coming

[50:30] years we don't get an an additional

[50:33] safer grant, then that that burden will

[50:36] come on to us, right? The 800,000 of

[50:38] that. Um, so my advice would be that we

[50:41] start putting away a little bit of money

[50:43] each year. Uh, so that when if we don't

[50:46] get another safer grant, we'll have that

[50:48] money available to to maintain our

[50:50] funding of that 800,000. The other

[50:52] option is we don't do that. And if we

[50:55] don't get the safer grant, it'll be a

[50:57] one-time $800,000 a year that we'll be

[51:00] looking at adding to the budget each

[51:01] year. Uh, and sorry. And and has that

[51:05] money come through that that three-year

[51:08] grant? Have we seen we've received that

[51:10] money? There's haven't been any problem

[51:12] receiving that.

[51:15] >> I believe it's

[51:17] spend you spend it, you get

[51:19] reimbursement.

[51:20] >> Yeah, we don't get it all in one sum.

[51:22] So, it it goes through like a quarterly

[51:24] billing that uh is paid for by the

[51:26] grant. Uh, but to my knowledge, there

[51:29] hasn't been any difficulty with that at

[51:30] this point. through the mayor. I I just

[51:33] want to check with our city manager. I

[51:35] think that when you're talking about

[51:36] putting money aside, you're talking

[51:38] about Central County Fire Board uh

[51:41] making that suggestions in terms of

[51:43] their budget. Correct.

[51:45] >> Yes. I I would say that's one of the

[51:47] items that's going to be discussed in

[51:48] the strategic meeting coming up this

[51:50] week is what do we do if this safer

[51:52] grant uh isn't renewed in the following

[51:54] years? How would we like to handle that?

[51:56] and whatever funding method is fine, but

[51:58] the three entities that are involved in

[52:01] central county fire should agree as a

[52:03] group and how we're going to do it. Uh

[52:06] rather than for example, the town of

[52:08] Hillsboro were to set aside that money

[52:10] each year to use and then when we come

[52:12] to that point, the other cities haven't

[52:13] done the same. I don't want to get

[52:16] caught in a in a funding problem like

[52:17] that. So, I would I would push that the

[52:19] three uh entities involved with Central

[52:22] County Fire come up with an agreement.

[52:23] That's one of the things that I'll be

[52:24] bringing up at the meeting this week.

[52:26] >> Right. And and just uh through the mayor

[52:28] again, uh I I think that it would be a

[52:30] tough decisions also for the Central

[52:32] County Fire Board to make should the

[52:35] funding does not come through and the

[52:37] three cities councils do not support the

[52:41] additional funding to the saber grants,

[52:44] then that would be a you know a

[52:46] difficult decision, but that would be

[52:48] cutting services, which I think that is also on the table.

[52:52] >> Absolutely. This is one of those ones

[52:53] that you would bring before the fire

[52:55] board as anformational process and and

[52:57] the recommendation would be that uh the

[53:00] fire board approve us to go to each uh

[53:02] city council meeting and do a full

[53:04] explanation to the full city council

[53:05] because when you're talking about that

[53:07] type of financial addition into the

[53:09] budget that needs to be a decision made

[53:10] by the full council rather than just the

[53:12] board.

[53:14] >> Okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor Regel. Go

[53:16] ahead. So, see now I have another

[53:19] question. Um, so I think you did

[53:22] mention, Jan, that we did have um

[53:24] reserves set aside for that to to make

[53:28] up for the safer grant.

[53:31] >> If uh you agree with the amount that

[53:35] we're putting in the reserve for this

[53:38] year, then yes, we do have that money

[53:40] saved for one year. And then we did save

[53:43] an additional amount in the asset

[53:45] replacement reserve last year. So we

[53:47] have two years of runway on that.

[53:50] >> That was the assigned there on this

[53:52] current slide.

[53:54] >> Okay. Yes.

[53:54] >> Um I had a couple of uh more quick

[53:57] questions that I found. Um in the uh

[54:01] budget by fund section page 99

[54:05] under fund fund description the asset

[54:08] replacement fund. It says these

[54:09] activities are entirely self-supported

[54:11] by user charges.

[54:13] And I wasn't sure what what users those

[54:17] were.

[54:17] >> The user charges are charges paid for by

[54:21] the other funds.

[54:22] >> Oh, okay.

[54:23] >> So, if we're replacing a water equipment

[54:27] vehicle, that's charged from the water

[54:29] fund to this fund and then it's spent

[54:32] out of this fund. Same thing if we have

[54:35] a police car, it's charged out of the

[54:37] general fund and then it's it's funded

[54:40] out of this asset replacement fund.

[54:42] >> Okay. Excellent. Um and then um oh I was

[54:46] curious uh under department departmental

[54:49] in information tab uh page 122

[54:53] the very last thing under the police I

[54:56] was wondering what an arctic room what's

[54:59] an arctic room

[55:02] very last sentence page 122

[55:09] a real time crime center Okay, that's

[55:13] very exciting. Um, okay. Thank you. I I

[55:16] should have looked I should have looked

[55:17] that up. Um, but thank you. Um, and then

[55:20] the last thing I wanted to mention um is

[55:25] uh when I when I first saw where it said

[55:29] um the amount of money that can be

[55:32] attributed to the city council goals, uh

[55:35] it was on one of the slides and it was

[55:37] in the book. Um,

[55:39] I guess what I what makes me hesitant, I

[55:41] would hate to have somebody look at that

[55:43] and say, "Oh, almost a million dollars

[55:46] that

[55:48] city council's just deciding to do

[55:49] this." I mean, they are goals on behalf

[55:52] of the town. They're not pet projects.

[55:55] Um, so I don't know if there's a way to

[55:57] Yeah. If there's a way to soften that

[56:00] language that it's to deliver city

[56:02] council

[56:04] >> approved goals for the town.

[56:06] >> Goals are priorities. They're priorities

[56:08] for the town.

[56:09] >> For the town.

[56:10] >> For the benefit of the town.

[56:12] >> Yes.

[56:12] >> I don't know. It just it just hit me

[56:15] looking at that. So, there's a way to

[56:17] soften that a little bit

[56:19] >> perception. Good point. Thank you so

[56:21] much.

[56:21] >> And u you know, those are mostly

[56:23] one-time costs.

[56:24] >> Uh they're not ongoing. And those are

[56:28] mostly needed for professional services

[56:31] where there's uh you know technical

[56:33] expertise that's required for that

[56:35] subject matter. Uh as we discussed

[56:38] earlier on like the the state the other

[56:40] the climate action plan. Um and so yes

[56:44] we can try to change that language a

[56:46] little bit.

[56:47] >> Thank you.

[56:48] >> In the in the book and

[56:50] >> um thank you. Oh I'm sorry. Go

[56:52] >> can I just follow up on that slide that

[56:54] we're on right now. council member.

[56:55] >> So now I'm confused again because here

[56:59] under land use planning we have town

[57:01] hall campus at $40,000

[57:04] and the information that we just got was

[57:08] in fact of the $440 that had already

[57:11] been approved. There's maybe $100,000

[57:15] left

[57:16] uh not the whole 440 420. So, where does

[57:22] this 40k step in?

[57:24] >> I think that's a typo. Thank you for

[57:26] finding our typo, right?

[57:30] >> Yes. Thank you for finding our

[57:32] >> a good thing to catch. Okay.

[57:38] » Um

[57:40] uh thanks for um commenting on that. And

[57:44] um one last question before we move on

[57:47] to the next section. What is the annual?

[57:50] What is the yearly cost of the drone

[57:51] program

[57:53] in terms of operational?

[57:55] >> Which program?

[57:56] >> The drone.

[57:58] >> Oh, the drone program.

[57:59] >> Yeah.

[57:59] >> Um,

[58:01] >> if you have it, it's I was just

[58:03] >> purchase and then there's an ongoing

[58:05] subscription fee.

[58:06] >> I'm I'm familiar with the purchase. I

[58:08] recall from previous discussions.

[58:11] >> Um, it's about 150,000 annually. Yeah.

[58:15] What uh this year? No, because we

[58:17] already have the drone. So that was just

[58:18] for the the program and that the

[58:20] purchase was from last year's for the

[58:22] equipment.

[58:22] >> So this just the operational cost

[58:24] correct per year. Okay, got thank you.

[58:27] Um I don't have any additional questions

[58:30] before we turn go to public comments. Do

[58:33] we have any public comments on this?

[58:36] >> Oh, and it's it's the RTIC

[58:40] room, not not an Arctic room. So, so

[58:43] yeah,

[58:44] >> it's a real time

[58:46] >> our

[58:46] >> crime information center. Yeah.

[58:48] >> Okay. I read it tic

[58:51] >> I read it as arctic.

[58:52] >> It's not a cold room.

[58:52] >> Uh it because it was written as Arctic.

[58:54] That's the way you read it as Arctic.

[58:56] >> I thought it was a a coal punch. Uh

[58:58] council member Adams and I were just

[59:00] having a sorry having a side

[59:02] conversation.

[59:03] >> What happens when police use too much

[59:04] lingo and

[59:05] >> and we all make typos. I I I made a bad

[59:08] one this very morning in email. It's

[59:11] Yes. I assumed it was a cooling room for

[59:14] when it got hot. That's what I That's

[59:16] what I thought. Oh, it's getting so hot.

[59:18] >> You first asked the question. I thought

[59:19] it was an emergency cooling room or

[59:21] something like that.

[59:22] >> Now we want one. That's going to be a

[59:24] council priority.

[59:25] >> Thanks to Chief Colola uh gave me the

[59:28] look. She's like, "No, it's not that."

[59:31] >> Um do we have any public comments?

[59:33] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. We We don't have

[59:35] no public comment.

[59:37] >> All right. Well, thanks for those

[59:38] clarifications. Um, I think we've been

[59:40] giving feedback as we went through these

[59:42] questions. Are there additional feedback

[59:45] the council would like to uh submit to

[59:47] the finance department?

[59:52] Seeing none, we can get to the next

[59:53] section of the presentation. Okay. Um,

[59:57] I'll move it along uh for the master fee

[59:59] schedule. Um, just as a reminder, the

[1:00:03] sewer and water rates, those are taken

[1:00:05] to council and adopted on a separate

[1:00:06] resolution. So, um, they're both in the

[1:00:09] middle of a 5-year rate series. The 218s

[1:00:12] are out. There's a public hearing for

[1:00:14] the sewer rates tonight, and then in

[1:00:16] June, there will be a public hearing for

[1:00:17] the water rates. So, it's separate from

[1:00:19] the master fee schedule. Just wanted to

[1:00:20] clarify that. Um, but first, there's two

[1:00:23] portions of it. First is the water and

[1:00:25] sewer connection fee that is taken to

[1:00:28] council, adopted on resolution as part

[1:00:30] of the master fee schedule. uh it's

[1:00:32] annually updated based on a CPI uh index

[1:00:34] we get from public works uh from the

[1:00:37] engineering news record construction

[1:00:39] index cost this year it's a 0.5%

[1:00:42] increase so that's the increase you see

[1:00:43] from the prior year

[1:00:46] and then the overall master fee schedule

[1:00:48] for 2627 there are no new or deleted

[1:00:52] fees for police engineering or public

[1:00:54] works services however there are changes

[1:00:57] to all of those fees as mentioned um as

[1:01:00] a practice we do now we update them

[1:01:02] annually just based on staffing labor

[1:01:04] rates just to continue cost recovery for

[1:01:07] those services rendered. Um and then the

[1:01:09] big change in our master fee schedule is

[1:01:11] the building and planning. They

[1:01:13] conducted a cost of service study as

[1:01:15] part of the long range financial funding

[1:01:17] plan. And so the proposed 2627 budget

[1:01:21] reflects those changes that were brought

[1:01:23] to you in April um as part of the cost

[1:01:26] service study and it is now part of our

[1:01:29] budget. Um and FAC did take a look at

[1:01:32] that as well and recommended the fees

[1:01:34] for billing planning as well as the

[1:01:36] whole overall uh master fee schedule

[1:01:40] and um we can answer any of the

[1:01:42] particular questions for the fees you

[1:01:44] have um but the um but it will go

[1:01:46] tonight uh as a public hearing separate

[1:01:49] from the budget for the master schedule.

[1:01:52] >> Okay. Thank you. Um any questions from

[1:01:54] the council?

[1:01:58] Okay. Seeing none. Any public comment on

[1:02:01] this section?

[1:02:03] >> Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Cole. And no

[1:02:06] public comment.

[1:02:09] >> Back to the council. No additional

[1:02:10] questions. And is that correct? Oh, I'm

[1:02:13] sorry. Vice Mayor Ragdale has a

[1:02:15] question.

[1:02:15] >> Just a a comment. Um, thank you again

[1:02:18] for that building and planning study. I

[1:02:20] know that was a a big deal to do and

[1:02:24] that was done well and um greatly

[1:02:26] appreciated. Thank you.

[1:02:29] Okay, Council Member Adams have a

[1:02:31] question.

[1:02:32] >> Uh, I'm pretty sure that uh in our

[1:02:35] binder on page 155,

[1:02:39] um, we owe you thanks for the tree

[1:02:43] removal permits that both uh, Council

[1:02:46] Member Krill and myself thought were too

[1:02:50] high. I think you have reduced them, but

[1:02:54] I want to make sure because

[1:02:57] in particular the reason I care about

[1:02:59] the tree removal is uh in most permits

[1:03:04] people are pretty happy to pay them

[1:03:05] because they're going to get something.

[1:03:08] This is a permit to take something away

[1:03:11] and it is important for the town that it

[1:03:15] actually happens. So that's why I think

[1:03:18] we both thought it was over $1,000 if I

[1:03:21] recall, but I couldn't find it. So I

[1:03:24] wanted to check and make sure it's

[1:03:27] um that's what we did.

[1:03:30] >> Um Council Member Adams, could you just

[1:03:32] clarify the previous cost to what it was

[1:03:35] reduced to? We having difficulty finding

[1:03:37] it is because a different binder. Just

[1:03:39] for clarification,

[1:03:40] >> it's it's in the other binder. It's in

[1:03:43] our

[1:03:43] >> You could just tell us the numbers just

[1:03:45] so we're all on the same page. the

[1:03:46] number. Well, there's several. Oh, it's

[1:03:49] visibly dead. It's one

[1:03:51] >> and I can provide some clarification for

[1:03:53] that. Thank you so much, Council Member

[1:03:55] Adams. Um, and I apologize I did not get

[1:03:58] to answer the question fully when um I

[1:04:01] was here a month ago discussing the

[1:04:03] fees. Um, what council member Adams and

[1:04:06] council member Krlic brought up was that

[1:04:08] in the planning division fee schedule,

[1:04:11] there is a tree removal for

[1:04:13] non-hazardous or voluntary and the old

[1:04:16] fee for that was $386

[1:04:20] and based on our fee study that was

[1:04:22] going to be increased and is still

[1:04:25] proposed to be increased to $1,76.

[1:04:29] That does seem like a large jump, but

[1:04:31] again that was based on the fee study on

[1:04:35] time um assumptions and the use of the

[1:04:38] town consulting landscape uh sorry town

[1:04:41] consulting arborist. And then these

[1:04:43] again are for non-hazardous or

[1:04:45] voluntary. So this is somebody just says

[1:04:48] I don't like this tree. I want it gone.

[1:04:51] And so we need to review that and kind

[1:04:53] of review the merits and the um uh

[1:04:56] effect that would have on the

[1:04:57] neighborhood and the visual aesthetic.

[1:05:00] And then when we go to the building uh

[1:05:03] division fees, we did still take the

[1:05:05] feedback from council, your feedback

[1:05:08] about wanting to make sure that we were

[1:05:10] not disincentivizing

[1:05:12] residents for removing hazardous or

[1:05:15] emergency trees. So we did further

[1:05:18] granulate those fees. Um, so we do now

[1:05:21] have a visibly dead. Um, and we are

[1:05:24] indicating that or we're not necessarily

[1:05:27] indicating that that requires an arburst

[1:05:29] report. So we do encourage residents to

[1:05:31] come forward um to show us that they

[1:05:34] have a visibly dead tree and we can

[1:05:36] evaluate that um at the building and

[1:05:38] counting uh building and planning

[1:05:40] counter. And that is a very small fee of

[1:05:42] $287.

[1:05:44] And that's really just to kind of count

[1:05:47] account for minimal staff time to

[1:05:49] actually issue the permit and then

[1:05:51] follow up on its removal. And then we go

[1:05:54] up from there with a hazardous removal

[1:05:56] with arborist report. So that does take

[1:05:58] a little bit more coordination and

[1:06:00] review of the arborist report. If it

[1:06:03] requires um review by the town

[1:06:05] consulting arborists, so that indicates

[1:06:07] as needed, then that is build at an

[1:06:10] additional hourly rate. And then there's

[1:06:12] a very minor $218 permit that

[1:06:16] coordinates with uh non-hazardous

[1:06:18] planning approval. So you got the

[1:06:20] planning approval. Now you get the

[1:06:21] permit for those non-hazardous

[1:06:23] voluntary.

[1:06:26] » Thank you. That really is helpful

[1:06:28] clarification.

[1:06:29] >> Great. Thank you.

[1:06:30] >> I did see the carveout for hazardous and

[1:06:32] that that did um answer I think the

[1:06:36] question that we had.

[1:06:38] >> Okay. Thank you. Um, any public comment

[1:06:41] on this section? I don't believe we had

[1:06:43] any. Okay, we can move on to the next

[1:06:46] section.

[1:06:50] » All right. Good afternoon, Miracle,

[1:06:52] members of the council. Drew Corbett,

[1:06:54] principal DKG Consultants. The item

[1:06:56] before you is the uh analysis of the

[1:06:59] general fund reserves. Get

[1:07:00] >> a little closer to the mic, Drew.

[1:07:02] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:07:04] Um, so as we get into the general fund

[1:07:07] reserves, I wanted to cover four things

[1:07:08] with you. Uh, give you some background

[1:07:10] and general context on why reserves are

[1:07:12] kept. Uh, talk about some of the

[1:07:14] considerations that council may want to

[1:07:16] consider when thinking about reserves.

[1:07:18] Um, I took on a financial risk

[1:07:21] assessment of the town that I'd like to

[1:07:22] share and then I'll move into the

[1:07:24] reserve policy recommendations.

[1:07:27] So in terms of background and general

[1:07:29] context um you know keeping reserves

[1:07:32] particularly general fund reserves are a

[1:07:33] key component to financial stability in

[1:07:36] the town. It allows you to mitigate

[1:07:38] risk. It allows you to maintain services

[1:07:40] during economic downturns or other

[1:07:42] emergencies. Um your current reserve

[1:07:45] policy is good. So let's let's start

[1:07:47] there. You have a good reserve policy.

[1:07:49] Um, you know, my assessment of it was

[1:07:51] that it could benefit from some

[1:07:53] additional definition, and I'll I'll

[1:07:55] explain why as we move forward. Um, and

[1:07:57] really what this is an opportunity to do

[1:08:00] is align with industry best practices

[1:08:03] while reflecting the unique and

[1:08:04] individual needs and priorities of the

[1:08:06] town, which is important for reserve

[1:08:08] policy.

[1:08:10] So this is your existing policy and as Jan went over in her initial

[1:08:14] presentation um you have the policy to

[1:08:18] retain 30% of your general fund

[1:08:20] operating expenditures in reserve in

[1:08:22] your uh ACER or your your annual

[1:08:25] comprehensive financial report. You

[1:08:26] indicate that you have a goal of 50%.

[1:08:28] You're currently meeting that 50% goal.

[1:08:31] Um, and the utilization priorities for

[1:08:34] the general fund reserve are economic

[1:08:36] uncertainties, local disasters, other

[1:08:39] financial hardships or downturns, uh,

[1:08:41] contingencies for unforeseen needs, and

[1:08:44] cash flow requirements. And so, in in

[1:08:46] the recommendations that I've made, we

[1:08:48] try to address all of those items.

[1:08:53] So, this is a look at your existing fund

[1:08:55] balance based on last year's uh, 2425

[1:08:59] close of the year. Um, and the fund

[1:09:01] balance for your reserve calculation was

[1:09:03] $25.3 million. So that considers the

[1:09:06] fact that there's items that are I would

[1:09:08] say are above the line like think like

[1:09:10] items that would get considered before

[1:09:12] you uh calculate your your reserves.

[1:09:18] What that would be your pension trust

[1:09:19] and your assigned or non-spendable fund

[1:09:21] balance. So as you can see you meet your

[1:09:24] 50% goal and have uh 5.4 million

[1:09:27] remaining as of last year. And that

[1:09:29] number obviously is changing

[1:09:30] year-over-year, but that's where you

[1:09:31] last closed your financials was with uh

[1:09:34] your 50% reserve funded with additional

[1:09:38] uh funds available.

[1:09:40] So GFOA is the government finance

[1:09:42] officers association. It's the

[1:09:44] preeminent um professional association

[1:09:47] for local government uh finance

[1:09:49] professionals and they have um best

[1:09:52] practices related to reserve policies

[1:09:54] and there are sort of four pillars for

[1:09:56] their uh for their best practices.

[1:09:58] Number one is to establish a formal

[1:10:00] policy or policies for maintaining

[1:10:03] unrestricted fund balance in your

[1:10:05] general fund. They recommend a a minimum

[1:10:08] of two months of either recurring

[1:10:10] revenues or recurring expenditures. uh

[1:10:13] they recommend that you have utilization

[1:10:16] conditions as well as conditions under

[1:10:17] which you would replenish your reserves

[1:10:19] if you utilize them. And then finally,

[1:10:21] they recommend that you maintain a

[1:10:23] strategy for funds that are in excess of

[1:10:25] your policy requirements. And so we will

[1:10:27] go through all of those uh as part of

[1:10:29] our recommendations.

[1:10:32] I also did a little bit of a pure city

[1:10:34] comparison. I think it's important here

[1:10:36] that comparing against, you know, sort

[1:10:38] of your peer cities is a consideration,

[1:10:41] but shouldn't be the consideration. Um,

[1:10:44] you know, reserves need to be really

[1:10:46] tailored to the unique needs of each

[1:10:48] agency. They need to be a function of

[1:10:50] risk of that agency. And as it relates

[1:10:52] to some of your peer cities,

[1:10:55] Hillsboro is not necessarily comparable

[1:10:58] um from a service level perspective to

[1:11:00] these other cities because you provide

[1:11:02] police inhouse, you fund central county

[1:11:05] fire, you have utilities, right? So, you

[1:11:08] know, oftentimes the the comparators

[1:11:10] that we use are based on population or

[1:11:13] economic conditions, but it's really

[1:11:15] important that, you know, again, that your your comparisons as it relates

[1:11:19] to reserves are are just one piece of of

[1:11:22] a larger uh puzzle for developing your reserves.

[1:11:28] So in terms of considerations,

[1:11:30] uh I think first and foremost and and

[1:11:33] this is where you you try to set

[1:11:36] reserves that are really based on the individual needs of of your agency,

[1:11:40] which is reserves really need to be a

[1:11:42] function of risk, right? That that's

[1:11:44] really the the main consideration.

[1:11:48] Reserves for specific purposes can drive

[1:11:52] uh policy decisions. that can create

[1:11:54] some clarity, but what's important is

[1:11:56] they don't prohibit flexibility. At the

[1:11:58] end of the day, these reserve funds are

[1:12:00] all unassigned fund balance and

[1:12:03] undesated. And we're designating them

[1:12:05] for intent, but that doesn't prohibit

[1:12:08] them. It doesn't otherwise restrict

[1:12:09] them. Um, again, as I' I've mentioned a

[1:12:12] few times and I will continue to

[1:12:13] mention, reserves really need to be

[1:12:15] tailored to to each agency. um two two

[1:12:19] different agencies with similar

[1:12:20] populations may have very different risk

[1:12:22] profiles. So the reserve needs are going

[1:12:24] to be different. And then finally the

[1:12:28] opportunity cost has to be considered

[1:12:30] there. There is such thing as having too

[1:12:31] much money in reserve because you are

[1:12:34] then not able to fund other priorities

[1:12:37] the more money that you're putting away.

[1:12:38] So there has to be a balance there and

[1:12:41] you have to consider your your credit

[1:12:43] rating and that has to be balanced with

[1:12:44] those opportunities costs as well.

[1:12:47] So, we'll move right into to the credit

[1:12:49] rating considerations. That's always a

[1:12:51] big consideration when when factoring in

[1:12:53] what level reserves do you want to keep

[1:12:55] for your general fund. Um, obviously a a

[1:12:59] good credit rating is an indicator of

[1:13:01] good financial management and more

[1:13:03] importantly, it'll contribute to your

[1:13:05] lower lower cost of financing when you

[1:13:07] need to finance capital work. You know,

[1:13:09] the better your credit rating, the lower

[1:13:11] your financing costs. The rating

[1:13:13] agencies are going to take into

[1:13:14] consideration a number of of factors

[1:13:16] when they're when they're developing

[1:13:18] your your credit rating. They're going

[1:13:19] to look at the local economic

[1:13:21] conditions. They're going to look at

[1:13:22] your revenue sources. They're going to

[1:13:24] look at how diverse your revenue sources

[1:13:25] are. They're going to look at how

[1:13:26] volatile your revenue sources are. Uh

[1:13:28] they're going to look at what what

[1:13:29] existing debt you have, what are your

[1:13:31] long-term liabilities, what what's your

[1:13:33] overall leverage um from a debt

[1:13:35] perspective. They're going to look at

[1:13:37] your level of fund balance. And they're

[1:13:39] going to look at your liquidity. You

[1:13:40] know, those are five five of the big

[1:13:41] factors.

[1:13:43] I pulled a a public publicly available

[1:13:46] document from Moody's credit rating

[1:13:48] agencies just to give an example of how

[1:13:50] they evaluate fund balance with respect

[1:13:53] to to making your credit rating. And

[1:13:55] Moody's in general, and I will also just

[1:13:57] emphasize here, this is a general

[1:13:59] document. This is they will, you know,

[1:14:01] once they're doing an actual credit

[1:14:03] rating for an agency, they're going to

[1:14:04] get much more specific. But in general,

[1:14:07] Moody's rates your fund balance level at

[1:14:09] about they give it a weight of about 20%

[1:14:11] of the overall rating. And if you're

[1:14:14] over 35% fund balance, that contributes

[1:14:17] to a AAA rating for that particular

[1:14:20] piece. So you are in good position from

[1:14:22] that perspective with your existing fund

[1:14:24] balance policy.

[1:14:27] As I mentioned though, you know, one of

[1:14:29] the things you have to consider is

[1:14:31] especially with respect to your your

[1:14:33] credit rating is all the competing

[1:14:36] interests you have. Um, you have finite

[1:14:38] financial resources.

[1:14:40] Funding your reserves is an important

[1:14:42] aspect of your finite financial

[1:14:45] resources, but so is so are addressing

[1:14:48] operating deficits as they come up. So

[1:14:50] is financing new capital needs and so is

[1:14:52] maintaining and rehabilitating your

[1:14:55] existing infrastructure. So all those

[1:14:57] things have to be considered within this

[1:14:58] broader context. So that's what I why I

[1:15:00] mentioned there is such thing as as

[1:15:02] holding on to too much reserves. It's

[1:15:04] really important to have a balance with

[1:15:06] making sure you're resilient and and are

[1:15:08] able to to properly mitigate risk but

[1:15:11] not putting away so much money that

[1:15:14] you're you know not maintaining your

[1:15:16] infrastructure appropriately or are

[1:15:18] carrying large deficits.

[1:15:22] So I did do a risk assessment of the

[1:15:24] town that I wanted to share. I I split

[1:15:27] it out into into operating risks and

[1:15:30] nonoperating risks. So their operating

[1:15:31] risks are going to be you know cash flow

[1:15:34] and me meeting those cash flow needs uh

[1:15:36] addressing issues of revenue loss and

[1:15:39] addressing issues with spikes in

[1:15:41] operating expenditures. Your

[1:15:42] non-operating risks are going to be

[1:15:44] things like natural disasters,

[1:15:46] infrastructure emergencies or public

[1:15:48] health crisis. So going directly into

[1:15:51] the the operating risks on the cash

[1:15:53] flow, you have low risk there overall.

[1:15:56] Um, you have strong cash management

[1:15:58] practices. You have great access to

[1:16:00] liquidity. Uh, at the end of last year,

[1:16:02] you had almost $35 million of cash and

[1:16:05] investments in your general fund. You

[1:16:07] had almost 90 million townwide. Um, in

[1:16:10] the event of a catastrophic event,

[1:16:13] you've you've got great liquidity. You

[1:16:15] do have the ability to borrow amongst

[1:16:17] within the funds if you needed to. But

[1:16:19] overall, you have you have low cash flow

[1:16:22] risk, right? Many many agencies

[1:16:25] based on the way they're funded and

[1:16:26] based on the volatility of their

[1:16:28] revenues have to keep higher reserves

[1:16:31] because of of volatility and cash flow

[1:16:33] whereas you have a little more steady uh

[1:16:35] cash flow in terms of knowing when

[1:16:38] you're going to get your funds and being

[1:16:39] able to plan for that. So overall you

[1:16:41] have a a really low uh risk on your cash

[1:16:44] flow position.

[1:16:47] larger risk there is is on revenues. Um

[1:16:50] but but you're overall in a fairly

[1:16:52] stable position. What I did was I took a

[1:16:54] look at all of your general fund

[1:16:56] revenues by category and and categorize

[1:16:59] them as as high, medium or low in terms

[1:17:00] of risk. The the good news for you all

[1:17:03] is over 60% of your revenue is is very

[1:17:07] secure um in terms of your secure

[1:17:10] secured and unsecured property tax.

[1:17:13] very low risk of of a significant shock

[1:17:17] to the system on your property tax. Uh

[1:17:20] the big the the large area where you do

[1:17:22] have risk and as as was discussed during

[1:17:23] the budget presentation is with the VLF.

[1:17:25] There's tremendous amount of uncertainty

[1:17:27] with what's going to happen there. The

[1:17:29] total budget there is 1.8 million as as

[1:17:32] Jan mentioned. You know, 1 million of

[1:17:34] that is is fairly secure. That is money

[1:17:35] that is available. It is the the the the

[1:17:38] shortfall that is uh very uncertain. So

[1:17:42] there is a high risk there, but it's a

[1:17:44] relatively low amount of your of your

[1:17:46] total overall budget. The other areas

[1:17:49] that I that I determined to be medium

[1:17:51] risk would be your excess raff um your

[1:17:55] construction permits, your service

[1:17:57] charges, and your other revenues. And

[1:17:59] those are medium just because they will

[1:18:01] typically eb and flow a little bit with

[1:18:02] the economy. And for excess raft,

[1:18:05] there's a a bit of uncertainty with that

[1:18:07] on an ongoing basis. But overall, you

[1:18:09] have pretty low risk with your with your

[1:18:12] revenues. You're not subject to

[1:18:14] volatility the way cities that are

[1:18:16] highly dependent on revenue sources like

[1:18:18] the hotel tax or sales tax have a much

[1:18:21] greater uh exposure to to economic

[1:18:24] cycles rather than than the town who's

[1:18:27] able to be a little bit more resilient

[1:18:29] um through through cycles in the

[1:18:31] economy.

[1:18:34] >> Yes, Council Member Trunk. Could I just

[1:18:36] ask for a clar clarification?

[1:18:39] So when you were talking about the risk

[1:18:41] assessment and the revenue loss um on

[1:18:44] the public safety tax, you actually rate

[1:18:47] it low. Is it because we have a

[1:18:49] consistent funding mechanism that come

[1:18:51] in? Is that is that how you're

[1:18:53] evaluating it? Correct. because, you

[1:18:55] know, as our personnel cost goes up and

[1:18:57] we talk about the pension and the salary

[1:19:00] increase and benefits, uh, it's now

[1:19:03] outpacing our budget. So, so in in this

[1:19:07] chart, what you're looking at is cons

[1:19:10] consistent funding sources. Is that how

[1:19:13] the evaluation goes?

[1:19:14] >> Correct. So, this is strictly on the

[1:19:16] revenue side. I'll I'll address the

[1:19:17] expenditure side in in another slide or

[1:19:20] two. Okay.

[1:19:20] >> Right. Because it's a different it's a different evaluation. So there's

[1:19:23] higher risk there. But this is strictly

[1:19:25] is what's the likelihood that this

[1:19:27] revenue is going to come in as expected.

[1:19:30] What is the the amount of volatility in

[1:19:33] this particular revenue source? So so

[1:19:34] the revenue itself is is stable. It's

[1:19:38] then the expenditures that it pays for

[1:19:40] that that is has a little more

[1:19:41] volatility that I'll I'll talk about in

[1:19:43] just a minute.

[1:19:44] >> Thank you.

[1:19:48] So I wanted to to also stress test your revenues as well. And so I put

[1:19:54] together a pretty extreme scenario in my

[1:19:56] mind for you know what if. So what if

[1:19:59] you had a a significant

[1:20:02] uh economic downturn that resulted in

[1:20:05] you know red a reduction in local

[1:20:08] revenues and the state taking action

[1:20:10] that impacted your your revenues. And so

[1:20:12] the the the the scenario was a 5%

[1:20:16] reduction in your in your property

[1:20:18] taxes, a lo a complete loss of the VLF,

[1:20:22] a 50% loss in the excess raft and and

[1:20:25] 50% losses in your permitting and your

[1:20:28] service charges, and then 25% of all

[1:20:30] else. What would happen if that were the

[1:20:32] case? So that would actually be a $6.5

[1:20:35] million revenue loss. So on a $ 38.7

[1:20:38] million base, you would be down to 32.1

[1:20:42] million. So your existing reserves would

[1:20:45] allow you to to work through that over

[1:20:48] the course of a of a few years. So

[1:20:49] you're already very resilient for what's

[1:20:52] a pretty significant

[1:20:54] uh you know stress test scenario for

[1:20:56] your budget. So after I did this, the

[1:20:58] next thing I did was how likely is this

[1:21:00] to happen? So I looked back at the great

[1:21:03] recession and the co 19 pandemic to see

[1:21:06] how you how you managed both of those uh

[1:21:09] financial situations and uh starting

[1:21:12] with the great recession

[1:21:14] you had one year 20101 where you had a

[1:21:17] 3% reduction in revenues then 11 12 you

[1:21:20] were flat and from there you've been

[1:21:23] growing ever since. So in in in the

[1:21:25] grand scheme of a of a great recession

[1:21:27] that had a a very significant impact on

[1:21:30] local governments throughout California

[1:21:32] and throughout the country, you all

[1:21:33] weathered that storm pretty well. A a

[1:21:36] blip in 201011 and flat the next year

[1:21:39] and then growth from there. Similar on

[1:21:42] the on the CO 19 pandemic, you had one

[1:21:45] year where you where you dropped by

[1:21:47] about a percent on the revenue side

[1:21:50] before starting to grow again

[1:21:51] significantly the the subsequent years.

[1:21:54] So when you when you look at a a fairly

[1:21:56] extreme what if scenario and then what

[1:21:59] this what the town has seen in reality

[1:22:02] from from the last two pretty

[1:22:03] significant economic shocks, you're in

[1:22:06] pretty good position from a revenue

[1:22:08] perspective. You have relatively low

[1:22:10] volatility

[1:22:11] and so that's a a big factor as you

[1:22:14] think about the reserves that you want

[1:22:16] to carry uh for the general fund.

[1:22:19] So now move into the risk assessment on

[1:22:21] the operating expenditures. So as as was

[1:22:24] brought up there there are absolutely

[1:22:26] risks on the on the operating

[1:22:27] expenditure side. You've got personnel

[1:22:29] costs that are are rising every year and

[1:22:32] typically what you're finding and most cities and towns are finding that

[1:22:35] their personnel costs are rising at a

[1:22:38] rate faster than revenues. So revenues

[1:22:40] are not keeping up with personnel costs.

[1:22:42] So there's absolutely risks with respect

[1:22:44] to that. There's risks with respect to

[1:22:46] the cost of central county fire general

[1:22:50] inflation. So the costs of the things

[1:22:52] that you're buying and your contract

[1:22:53] services are going up, liability,

[1:22:56] workers comp, all of these things are increasing and create some risk. The difference that that I would say for

[1:23:05] the expenditure side risk in comparison

[1:23:08] to the revenue side risk is generally

[1:23:10] with the expenditure side, you're able

[1:23:11] to see it coming. So you can plan a

[1:23:14] little bit better with the revenues

[1:23:16] typically and again less so for the town

[1:23:18] because you're you're not relying on

[1:23:20] things like hotel tax and sales tax. But

[1:23:23] often when those start to take a dive,

[1:23:25] you're seeing that months down the road.

[1:23:27] You're you're seeing it from the

[1:23:29] rearview mirror, not looking at it

[1:23:31] perspectively.

[1:23:33] On the expenditure side, again, you know

[1:23:36] these things are happening. You know

[1:23:37] these are conditions. You're generally

[1:23:38] able to plan for them. So it's not as if

[1:23:41] they're not risks. It's just you're

[1:23:43] better able to manage them with with

[1:23:46] your through your normal budget process,

[1:23:48] right?

[1:23:52] So, the non-operating risks, keep this

[1:23:54] pretty pretty brief. Um, obviously

[1:23:56] natural disaster impacting your

[1:23:58] infrastructure, any other general

[1:24:00] infrastructure emergency is is a concern

[1:24:02] for any agency. Um, obviously there's

[1:24:05] some elevated risk due to our geography

[1:24:07] and and aging infrastructure. Um there are insurance policies that the

[1:24:12] town cover carries that would help cover

[1:24:15] and mitigate some of this risk. So that

[1:24:17] is a factor as as we develop the the

[1:24:20] reserve policy. And then I think as we

[1:24:22] saw um you know five six years ago

[1:24:25] during the the co 19 pandemic the risk

[1:24:27] of a public health crisis having a

[1:24:29] significant financial impact on the town

[1:24:31] I think is relatively low based on what

[1:24:34] happened. I think that the county is

[1:24:35] going to bear a lot of that a lot of

[1:24:37] that cost and a lot of that that

[1:24:38] responsibility. So overall those those

[1:24:41] risks are are relatively low.

[1:24:44] So now I'll transition into the reserve

[1:24:47] policy recommendations. So

[1:24:49] recommendations again with with the with

[1:24:52] the broad perspective of starting with a

[1:24:54] good policy that you have and and

[1:24:56] emphasizing that these policy

[1:24:58] recommendations are the intent for how

[1:25:02] the money should be set aside but they

[1:25:04] don't restrict council from from taking

[1:25:07] other actions. So the first reserve, the

[1:25:11] intent there is to be a contingency

[1:25:12] reserve. The idea there is is the intent

[1:25:15] for these funds would they would be set

[1:25:17] aside and utilized for really

[1:25:19] extraordinary one-time events. So things

[1:25:22] such as a natural disaster, major

[1:25:24] infrastructure failure, or any other

[1:25:26] unforeseen emergency or disaster as

[1:25:29] determined by the council. And the idea

[1:25:32] with this this res reserve the target

[1:25:34] would be 25% of general fund budgeted

[1:25:37] operating expenditures and it would be

[1:25:39] the top priority for for funding. So

[1:25:43] what the way these these reserves have

[1:25:45] been structured is to sort of waterfall

[1:25:47] with a priority list. And so the top

[1:25:50] reserve would be the the contingency

[1:25:52] reserve. So the first 25% of unassigned

[1:25:55] fund balance would go into that reserve.

[1:25:58] The second reserve is more intended to stabilize the budget during, you

[1:26:04] know, economic uh downturns or other uh

[1:26:07] things such as a state takeaway with the VLF.

[1:26:11] And the idea with this reserve is

[1:26:14] service level retention. So, the ability

[1:26:16] to maintain service levels while the

[1:26:19] town figured out if this were a

[1:26:22] short-term economic shock or if this

[1:26:24] were a long-term revenue loss. And the

[1:26:27] idea with this reserve is for it to be

[1:26:29] at a 15% of general fund budgeted

[1:26:32] operating expenditure target with the utiliz or the the replenishment

[1:26:39] policy being that when the reserve

[1:26:41] actually goes below the the the target

[1:26:44] so when it gets below the 15% so when

[1:26:46] you're actually utilizing the reserve

[1:26:49] the budget the next budget cycle will

[1:26:51] articulate an operational plan to res to

[1:26:54] return the reserve to the target level

[1:26:56] within three years. So as an example, if

[1:27:00] there were a you know an economic

[1:27:03] recession and you needed to drive dip

[1:27:05] into the reserves to maintain services,

[1:27:09] the operational plan may be stay the

[1:27:12] course, revenues are going to recover

[1:27:14] over the next couple years. Whereas if we learn that the VLF is going to go

[1:27:20] away and that's a long-term g hole

[1:27:23] that's in that's in your budget, the the

[1:27:26] budget stabilization fund is again used

[1:27:28] to maintain services in the short term

[1:27:30] while an operational plan is developed

[1:27:33] over the long term to close that that

[1:27:35] ongoing gap and this the intent here was

[1:27:38] for this to be the second priority for

[1:27:39] unassigned balance fund balance. So the

[1:27:41] first is the contingency. The second is

[1:27:44] for the budget stabilization reserve.

[1:27:47] The third reserve, the intent for this

[1:27:49] is to be an infrastructure reserve to be

[1:27:52] utilized to fund infrastructure needs

[1:27:55] that arise during the fiscal year that

[1:27:56] were not either budgeted or planned for

[1:27:59] in the near term. So the the purpose

[1:28:01] here is not to supplant funds that are

[1:28:04] intended for the capital uh or the

[1:28:08] existing the existing capital plan. The

[1:28:10] intent here is for there to be a set

[1:28:12] aside for things that come up that were

[1:28:15] not planned. So in the in the current

[1:28:17] structure, things that come up are not

[1:28:19] planned. You you decide whether you want

[1:28:21] to go into reserves, you decide whether

[1:28:23] you want to uh take money out of other

[1:28:26] capital projects and use it for the the

[1:28:28] unplanned needs. And the idea here is to

[1:28:31] have a little bit of money set aside to be able to address the unplanned

[1:28:35] needs as as they come up. But again not

[1:28:38] to supplant the existing uh funds that

[1:28:41] are used for uh current capital

[1:28:43] projects.

[1:28:44] The intent here would this one would be

[1:28:47] the third priority. So once the

[1:28:49] contingency is funded once the budget

[1:28:52] stabilization is funded the

[1:28:53] infrastructure reserve would then be

[1:28:55] funded

[1:28:57] and then the remaining funds any any

[1:29:00] remaining funds would be an undesated

[1:29:02] fund balance. So these are the funds

[1:29:04] after the three defined reserves are

[1:29:06] funded. Um and they would be available

[1:29:09] for appropriation at the discretion of

[1:29:11] council. Best best case scenarios, they

[1:29:14] would be these would be used for

[1:29:16] one-time purposes because they're

[1:29:17] one-time funds, but they could be used

[1:29:19] for anything that council determined

[1:29:22] they needed to be used for. Um and

[1:29:24] again, this would these would be the

[1:29:25] funds that were left over after the

[1:29:27] three other reserves are funded.

[1:29:32] And before I go through some of the

[1:29:34] numbers, I just want to provide some

[1:29:36] just some final policy considerations

[1:29:38] here. So, as I mentioned at the at the

[1:29:41] beginning of the presentation, defining

[1:29:43] these specific reserves for for

[1:29:46] unassigned fund balance, it doesn't

[1:29:48] restrict that funding. These these funds

[1:29:51] remain at council's discretion. These are still ultimately unassigned

[1:29:55] funds that get put into reserve,

[1:29:58] right? but they are not restricted

[1:30:00] otherwise and can be used at council's

[1:30:02] discretion.

[1:30:04] The the idea here is to create some

[1:30:06] definition for their intended use that

[1:30:09] allows for an earlier discussion when

[1:30:12] they need to be utilized. It allows for

[1:30:15] an early discussion about some of the

[1:30:17] tradeoffs that may need to to take place

[1:30:20] when those funds are used. So for

[1:30:23] instance, if you have that

[1:30:24] infrastructure need that was unplanned

[1:30:26] and you and we've got and there this

[1:30:28] policy exists, it's not necessarily an

[1:30:31] automatic that it would be used. It

[1:30:33] creates the the sort of the the trigger

[1:30:36] to have the discussion about do we use

[1:30:38] these polic do we utilize the

[1:30:40] infrastructure reserve? What happens if

[1:30:42] we do that? What are the trade-offs that

[1:30:44] might have to happen? Right? So the idea

[1:30:47] is here is it's it's to help guide

[1:30:49] decision- making by by creating an

[1:30:51] intent for these reserves, but it's not

[1:30:54] intended to restrict um the decision-

[1:30:58] making and ultimately again these these

[1:30:59] funds can be used for anything council

[1:31:02] chose for them to be used for and the

[1:31:05] policy can be written as such.

[1:31:08] With that, I'll just go through the

[1:31:10] numbers really quickly. The and Jan

[1:31:11] already covered these. Um, in under the

[1:31:14] current policy for based on the 26 27

[1:31:17] baseline budget, the 30% goal would be

[1:31:20] met. The 50% goal would be slightly

[1:31:24] under under the proposed uh the three

[1:31:28] policy reserves would be fully funded

[1:31:30] and there would be about $300,000 in

[1:31:32] undesated fund balance. That concludes

[1:31:35] my presentation. I'm happy to take any

[1:31:37] questions.

[1:31:39] Um, thank you, Mr. Corpet. Um, I will

[1:31:44] ask the council if they have any, um,

[1:31:46] questions.

[1:31:49] >> Yes. Um, council member Krik.

[1:31:51] >> Thank you, Drew. And I did have the

[1:31:53] advantage. I was able to see this ahead

[1:31:55] of time. So, just to, um, clarify,

[1:31:58] you are recommending the same amount of

[1:32:01] reserve that we have in our current

[1:32:03] policy. It's just a different way of

[1:32:05] organizing the reserve funds. Is that

[1:32:07] correct?

[1:32:08] >> It's close. It's it's it's

[1:32:11] a little bit less than the current 50%

[1:32:14] policy under under the the current it's

[1:32:17] I think closer to maybe 45. Um there

[1:32:20] would only be two that were based on a

[1:32:22] percentage. So you'd have 40% between

[1:32:24] the contingency and the budget

[1:32:25] stabilization. And then instead of an

[1:32:27] additional 10% it would be uh $3

[1:32:29] million. So it's it's close. It's It's

[1:32:32] well above the 30% level, but it's not

[1:32:34] quite at the 50 based on your 2627

[1:32:37] budget.

[1:32:38] >> Thank you.

[1:32:41] » Yes, Vice Mayor Rexdale.

[1:32:44] >> Um, thank you so much. Um, also thank

[1:32:46] you for the slides in advance. It's that

[1:32:49] was very helpful. Um, I had uh two brief

[1:32:52] questions. Um, so going through the the

[1:32:55] Moody's rating, which that was very um

[1:32:58] helpful. Um do they if we did the

[1:33:02] different um reserve uh categories um in

[1:33:08] rating us would they just look at our um

[1:33:11] amalgamated

[1:33:13] uh accumulate accumulate accumulated or

[1:33:17] would they look at each?

[1:33:19] >> No, they would they would look at the cumulative amount that's that's

[1:33:22] unassigned.

[1:33:24] >> Right. So, so if you had, you know, as a

[1:33:27] as an example, if you had

[1:33:31] if your entire fund balance were

[1:33:33] restricted for a specific purpose and

[1:33:36] you didn't actually have any funds that

[1:33:37] were at at council's discretion, they

[1:33:40] would they would certainly view that

[1:33:41] differently than viewing

[1:33:44] undesated fund balance that's at

[1:33:47] council's discretion that you've chosen

[1:33:48] to reserve in specific buckets.

[1:33:52] So, if it turned out one year we needed

[1:33:55] to um

[1:33:57] go into the infrastructure reserve and

[1:33:59] we hadn't

[1:34:01] quite replenished it yet, um they would

[1:34:03] still look at the overall number.

[1:34:05] >> They would look at the overall.

[1:34:06] >> Okay. Um and then um the other question

[1:34:09] I had is so the contingency reserve

[1:34:11] recommended 25% budget stabilization 15%

[1:34:16] and then the infrastructure was um not

[1:34:18] as a percentage but it was as at a

[1:34:21] dollar amount and I was wondering uh the

[1:34:23] reasoning behind that.

[1:34:28] I ultimately made the recommendation

[1:34:31] um you know trying to look at the

[1:34:34] available funding sort of setting the

[1:34:36] right balance for the fund and looking

[1:34:38] at um with the with the infrastructure

[1:34:41] you know obviously for for each of these

[1:34:44] as your operating budget grows any

[1:34:48] expenditure that's a percentage of that

[1:34:50] operating budget is going to grow as

[1:34:52] well. So each year your contingency

[1:34:54] reserve is going to grow, your budget

[1:34:56] stabilization fund is going to is going

[1:34:57] to grow just naturally as the budget

[1:35:00] goes. I set the infrastructure reserve

[1:35:02] at a as opposed to as a percent

[1:35:05] um just looking at sort of historical

[1:35:08] spending um capital needs and and just

[1:35:12] trying to trying to get the the right

[1:35:13] balance of not setting the reserve too

[1:35:17] high. Um but it wasn't wasn't overly

[1:35:20] scientific. I just chose that that

[1:35:22] perhaps not having all three reserves

[1:35:24] that were automatically growing made

[1:35:26] sense and that instead you could look at

[1:35:28] the infrastructure reserve over over

[1:35:30] time and determine what the right level

[1:35:32] for that reserve is.

[1:35:34] >> Okay, that makes sense. Thank you,

[1:35:39] » Council Member Adams.

[1:35:41] >> Thank you. Um, I think this is the page

[1:35:44] that I had the most trouble with too.

[1:35:47] And initially I was really against this

[1:35:51] idea because

[1:35:54] as much as you and all of us might agree

[1:35:57] that these are still fluid funds

[1:36:02] over time,

[1:36:04] people forget that. And even though this

[1:36:06] is our intention, the effect can be that

[1:36:10] it is a cap or that it is something that

[1:36:14] we need to raise money for in order to

[1:36:17] fulfill. And I really think we operate

[1:36:21] better with money that we can use at our

[1:36:25] discretion and that

[1:36:28] we,

[1:36:30] for example, have just been looking at a

[1:36:33] couple of bridges,

[1:36:35] little bridges. We're not talking about

[1:36:38] big bridges. This isn't the Golden Gate.

[1:36:41] These are little bridges and they're

[1:36:44] really expensive

[1:36:47] uh to repair.

[1:36:49] So in this instance, the reserve here

[1:36:53] wouldn't cover those two bridges. So

[1:36:56] infrastructure is actually where we

[1:36:58] spend a fair amount of our money. I'm

[1:37:01] worried that in the future someone will

[1:37:03] say yes, but it's we only have $3

[1:37:06] million for that, so we'll only fix one

[1:37:09] of the bridges. Something like that. So,

[1:37:11] I want to make sure that if we go ahead

[1:37:13] with this that we insist that it be

[1:37:19] labeled as

[1:37:21] suggested or something like that. But

[1:37:25] then when I thought about it, it also is really not great to walk

[1:37:33] into any situation as a town that has a

[1:37:37] big wad of money, $30 million or $26

[1:37:42] million that isn't assigned to anything.

[1:37:45] It makes people think that we have lots

[1:37:48] of things we could do and lots of

[1:37:52] communities will ask us to use that

[1:37:55] because we have that. So ultimately I

[1:37:59] came around to exactly what you proposed

[1:38:02] with the exception of infrastructure

[1:38:04] reserve which what you have here is a a

[1:38:10] little less than 7%

[1:38:13] and it wouldn't cover what we're looking

[1:38:15] at right now. So, I'm just wondering if

[1:38:18] we need to either put a percentage in

[1:38:20] there or

[1:38:23] uh rejigger the money slightly because

[1:38:26] our infrastructure is currently the

[1:38:28] biggest part actually public works and

[1:38:31] streets and sewers that's what we pay

[1:38:34] most for. So maybe we don't have the

[1:38:38] balance exactly right, but I am

[1:38:39] ultimately came around to believe that

[1:38:42] it's better to have this as long as we

[1:38:44] recognize

[1:38:46] in perpetuity

[1:38:48] that this is fluid and that we don't

[1:38:50] need to raise money in order to fulfill

[1:38:54] this. So maybe you could comment on

[1:38:57] that.

[1:38:59] >> Yeah, I'll take the beginning and then

[1:39:01] Drew, you can clean up all the mistakes

[1:39:02] I'm about to make if you'd like. Um you

[1:39:05] bring up a great point about the bridges

[1:39:06] and that's we're looking at two of them

[1:39:08] maybe around 6.9 million um for those

[1:39:11] types of repairs but again if you

[1:39:13] remember we kind of identified one of

[1:39:15] them uh actually in both cases as a

[1:39:17] public safety emergency as well. Uh so

[1:39:20] these are kind of those oneoff things

[1:39:22] that we would look at as an emergency

[1:39:24] thing that we want to fix because of the

[1:39:26] public safety issue. Not so much of a

[1:39:28] something we want to get done from

[1:39:30] infrastructure. And the $3 million is

[1:39:32] pretty much the average amount if you if

[1:39:35] you look at what an infrastructure

[1:39:36] project cost. It's about $3 million if

[1:39:39] you go historically looking over it. So

[1:39:41] it provides for one infrastructure

[1:39:44] capital improvement project that kind of

[1:39:45] was unplanned for. These are the ones

[1:39:48] that specifically the bridge I I would

[1:39:50] call these more of a public safety type

[1:39:53] emergency. And really this comes about

[1:39:54] to I mean over the last five years uh

[1:39:57] we've had a draw of about 11.6 6 million

[1:40:01] um from reserves for capital improvement

[1:40:03] projects that we've been working with.

[1:40:05] So it it kind of adds a way of sort of

[1:40:09] saying this is the amount that we have

[1:40:11] there. But as Drew pointed out earlier,

[1:40:14] all this does is give us a guideline for

[1:40:16] how to use it and where we need to maybe

[1:40:18] replace some money, where we might need

[1:40:20] to make those decisions of saying maybe

[1:40:22] we don't do this particular project this

[1:40:24] year until the fund is back up to where

[1:40:26] we want it. But it in no way restricts

[1:40:29] the council for using all of this money

[1:40:31] is available to the council at any time

[1:40:33] at the council's discretion. It's just

[1:40:35] more of a budgeting tool I think for us.

[1:40:37] And Drew, if you want to add anything

[1:40:39] >> briefly add I think you covered it very

[1:40:41] well. Um when we were having the

[1:40:43] discussion about what to where to set

[1:40:45] that infrastructure reserve as as the

[1:40:47] city manager mentioned, we sort of

[1:40:49] landed on $3 million because that kind

[1:40:51] of around the historical average. And I

[1:40:54] think the scenario that that was brought

[1:40:56] up is is a great reason as to why to to

[1:41:00] have these reserves in the bucket, but really, you know, articulating that

[1:41:05] they are flexible. If you were to get

[1:41:08] into a situation where you did have the

[1:41:10] two bridges and there's and and they

[1:41:12] were unplanned and you had a $7 million

[1:41:16] issue that you needed to address between

[1:41:17] the two bridges and you're looking at

[1:41:19] the reserve and you're saying, "Okay,

[1:41:20] well, we have $3 million that we've set

[1:41:22] aside for this purpose. Do we want to

[1:41:24] use do we want to go into the other

[1:41:27] reserves to do this?" Okay, if we do

[1:41:30] that, this is this is the trade-off we

[1:41:33] have to make, which means we're not

[1:41:34] ready. we're not as as resilient for an

[1:41:37] economic shock, right? But but sometimes

[1:41:39] timing is never good. But it it it

[1:41:42] forces that discussion and that

[1:41:44] thoughtful decision about do we want to

[1:41:46] do this now? Do we need to do this now?

[1:41:48] Or do we want to start, you know, do one

[1:41:52] of the projects now and hold off on one

[1:41:53] of them until we're able to replenish

[1:41:55] the funds. But the real purpose is is to

[1:41:57] be able to have that conversation early

[1:42:00] when it comes up versus, you know, not,

[1:42:03] you know, having them sort of just in in

[1:42:05] one large bucket and saying, "Yes, we

[1:42:06] have the money, but then not having the

[1:42:08] trade-off conversation."

[1:42:12] » I I think that's a really good point

[1:42:14] that it we need to look at the tradeoffs

[1:42:18] and and that's so that I I appreciate.

[1:42:23] >> Thank you. Um, any additional question

[1:42:24] from from the council? All right. I have

[1:42:27] a couple of followup and I agree with

[1:42:29] the comments by um, council member

[1:42:32] Adams. I I do think it does help to have

[1:42:35] this bucket because it does um

[1:42:39] it sort of diminishes this sense that

[1:42:41] oh, we have all this money saved, we can

[1:42:43] do whatever we want. It it it forces us

[1:42:46] to pay attention how where the monies

[1:42:48] are being spent. Um, but one of the

[1:42:51] things I'm picking up here is you

[1:42:52] pointed out it's less savings overall

[1:42:56] whether it's in different buckets or

[1:42:58] not. It's it's still 19.7. I just want

[1:43:01] to clarify that versus

[1:43:04] 25. I mean, in other words, why reduce

[1:43:08] the target that we've been working

[1:43:10] towards? What is the logic behind that?

[1:43:14] the target remained

[1:43:19] at at 19 because that was the 50%. It's

[1:43:22] just last year you closed with more than the 50% amount. So you had a 5.4

[1:43:28] for in addition. But because of the

[1:43:31] spending this year and and what the

[1:43:33] budget is next year with with your again

[1:43:35] your reserve your automatic reserve

[1:43:37] calculation automatically increasing

[1:43:39] because of of operating expenditures

[1:43:41] being higher. The the target is actually

[1:43:45] at the targets at 19.4 4 million based

[1:43:50] on your existing policy

[1:43:53] >> of 30% or

[1:43:55] >> 50%.

[1:43:58] » The the other piece of it is that this

[1:44:01] is the fund balance for the reserve

[1:44:04] piece of it. Then you add on to this the

[1:44:07] restricted

[1:44:08] $6 million for the um for the uh engine

[1:44:14] 115 trust. So this is the nonrestricted

[1:44:18] portion of the reserve.

[1:44:22] >> Okay. So the 25 includes the restricted

[1:44:24] as well. Is that

[1:44:28] >> Well,

[1:44:30] we want to make sure we're talking about

[1:44:31] the same 25.

[1:44:32] >> Yes.

[1:44:39] » Okay. So there's Yeah,

[1:44:41] >> there's two different 25s.

[1:44:43] >> Okay. So last year we closed from a

[1:44:48] financial statement perspective we

[1:44:50] closed at 33.7 million in reserves in

[1:44:56] total

[1:45:00] » of which 5.7 was the pension trust.

[1:45:06] >> So that would get you to a 20

[1:45:11] 25.3. Okay. So that's the 25.3 if you

[1:45:14] also take out the assigned.

[1:45:17] The issue is that this year we're

[1:45:19] forecasting that we're going to be

[1:45:22] drawing on reserves by a significant

[1:45:24] amount because of those two projects

[1:45:26] like six million or more. And so if you

[1:45:30] were to roll that 33.7 forward, that's

[1:45:33] going to be a much smaller number. And

[1:45:36] that's what gets us to the ending

[1:45:38] projected reserve of 25.6

[1:45:43] for the budget of which 6 million is the

[1:45:47] pension trust and the other 19.7 is the

[1:45:49] remaining amount that goes toward

[1:45:53] um the policy.

[1:45:57] Um, so if you were to take the 19.7 and

[1:46:01] 25 and 15, I'm just curious about these

[1:46:03] numbers in terms of actual dollars. I I

[1:46:06] agree. Um, infrastructure this year

[1:46:08] alone for the two bridges is 6 million.

[1:46:13] I was just worried that the undesated

[1:46:16] fund balance that could be determined by

[1:46:18] any future city council how it's to be

[1:46:21] spent. What percent eventually ends up

[1:46:24] in that undesated fund balance or at

[1:46:28] least

[1:46:29] if they what do they really have

[1:46:32] discretion over in terms of not keeping

[1:46:34] it in a in a bucket?

[1:46:37] So you'll you the council would still

[1:46:39] have discretion over all of the funds

[1:46:42] that are not that are not in the pension

[1:46:45] trust and not otherwise assigned. So

[1:46:49] based on where you're expecting to

[1:46:52] finish 2627

[1:46:55] that's $19.7 million.

[1:46:58] under the proposed policy, you would

[1:47:00] reserve that into three different

[1:47:02] buckets and there would be $300,000

[1:47:05] undesated at the time, right? So, you'd

[1:47:08] still have your but you'd have your

[1:47:09] reserve buckets and the intent of how

[1:47:11] they would be used, but ultimately

[1:47:13] council could use those funds however

[1:47:15] you saw fit. So, you you effectively you

[1:47:17] have $19.7 million.

[1:47:19] >> Okay. Um,

[1:47:23] is this

[1:47:25] I'm you know, I'm just curious. Do you

[1:47:27] think um Jan this could discourage um

[1:47:32] the talk? I mean, if you just look at

[1:47:33] those buckets, you've hit it. Do you

[1:47:35] think it could potentially discourage

[1:47:38] putting more funds into the undesated

[1:47:42] let's say we we having an amazing

[1:47:43] economy and you know, we have huge um

[1:47:47] reserve.

[1:47:49] Do you think just from just general

[1:47:52] practicing would would people continue

[1:47:55] to fund it to this 50% goal

[1:48:00] would the fact that a certain bucket has

[1:48:02] been filled discourage ongoing funding?

[1:48:10] » So looking more at the at the left uh

[1:48:13] side you can see that we're not

[1:48:16] completely hitting the 50% goal right

[1:48:18] now. Right.

[1:48:19] >> So, it's a great question. The question

[1:48:21] is, will we have an operating deficit

[1:48:23] next year and then the next year? Right.

[1:48:25] So, and right now, we believe we will if

[1:48:30] we're if we continue with our operations

[1:48:33] and the capital spending that we are

[1:48:35] currently at. And so, it's going to um

[1:48:40] be much tighter over time to have an

[1:48:43] undesated fund balance. That is that's

[1:48:46] the bottom line. Yes. And you don't

[1:48:49] think it would cause delay to come, you

[1:48:50] will have to come to council each time

[1:48:52] you want to move funds from one bucket

[1:48:54] to the next, right? Would that cause

[1:48:57] delays in from an operational

[1:48:59] standpoint? Uh, city manager and or or

[1:49:02] not really. You don't

[1:49:04] >> So I think think back to uh what Drew

[1:49:07] was saying about having the foresight on

[1:49:10] the budget and looking at ahead at the

[1:49:12] expenditures and then lining that up

[1:49:15] with revenue. So that's one opportunity

[1:49:16] to do that each year when we set the

[1:49:19] budget process. Um and then if things

[1:49:21] come up throughout the year, that's

[1:49:24] where this prioritization

[1:49:26] u may come into play if there's

[1:49:29] unbudgeted items.

[1:49:31] >> And I would add to that that regardless

[1:49:33] if it's an unanticipated item and that's

[1:49:35] over my signing authority, it's going to

[1:49:37] have to come back to council um anyway.

[1:49:40] And with our

[1:49:42] amazing department heads that we have

[1:49:44] here, I'm I'm never worried about them

[1:49:46] not having enough projects that they

[1:49:48] want to get done. So, I think that this,

[1:49:50] you know, it's not going to I won't see

[1:49:53] a discouragement for different pro, you

[1:49:56] know,

[1:49:58] items that they want to accomplish

[1:49:59] within their departments um coming

[1:50:02] forward um with with regard to this

[1:50:05] budget. the idea will just be like you

[1:50:07] know prioritizing and bringing it to the

[1:50:09] council as to exactly what we want to

[1:50:11] do. Uh but all our department heads are

[1:50:14] they have if you were to give them an

[1:50:15] unlimited they have a very long list of

[1:50:17] things they would like to get

[1:50:18] accomplished. So I'm not worried about

[1:50:20] them discouraging them from using their

[1:50:22] creativity to come forward with projects

[1:50:25] >> uh through the mayor.

[1:50:26] >> Yes, council member Chuang. Uh the way I

[1:50:29] understand this is that uh at the end of

[1:50:31] the day the council has the ultimate

[1:50:34] decision in terms of you bring the staff

[1:50:37] bring forward to uh the council

[1:50:40] regarding projects or whatnot or the

[1:50:41] deficits but this allows us some

[1:50:44] structures for us to review and to be

[1:50:47] able to spend accordingly. I think

[1:50:48] that's how I understand it. And really

[1:50:51] it's it's more um

[1:50:55] structure. It it has a much more indepth

[1:50:58] in terms of the contingency of the

[1:51:00] project and your the 19.7 is really the

[1:51:04] projections of how you see going down

[1:51:07] the line for this year that you

[1:51:10] anticipate that there is going to be

[1:51:12] 19.7 mill into the reserve and this is

[1:51:16] how you divid it up to be if there is a

[1:51:19] situation such as the BRF did not come

[1:51:22] through that the council then would have

[1:51:25] the opportunity need to evaluate this

[1:51:26] and look at the the each of the bucket,

[1:51:29] right? Is that is that how we look at

[1:51:31] it?

[1:51:31] >> Yeah, I I think that's exactly how you

[1:51:33] look at it. Right. Like this is the

[1:51:36] snapshot of under this policy what your

[1:51:39] reserve would look like going into the

[1:51:41] next fiscal year. And so you're looking

[1:51:43] at a situation where you've got all of

[1:51:46] your policy reserves funded. You've got

[1:51:48] $300,000 of undesated fund balance. So

[1:51:51] you're in a good situation. you're not, you know, you're not looking

[1:51:54] at having all of your policy reserves

[1:51:56] funded and then an extra $10 million.

[1:51:58] You've got you're you're you're tight to

[1:52:00] your policy and then practically

[1:52:02] speaking as you move forward. As the

[1:52:04] city manager mentioned, what would

[1:52:06] happen over the course of the year is

[1:52:08] number one, you're going to be

[1:52:09] evaluating your revenues and and making

[1:52:11] sure that you know the economy is going

[1:52:14] as you think it is. Nothing is is

[1:52:17] changing materially based on what you

[1:52:18] thought on the revenue side. And then if

[1:52:20] you have that uh you have that situation

[1:52:23] with an un major unanticipated

[1:52:25] expenditure,

[1:52:26] it would likely be, you know, if it's if

[1:52:28] it's a major unanticipated expenditure,

[1:52:30] it' be over the the city manager

[1:52:32] spending authority. So they're going to

[1:52:33] come back with that item anyways. And

[1:52:36] that's your opportunity to to relook at

[1:52:38] this in a in a larger context and make

[1:52:40] decisions about hey if we if we have to

[1:52:43] spend we we had this million dollar

[1:52:45] surprise we could fund it out of the

[1:52:48] infrastructure reserve and everything

[1:52:50] else is is remains funded or whatever it

[1:52:53] may be. So it's that it's that

[1:52:54] checkpoint on on the plan to see is you

[1:52:58] know do we have the capacity that we

[1:53:00] thought we had to to fund this

[1:53:02] unanticipated need.

[1:53:03] >> Yeah. through the mayor. I I I thought

[1:53:05] this lends further clarity in terms of

[1:53:09] what the council has the options for and and you know with mayor's comments

[1:53:14] regarding if we have a good year this

[1:53:17] projection of 19.7 is going to go larger

[1:53:19] and you know the percentage of the

[1:53:21] contributions for each of the category

[1:53:24] will be increased. So, you know, um, so, I I do think that it lends clarity

[1:53:30] to, uh, provide council the opportunity

[1:53:34] to look at it and and see the bucket and

[1:53:36] to see how they can, you know, um, put

[1:53:38] in more in one of the contingency

[1:53:41] funding or to evaluate and says, you

[1:53:45] know, the bridges are important and the

[1:53:47] infrastructures now we can utilize more

[1:53:50] funding for that. Is that right?

[1:53:53] >> Thank you. Thank you, Drew. Yes, Council

[1:53:55] Member Krill. I

[1:53:56] >> I know we're trying to get to um close

[1:53:58] session, but I just want to say I agree.

[1:54:00] I think this provides flexibility with

[1:54:02] structure and clarity, and I just wanted

[1:54:04] to note that the uh financial advisory

[1:54:06] committee did look this over and

[1:54:08] recommends the structure.

[1:54:11] Um I was at that meeting as well and the

[1:54:14] questions we've gone over were some of

[1:54:16] the questions the finance committee

[1:54:18] brought up regarding flexibility and

[1:54:20] making sure that this is set up in a

[1:54:22] manner that doesn't restrict or

[1:54:24] constrain not only the city council but

[1:54:26] the staff in terms of getting things

[1:54:28] done and it sounds like you've addressed

[1:54:31] that. Yeah, it's large it's largely a a

[1:54:34] behind-the-scenes blueprint for us to

[1:54:35] work with internally and it also helps

[1:54:37] us bring up the conversation when we

[1:54:39] come to council if we're going to look

[1:54:40] at spending some of these. We also want

[1:54:42] to forecast in the future, you know, is

[1:54:44] there a project we may need to delay.

[1:54:46] So, we're not just asking to spend a

[1:54:48] reserve. We're also saying the

[1:54:49] consequence of spending this now may be

[1:54:51] that a certain project is delayed for a

[1:54:54] period of time. So, you kind of get both

[1:54:56] sides of the equation.

[1:54:58] >> Okay. Thank you. Do we have any public

[1:55:00] comment on this issue before we move on?

[1:55:03] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. No public

[1:55:04] comment.

[1:55:05] >> Okay, with that said, um no additional

[1:55:08] comments from the council. Um I thank

[1:55:12] you all three of you very much for this

[1:55:15] um very detailed um presentation and

[1:55:18] discussion. We will now adjourn to close

[1:55:20] session.

[1:55:25] No, it's just a directive

[1:55:28] >> when we come back.

[1:55:30] >> No. Uh

[1:55:32] >> yeah.

[1:55:34] >> Uh

[1:55:34] >> yeah. Mayor Cold, do you want to go

[1:55:36] ahead and call the close session to

[1:55:38] order and we'll just

[1:55:40] >> Thank you.

[1:55:41] >> Um we'll now call the close session um

[1:55:44] meeting. Uh it's well, we're running

[1:55:47] late. It's 5:00 p.m. supposed to be

[1:55:49] 4:45. Okay. And the Hillsboro City

[1:55:52] Council uh meeting is called to order.

[1:55:54] And may we please have the roll call.

[1:55:55] >> Thank you. Adams

[1:55:56] >> present.

[1:55:57] >> Schwang present.

[1:55:58] >> Crow present.

[1:55:59] >> Ragdale present. Cole

[1:56:01] >> present.

[1:56:02] >> Um do any of my coun do any of the

[1:56:04] council members have a conflict of

[1:56:05] interest they need to disclose for the

[1:56:07] close session items?

[1:56:12] Okay. Let me briefly read the close

[1:56:13] session items. Public public employee

[1:56:15] performance evaluation. Item B,

[1:56:18] conference with labor labor negotiators.

[1:56:22] And um do we have any public comments on

[1:56:24] the close session items?

[1:56:25] >> No public comment. Thank you.

[1:56:27] >> Okay. In which case we'll now return to

[1:56:28] close session.

[1:56:33] » Good evening everyone. The Hillsboro

[1:56:36] City Council meeting is now called to

[1:56:37] order. It's May 11th. Um the time is

[1:56:40] 6:01 p.m. Um city clerk, may we please

[1:56:44] have the roll call.

[1:56:45] >> Thank you. Mayor Cole Adams

[1:56:47] >> present.

[1:56:49] Kwick

[1:56:50] >> present. Bragstone present. Cole

[1:56:53] >> present.

[1:56:53] >> Thank you.

[1:56:54] >> Okay. Could you please stand for the

[1:56:56] pledge of allegiance?

[1:57:10] Liberty, justice.

[1:57:13] Thank you.

[1:57:16] >> Welcome everyone. It's wonderful to have

[1:57:18] all this distinguished uh guests in the

[1:57:20] chambers this evening. Um

[1:57:24] the U city, let me um ask our city

[1:57:26] attorney Diaz, do we have any report

[1:57:28] from close session?

[1:57:30] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Just wanted to

[1:57:31] announce for the public that the council

[1:57:32] did convene in close session earlier

[1:57:34] today uh to consider a few items as

[1:57:36] listed on the agenda and there was no

[1:57:38] reportable action under the Brown Act.

[1:57:39] Thank you.

[1:57:40] >> Thank you. Um

[1:57:43] like as I stated, we we're very um happy

[1:57:46] to see you all in chambers this evening.

[1:57:48] Um we are going to our first recognition

[1:57:51] is the Hillsboro I voted sticker contest

[1:57:54] winner. Before I

[1:57:57] move on to talk about our um recipient,

[1:58:01] um we have something in medicine and

[1:58:04] health and science um called double

[1:58:07] blind study, which means the patients

[1:58:09] know the researchers know what drug

[1:58:11] you're trying to test. They do sort of

[1:58:13] this very it's a way of removing bias.

[1:58:17] So they look at the outcome, the results

[1:58:19] just based on what's in front of them.

[1:58:21] The patient is not biased in terms of

[1:58:23] their symptoms. the the researchers are

[1:58:25] not biased in terms of how they conduct

[1:58:26] the study. And when I think of this

[1:58:28] award that came to mind when I was

[1:58:31] reading just sort of how we went about

[1:58:33] getting this winner tonight um and

[1:58:35] you'll see what I mean shortly. The city

[1:58:37] clerk collaborated with the city of

[1:58:39] Berling game city clerk's office on the

[1:58:41] town's first I voted sticker design

[1:58:44] contest for youth under the age of 18

[1:58:46] for the June 2026 primary election. And

[1:58:50] we want to thank all of the young

[1:58:51] artists who participated. The city clerk

[1:58:54] received fantastic submissions. And

[1:58:57] while every design brought something

[1:58:59] unique to the table, one design stood

[1:59:01] out and was selected to be printed and

[1:59:04] distributed at the town hall polling

[1:59:06] location this year. Our winner happens

[1:59:09] to be a talented Hillsboro student

[1:59:12] artist who had her artwork included on

[1:59:16] the cover of the 2026 Hip Housing

[1:59:19] calendar and she was the first place

[1:59:23] winner of the 2025 Rethink Waste poster

[1:59:26] contest in the elementary school

[1:59:28] category.

[1:59:30] and um again talk about the coincidence

[1:59:34] of picking the right winner each time. I

[1:59:38] would like to invite Hillsboro I voted

[1:59:40] sticker contest um winner Meline and her

[1:59:44] family to the podium and um it's really

[1:59:48] amazing that Meline has won all these

[1:59:50] awards. There's no nothing is fixed

[1:59:52] here. This is authentic winner here. I'm

[1:59:55] very proud of her. Um, Meline, would you

[1:59:58] like to would you and your family like

[1:59:59] to um make some comments.

[2:00:12] » Welcome. We're so proud of you.

[2:00:15] >> Thank you.

[2:00:19] I drew a bald eagle because it's our

[2:00:23] national animal and the bald eagle is

[2:00:28] standing on a branch. So I decided to

[2:00:32] include the three branches of the

[2:00:34] government.

[2:00:36] >> It is quite impressive. It's so

[2:00:38] thoughtful and so like did did you read

[2:00:40] a story or book? What inspired you to

[2:00:43] use this image? because it's

[2:00:45] >> my teacher taught me the three branches

[2:00:47] of the government.

[2:00:48] >> Ah,

[2:00:50] good for you. You getting some great

[2:00:52] civic lessons and I would like to invite

[2:00:53] any of my colleagues who may want to

[2:00:55] make a comment. Oh, I'm I'm part of the

[2:00:58] Meline fan club and I have been

[2:01:01] privileged to be with her at two awards

[2:01:04] ceremonies, but I also coincidentally

[2:01:08] already am wearing my I voted uh sticker

[2:01:12] from our election. This is so important

[2:01:16] and I think you did just a fabulous job.

[2:01:19] It has wonderful symmetry, lots of

[2:01:21] color, and a message to tell that it's

[2:01:24] as smart as a bald eagle to vote. So,

[2:01:28] the branches of government, super. Thank

[2:01:31] you, Matteline, once again.

[2:01:33] >> Yes.

[2:01:38] Any additional comments? Yes. Um, Vice

[2:01:40] Mayor Rexdale,

[2:01:41] >> I just want to say I get it now that you

[2:01:44] said that the branches of government and

[2:01:47] they're in the See, it takes me takes me

[2:01:49] a while. Um, and there are a lot of

[2:01:53] adults that are not familiar with the

[2:01:55] separation of powers and the three

[2:01:57] branches of government and this reminder

[2:02:00] is uh very important. Um, and thank you

[2:02:02] very much for sharing your talents with

[2:02:04] us.

[2:02:05] >> Yes. So the certificate of recognition,

[2:02:07] the city council of the town of

[2:02:09] Hillsboro extends congratulatory

[2:02:11] recognition of Meline Woo for being

[2:02:14] selected as the town of Hillsboro winner

[2:02:16] of the 2026 Town of Hillsboro and City

[2:02:20] of Berlin game I voted sticker design.

[2:02:23] You are to be admired and commended for

[2:02:26] your efforts. I'll give this to you.

[2:03:06] Meline just to say that we'll be voting

[2:03:09] and we will be wearing your sticker. So

[2:03:12] that's pretty cool.

[2:03:14] >> Well done. Well done. Thank you. And the

[2:03:17] next next item on the agenda is um

[2:03:19] mental health um month recognition.

[2:03:23] And I believe we have um Eric Valadarees

[2:03:27] with us. Um is he available? Is he here

[2:03:30] with us? There he is. It was great to

[2:03:33] see you a few weeks ago and I remembered

[2:03:35] everything you said. I thought, "Ah,

[2:03:37] perfect. He's here. Great."

[2:03:40] um he's the executive director at family

[2:03:42] connections to the po and um I just was

[2:03:46] so impressed by the comments you made a

[2:03:48] few weeks at that event. I just thought

[2:03:50] this is exactly who we need here in

[2:03:52] chambers for mental health um

[2:03:55] proclamation.

[2:03:57] So we are going to read the proclamation

[2:03:59] and then we'll present it to you

[2:04:02] and we'll uh the entire council is going

[2:04:05] to read this and we'll start with

[2:04:06] council member Adams.

[2:04:08] Thank you. Town of Hillsboro

[2:04:10] proclamation mental health month May

[2:04:13] 2026.

[2:04:15] Whereas mental health is essential to

[2:04:18] overall well-being impacting

[2:04:21] individuals, families, and communities

[2:04:24] across the United States. And

[2:04:27] >> whereas every day millions of people

[2:04:29] face stigma related to mental health and

[2:04:31] substance use conditions and may feel

[2:04:34] isolated and alone going years before

[2:04:37] receiving any help and if left untreated

[2:04:40] have life expecties 25 years shorter

[2:04:43] than the general population. And

[2:04:46] >> whereas despite its prevalence, mental

[2:04:48] health remains shrouded in stigma

[2:04:50] preventing many from seeking help. And

[2:04:54] whereas the 2026 mental health month

[2:04:57] theme is mental health is ours

[2:05:00] emphasizing community collective action

[2:05:02] and holistic support. And whereas mental

[2:05:06] health and substance use condition are

[2:05:12] treatable health conditions and

[2:05:14] individuals with mental health and s

[2:05:18] substance use condition can recover and

[2:05:23] le full and meaningful lives. And

[2:05:28] >> whereas May is recognized nationally as

[2:05:32] mental health month, providing an

[2:05:34] opportunity to raise awareness, combat

[2:05:37] stigma, and promote mental health

[2:05:39] resources.

[2:05:41] Now therefore, be it resolved that the

[2:05:44] city council of the town of Hillsboro

[2:05:46] does hereby co proclaim the month of May

[2:05:48] 2026 as mental health month in Hillsboro

[2:05:51] and encourages all residents to educate

[2:05:54] themselves and others about mental

[2:05:56] health conditions, treatment options,

[2:05:58] and available resources. Challenge

[2:06:00] stigma by speaking respectfully and

[2:06:03] inclusively about mental health. Seek

[2:06:05] help if they are struggling with their

[2:06:07] mental health and encourage others to do

[2:06:08] the same. support organizations that

[2:06:11] provide mental health services and

[2:06:13] advocacy and create safe and supportive

[2:06:16] environments for open conversations

[2:06:17] about mental health so that together we

[2:06:20] can create a community that feels

[2:06:21] empowered to prioritize their mental

[2:06:23] well-being and seek help when needed.

[2:06:26] Signed by our mayor, Dr. Sophie Cole,

[2:06:28] May 11th, 2026.

[2:06:30] >> Thank you. We're so honored to present

[2:06:32] you this proclamation.

[2:07:07] And um our next proclamation is um

[2:07:11] Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and

[2:07:13] Pacific Islander Heritage Month. And

[2:07:16] again, I would like to invite the entire

[2:07:18] council to um read this proclamation.

[2:07:21] So, Town of Hillsboro proclamation,

[2:07:24] Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and

[2:07:27] Pacific Islander

[2:07:29] Heritage Month, May 2026.

[2:07:32] Whereas during the month of May, we

[2:07:35] celebrate Asian-American,

[2:07:37] Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islanders

[2:07:41] heritage month and pay tribute to the

[2:07:44] contribution of Asian-American and

[2:07:47] Pacific Islanders who have enriched our

[2:07:51] history and been in an integral part of

[2:07:55] our community. And whereas the month of

[2:07:59] May was selected for ANHPI

[2:08:02] Heritage Month to commemorate the

[2:08:04] immigration of the first Japanese to the

[2:08:06] United States on May 7th, 1843

[2:08:10] and to mark the anniversary of the

[2:08:12] completion of the transcontinental

[2:08:14] railroad on May 10th, 1869 with

[2:08:17] substantial contributions from Chinese

[2:08:19] immigrants. And whereas Asian-Americans,

[2:08:23] Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders

[2:08:26] comprise many ethnicities and languages,

[2:08:29] and their many achievements embody the

[2:08:31] American experience. And

[2:08:34] >> whereas according to the federal

[2:08:36] Asian-Pacific American Council, the

[2:08:38] theme for A&HPI Heritage Month in 2026

[2:08:42] is power in unity, strengthening

[2:08:45] communities together to highlight the

[2:08:48] importance of leveraging collective

[2:08:49] power, telling stories, and being

[2:08:51] bridgebuilders in communities. And

[2:08:54] >> whereas Asian-Americans, Native

[2:08:57] Hawaiian, and Pacific Islanders

[2:09:00] contribute significantly to many facets

[2:09:02] of American culture and society,

[2:09:05] including science and medicine,

[2:09:07] literature and art, sports and

[2:09:10] recreation, government and politics, and

[2:09:13] activism and law.

[2:09:16] Now therefore, be it resolved that the

[2:09:20] city council of the town of Hillsbor

[2:09:23] does hereby proclaim the month of May

[2:09:25] 2026 as Asian-American, Native Hawaiian,

[2:09:30] and Pacific Islander Heritage Month to

[2:09:33] recognize the countless contribution

[2:09:36] that Asian-Americans,

[2:09:38] Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders

[2:09:40] have made to our community. Signed by

[2:09:43] Dr. Sophie Cole, our mayor, May 11th,

[2:09:47] 2026.

[2:09:48] And tonight, I would like to um bring

[2:09:51] forward um Diane Lou and her daughter.

[2:09:55] Uh both are really just avid volunteers

[2:09:58] for our community. Come on up to receive

[2:10:01] this,

[2:10:05] mayor. Yes.

[2:10:11] Sure.

[2:10:23] Oops.

[2:10:48] Thanks again for all the work you do in

[2:10:49] the community. Much appreciated.

[2:10:52] And our next proclamation is uh National

[2:10:55] Public Works Week coming up next week.

[2:10:57] Um May 17th to May 23rd.

[2:11:02] And I would like to invite our public

[2:11:04] works director Paula Willis and deputy

[2:11:06] public works director Natalie Gribbin to

[2:11:08] the podium to receive the proclamation.

[2:11:10] And I will ask um I've asked council

[2:11:12] member um Adams uh public works

[2:11:16] commissioner to read the proclamation.

[2:11:20] >> With pleasure. Thank you. Town of

[2:11:22] Hillsboro proclamation national public

[2:11:24] works week May 17th through the 23rd

[2:11:28] 2026.

[2:11:30] Whereas public works staff members focus

[2:11:33] on infrastructure, facilities and

[2:11:35] services that are of vital importance to

[2:11:39] sustainable and resilient communities

[2:11:42] and to the public health, quality of

[2:11:45] life, and well-being of the Hillsboro

[2:11:47] community.

[2:11:49] And whereas the 2026 theme for public

[2:11:52] works week is rooted in service powered

[2:11:56] by community to acknowledge that the

[2:11:59] roots of service run deep in public

[2:12:02] works.

[2:12:04] Some work such as building roads and

[2:12:07] bridges is highly visible while other

[2:12:10] public works contributions such as

[2:12:14] maintaining water and sewer systems are

[2:12:17] often hidden from view. Together, these

[2:12:20] efforts form the foundation of thriving

[2:12:23] communities, reminding us that every

[2:12:26] project, seen or unseen, powers the

[2:12:30] connection between service and the

[2:12:33] people it supports.

[2:12:35] And whereas the infrastructure,

[2:12:37] facilities and services could not be

[2:12:40] provided without the dedicated efforts

[2:12:42] of the public works team who are

[2:12:45] engineers, managers, maintenance workers

[2:12:48] and employees at all level of government

[2:12:51] and the private sector who are

[2:12:53] responsible for rebuilding, improving

[2:12:56] and protecting our nation's

[2:12:58] transportation, water supply, water

[2:13:01] treatment and solid waste systems,

[2:13:03] public buildings and other structures

[2:13:06] and facilities essential for our

[2:13:08] residents.

[2:13:10] And whereas 2026 marks the 66th

[2:13:14] annual National Public Works Week

[2:13:17] sponsored by the American Public Works

[2:13:19] Association.

[2:13:21] Now therefore, be it resolved that the

[2:13:24] city council of the town of Hillsboro

[2:13:26] hereby proclaims the week of May 17th to

[2:13:29] the 23rd, 2026

[2:13:32] as National Public Works Week and urges

[2:13:35] all residents to join with

[2:13:38] representatives of the American Public

[2:13:39] Works Association and government

[2:13:41] agencies in activities, events, and

[2:13:45] ceremonies designed to pay tribute to

[2:13:48] public works professionals, engineers,

[2:13:50] ers, managers, maintenance workers, and

[2:13:53] employees, and to recognize the

[2:13:56] substantial contributions that they make

[2:13:59] to protecting our health and safety and

[2:14:02] to advancing quality of life for all.

[2:14:06] Signed by Dr. Sophie Cole, mayor, May

[2:14:10] 11th, 2026.

[2:14:12] >> Thank you.

[2:14:14] We we know you guys are awesome but

[2:14:17] and we are just so proud to have the

[2:14:20] team the public works team and um it is

[2:14:24] our honor to present this to you and

[2:14:27] also

[2:14:35] » yeah you're welcome to make a comment.

[2:14:37] >> So just uh thank you for the

[2:14:39] recognition. Um, I'm usually be really

[2:14:41] bad at forgetting important people in

[2:14:43] this. So, I wanted to thank the council

[2:14:44] first, but also it's important to

[2:14:46] recognize that uh APWA is a great

[2:14:49] organization that we're part of uh along

[2:14:52] with all the other municipalities in the

[2:14:54] Silicon Valley as well as peninsula. The

[2:14:57] current president of APWA is no one know

[2:15:00] is actually

[2:15:02] Natalie Gribbons. Okay.

[2:15:04] >> She uh

[2:15:08] she represents all of us very well and

[2:15:11] we're very proud of her. Uh we're

[2:15:13] certainly proud to be a part of the

[2:15:14] team. As we like to say, for us, a job

[2:15:17] well done is one where you don't hear

[2:15:19] about our work because water is always

[2:15:22] moving, sewer is always moving, and we

[2:15:23] have the best streets in the peninsula.

[2:15:25] So, thank you for thinking of us and

[2:15:27] thank you Natalie for for leading us.

[2:15:30] >> Thank you.

[2:15:36] I I just wanted to add um that I noticed

[2:15:41] that it is National Drinking Water Week,

[2:15:45] the week of May 3rd through 9th. It's

[2:15:47] the first full week of May of every

[2:15:50] year. So, um you know, thank you for

[2:15:53] that, which is a a huge public service,

[2:15:55] our our wonderful water. Thank you.

[2:16:02] Yes.

[2:16:19] And you know, in my effort to sort of

[2:16:20] try to go through the agenda as

[2:16:24] efficiently and quickly as I can, I um

[2:16:27] forgot to ask um our first recipient um

[2:16:30] Mr. Eric Valader to make a comment about

[2:16:33] family collections. And if you do,

[2:16:35] you're more than welcome to tell us

[2:16:37] anything you want to share with us. And

[2:16:39] again, thank you for all the work you do

[2:16:41] with family connections and all the work

[2:16:42] you do in the community.

[2:16:46] » Thank you, Mayor Cole. Um, I'd like to

[2:16:48] thank you and the members of the

[2:16:49] Hillsboro City Council for recognizing

[2:16:52] mental health awareness month and for

[2:16:54] your continued commitment to the

[2:16:55] well-being of children and families in

[2:16:57] our community. We are very grateful for

[2:16:59] the opportunity to stand alongside a

[2:17:01] city that values prevention, compassion,

[2:17:04] and early support for mental health. Um,

[2:17:06] as they mentioned, my name is Eric

[2:17:08] Badaris, and I have the privilege of

[2:17:10] serving as the executive director of

[2:17:12] family connections where we provide free

[2:17:14] early childhood classes, parent

[2:17:17] education, and workshops, and mental

[2:17:19] health services for families with

[2:17:20] children birth through five and

[2:17:22] underresourced communities. Our vision

[2:17:24] is that thriving children happen through

[2:17:27] thriving families. During my time at

[2:17:29] Family Connections, especially recently,

[2:17:32] I've seen the need for this work

[2:17:33] continue to grow. In California, 70% of

[2:17:37] children from birth to five with

[2:17:39] identified early intervention needs

[2:17:41] receive no services, a gap reflected in

[2:17:44] rising preschool expulsions. In fact,

[2:17:47] 250 children uh preschoolers are

[2:17:50] expelled every day in this country.

[2:17:52] These disparities fall hardest on our

[2:17:54] black and brown boys. At the same time,

[2:17:58] more children and adolesccents are being

[2:18:00] seen in emergency rooms for mental

[2:18:02] health services, including anxiety,

[2:18:04] depression, and suicidal ideiation.

[2:18:07] These trends remind us that mental

[2:18:09] health challenges begin early and that

[2:18:11] families need support before situations

[2:18:13] reach a crisis point. That is why our

[2:18:16] work focuses on prevention, early

[2:18:18] intervention, and holistic support. By

[2:18:21] supporting parents, educators, and

[2:18:23] children early in life, we help build

[2:18:25] resilience, reduce stigma, and connect

[2:18:28] families to care before challenges

[2:18:30] escalate. When communities invest in

[2:18:32] mental health early, children are more

[2:18:35] likely to succeed in school, build

[2:18:37] healthy relationships, and grow into

[2:18:39] thriving adults. I want to thank you

[2:18:41] again for this proclamation and for

[2:18:43] standing with families and children

[2:18:44] throughout our community. Mental health

[2:18:46] is not something any any organization

[2:18:49] can address alone and it takes

[2:18:50] partnerships, compassion, and a

[2:18:53] community willing to show up for one

[2:18:54] another. Your support sends a very

[2:18:56] powerful message that every child and

[2:18:58] every family matters. Thank you.

[2:19:01] >> Thank you.

[2:19:06] so much for sharing that with

[2:19:08] us. It puts everything into perspective

[2:19:10] and as you pointed out um mental illness

[2:19:14] is another disease and like all diseases

[2:19:17] the sooner you start treating it the

[2:19:19] better your chances of um surviving.

[2:19:23] Right. So thanks for everything you're

[2:19:25] doing in the community. Much

[2:19:26] appreciated.

[2:19:28] All right. The next item um on our

[2:19:30] agenda is actually a presentation from

[2:19:33] our own chief of police Melissa Ka and

[2:19:36] Corporal Christopher Ray um who will be

[2:19:39] presenting automated license plate

[2:19:41] reader update.

[2:19:43] >> Good evening and madame mayor, honorable

[2:19:46] council members, town staff and

[2:19:48] residents. Thank you for this

[2:19:50] opportunity for us to provide an update

[2:19:53] on our Flock automated license plate

[2:19:55] readers.

[2:19:57] Flock is an essential tool that we use

[2:19:59] as police officers and it's a tool we

[2:20:02] use every day to keep the community safe

[2:20:04] and to solve crimes.

[2:20:07] I'd like to share a few success stories

[2:20:10] for you on our use of flock.

[2:20:16] On December 1st, 2025, we were notified

[2:20:20] by the district office that there were a

[2:20:22] burglary that had occurred in the locked

[2:20:25] yard of their district office. Two

[2:20:29] vehicles were stolen during that

[2:20:32] burglary. We were quickly able to add

[2:20:35] the license plates into the flock system

[2:20:37] and notice that the first uh captured

[2:20:43] video was right at Stone Hedge and

[2:20:45] Baywood. We were then able to follow the

[2:20:48] flock captures through San Monteo to El

[2:20:53] Camino and 92 and then up to 9 101 in

[2:20:57] Melbour. Ultimately, the vehicle was

[2:21:00] recovered in San Francisco.

[2:21:06] On May 5th, 2025, two vehicles were

[2:21:09] stolen from uh the 2100 block of

[2:21:12] Carmelita.

[2:21:16] Using their license plate numbers, we

[2:21:17] were able to track the the vehicles in a

[2:21:21] nearby city. investigations conducted a

[2:21:24] search warrant for the phone carriers

[2:21:27] based on the location where the vehicles

[2:21:29] were stolen and the location of where

[2:21:31] the stolen vehicle was captured on flock

[2:21:34] cameras. After reviewing the phone

[2:21:36] carrier records, investigations were

[2:21:38] able to identify a juvenile subject.

[2:21:46] On 629, a residential burglary occurred

[2:21:49] on the 2100 block of Forest View in in

[2:21:52] Hillsboro. The suspect spray painted

[2:21:55] swastikas on the dirt and on a statue of

[2:21:59] a woman. Video surveillance was able to

[2:22:03] identify the suspect and led our

[2:22:07] investigations to figure out the type of

[2:22:11] vehicle that was used. And we were able

[2:22:14] to locate the vehicle and arrest the

[2:22:16] subject.

[2:22:26] This one here's a typo. It was 71 and

[2:22:29] 25. a residential burglary occurred in

[2:22:32] Hillsboro.

[2:22:33] >> Uh alarm was activated around 2:00 in

[2:22:36] the morning. Neighbors had heard uh the

[2:22:40] activation called the police. We went

[2:22:42] out. Uh they also heard a vehicle

[2:22:45] leaving. Their video surveillance was

[2:22:47] able to capture the vehicle. We got the

[2:22:50] license plate and we um have an arrest

[2:22:54] warrant currently for that suspect.

[2:22:59] And finally, uh the last one I'll share

[2:23:01] with you is on the 17th of 2025 in

[2:23:04] December, uh we were responded to the

[2:23:07] Berling game Country Club on two

[2:23:09] vehicles that were ransacked

[2:23:12] early in earlier in that day. Uh while

[2:23:15] later, we got a phone call from another

[2:23:17] victim who was also a victim of a

[2:23:20] burglary around the same time. that

[2:23:23] victim had a video surveillance of the

[2:23:26] subject and we were able to tie the two

[2:23:28] crimes together and there is now a

[2:23:32] arrest warrant for that suspect. Now

[2:23:34] these are just a few of the cases that I

[2:23:37] wanted to highlight for you today. There

[2:23:39] have been many many many success for

[2:23:42] stories that I could share with you but

[2:23:44] these are just a few.

[2:23:47] I wanted to show you the burglary trends

[2:23:50] uh for the past 10 years and let's

[2:23:52] highlight 2021. It's when we started the

[2:23:56] uh training and evaluation of our flock

[2:23:59] cameras and since then uh residential

[2:24:02] burglaries have significantly declined.

[2:24:04] In 2023 is when we obtained more flock

[2:24:08] cameras and placed them around ingress

[2:24:11] and egress of the town. The blue the

[2:24:14] blue lines mark the residential

[2:24:16] burglaries and the yellow line

[2:24:18] represents the commercial and

[2:24:21] construction site burglaries.

[2:24:26] I'm going to pass the mic over to uh

[2:24:28] Corporal Christopher Ray. He is our

[2:24:31] flock specialist and he is going to

[2:24:34] explain to you how flock works.

[2:24:40] » Good evening. Corporal Ray, been the

[2:24:42] administrator for the Flock cameras for

[2:24:44] approximately five years from the

[2:24:46] initial install. Um, what I'm going to

[2:24:48] go over today is some claims that people

[2:24:50] have against Flock and I'm going to give

[2:24:52] the facts behind it. I'm going to go

[2:24:54] over how it actually operates and how we

[2:24:56] conduct searches and then I'll go over

[2:24:57] some policy and some other procedural

[2:25:00] stuff that we have uh with statistics.

[2:25:03] A big claim we get is that LPRs track

[2:25:05] people when in fact they actually just

[2:25:07] take a point in space photograph of the

[2:25:09] vehicle. We don't know where the vehicle

[2:25:11] moves past that image. So, no tracking

[2:25:14] of vehicles.

[2:25:16] License plates are private information.

[2:25:18] They're actually a mandatory item you

[2:25:20] install on your vehicle. It's government

[2:25:22] issued and it has to be publicly

[2:25:24] visible.

[2:25:27] Uh, another one is the constitutional

[2:25:28] rights. People accuse us using this is

[2:25:31] it's a violation of their fourth

[2:25:32] amendment, but LPRs do not violate the

[2:25:34] fourth amendment right or any other

[2:25:36] constitutional provisions.

[2:25:40] All four customer this is a big one

[2:25:42] that's going around is data is shared

[2:25:43] across the c country we choose who we

[2:25:46] share with so if we want to share with

[2:25:47] Berling game we can share with Berling

[2:25:49] game and not share with sato we share

[2:25:51] with no federal agencies we share with

[2:25:53] just local or other PDs or sheriff

[2:25:56] agencies and they share with us at any

[2:25:58] time we can stop sharing with them if

[2:26:00] they violate any of our policies or

[2:26:01] procedures

[2:26:04] data sales lock sells the claim was that

[2:26:07] they sell all the images out possibly to

[2:26:10] federal agencies. This does not exist.

[2:26:12] Hillsboro itself actually owns and

[2:26:14] possesses the images and that we have a

[2:26:16] process of deleting the images.

[2:26:20] Uh private customers doesn't affect us

[2:26:23] much here, but if someone were to own

[2:26:25] that private camera, there's talks that

[2:26:27] they can view footages or get our DMV

[2:26:30] returns. No customer other than official

[2:26:32] law enforcement can view any kind of

[2:26:34] return from the flock program itself.

[2:26:39] regarding the federal agencies including

[2:26:41] ICE having backdoor access. That is not

[2:26:43] a thing. It does not exist. And again,

[2:26:45] we share with no federal agencies or any

[2:26:48] agencies that would share with a federal

[2:26:50] agency. So, we just stay in California

[2:26:52] as the laws are so strict. We're

[2:26:54] protected that way knowing that they're

[2:26:55] not going to be releasing it unless they

[2:26:57] violate laws.

[2:27:00] LPR cameras uh collect personal

[2:27:03] information. That's a claim that has

[2:27:04] happened. That's not facts. They do not

[2:27:06] do anything that claims names,

[2:27:08] addresses, social security numbers or

[2:27:09] DMB records. It is simply

[2:27:11] characteristics of the vehicle or the

[2:27:13] license plate which is issued by the

[2:27:15] government.

[2:27:17] Another claim is flock keeps LPR data

[2:27:20] forever. We are the ones that determine

[2:27:22] when LPR data is done. That is actually

[2:27:24] in our accountability policy and at that

[2:27:27] point it'll be removed. Now, if we do

[2:27:29] take an image off of the server, we have

[2:27:31] to keep it in a controlled environment,

[2:27:32] either through an axon, which is a

[2:27:34] cloud-based storage and secured

[2:27:36] evidence.com, or we put it into a

[2:27:38] report, which then will be an also a

[2:27:40] controlled document.

[2:27:42] I think I have one or two more claims.

[2:27:44] Uh, Flock LPR cameras are used facial

[2:27:46] recognition, no facial recognition. You

[2:27:48] can't track race, sex, any kind of human

[2:27:51] characteristics. It is trained to only

[2:27:53] take photographs of rear uh the rear of

[2:27:56] the vehicle.

[2:27:59] Uh, LPR cameras negatively impact

[2:28:01] communities of color. Actually, the

[2:28:03] Oakland NAACP

[2:28:05] endorsed Flock LPR, noting it reduces

[2:28:07] biases in policing. Cameras detect only

[2:28:10] crime vehicles, removing subjective

[2:28:13] judgment to avoid disproportionate

[2:28:14] stops, harmful interactions with

[2:28:16] residents.

[2:28:18] LPRs do another claim is LPRs don't have

[2:28:21] impact on crime. As you just saw with

[2:28:23] the results we are having, it is a huge

[2:28:26] increase just using San Francisco. A 41%

[2:28:29] decrease in autothefts and a 46%

[2:28:32] increase in autotheft arrests.

[2:28:35] All right. So every our policy makes us

[2:28:38] do a periodic audit which I try to keep

[2:28:42] every 30 days and it covers not only

[2:28:44] in-house searches from Hillsboro

[2:28:46] officers but any agency that has access

[2:28:48] to our cameras. If we do find something

[2:28:51] that is annotated as a issue, we'd be

[2:28:54] contacting the agency that made that

[2:28:56] issue and removing their access

[2:28:57] immediately to find out if what exactly

[2:29:00] happened. Um,

[2:29:04] now I'll go over how we do the searches.

[2:29:06] So, this is considered the basic search.

[2:29:08] This is what every officer can do

[2:29:09] immediately on scene. An example would

[2:29:11] be you just got in a hit and run and the

[2:29:13] vehicle took off. You tell us it was a

[2:29:15] red sedan. This is information. So event

[2:29:18] offense type would be a hit and run the

[2:29:19] case number attached to it. So we can

[2:29:21] refer back if an audit happens and

[2:29:23] there's an error and then the reason

[2:29:25] would be a hit and run vehicle if we

[2:29:27] have a license plate. But if we don't

[2:29:28] that's where we can go into the

[2:29:30] fingerprint the vehicle fingerprint

[2:29:31] technology. The vehicle make the model

[2:29:34] the color damage even and we do a search

[2:29:37] that way starting close with our cameras

[2:29:39] and expanding wider if we need to if

[2:29:41] they possibly went to Alamita to get on

[2:29:43] 92. And then we can choose up to the

[2:29:45] past 30 days to search. uh outside of

[2:29:47] our city.

[2:29:50] Another one we use, it's called, it's an

[2:29:51] advanced search convoy. This is

[2:29:53] ginormous for residential burglaries

[2:29:56] because usually when one car is

[2:29:57] committing it, another one's sitting

[2:29:58] somewhere watching. So when we find a

[2:30:00] suspect vehicle, we can then link that

[2:30:03] plate to other vehicles that were

[2:30:04] traveling past cameras in a 30 to one

[2:30:07] minute time frame. So then it gives us

[2:30:09] the secondary vehicle and puts a

[2:30:11] connection to them. Another one we use

[2:30:13] is a visual search. This is more for say

[2:30:16] you take a photo of that hit and run

[2:30:17] vehicle and leave. We can actually take

[2:30:19] that photo, put it into flock and it'll

[2:30:22] run through it to find that vehicle.

[2:30:24] Works a little bit better if there's

[2:30:25] like an identifying thing like major

[2:30:28] damage or rusting is it'll look through

[2:30:30] all the cameras to find that vehicle

[2:30:31] that match that description. And the

[2:30:34] last one we use is a multio. And this is

[2:30:37] what we use with Athetherton or Berling

[2:30:39] game. Usually when we have a burglary,

[2:30:41] they have a burglary. So I can actually

[2:30:44] choose the location, Hillsboro and the

[2:30:46] time that the crime occurred and then

[2:30:47] Athetherton and the time it occurred and

[2:30:49] Berlingame and the time it occurred and

[2:30:51] we'll search all three cities to find a

[2:30:53] vehicle that was in three those three

[2:30:54] locations at those times. And if we have

[2:30:57] to, we can bring it down just to two,

[2:30:58] Hillsboro and Athetherton.

[2:31:01] Here's the insight. This is a 30-day

[2:31:03] read. 1.6 million vehicles enter

[2:31:05] Hillsboro. We have 330 hot list. Hot

[2:31:08] list can be from stolen vehicles to

[2:31:09] Amber alerts to stolen plates. searches

[2:31:13] just in our agency was almost 600

[2:31:15] searches that we used and you can see

[2:31:16] the peaks out through the times.

[2:31:19] The statistics regarding ours. So we

[2:31:21] have 22 cameras. 21 are actually

[2:31:24] installed. One is a movable one. So if

[2:31:26] an area in town is constantly getting

[2:31:28] crime in that area, we can install it.

[2:31:30] So it just focuses on that street on the

[2:31:32] back of a stop sign. Agencies we share

[2:31:34] with is 436. Agencies sharing with us is

[2:31:38] 428. And again, just in California, uh,

[2:31:41] official hot list over 365 days was

[2:31:44] 1,654.

[2:31:46] Our custom hot list in a year was 33.

[2:31:49] Other agencies using our cameras to get

[2:31:52] alerted of a crime vehicle, 1,516.

[2:31:55] So that means 1,516 vehicles that

[2:31:58] committed crimes in other cities are

[2:32:00] coming into Hillsboro.

[2:32:02] Stolen plates, we had 1,627 vehicles

[2:32:05] enter just our cameras. We had 27 stolen

[2:32:07] vehicles and we had a total hot list of

[2:32:10] 3,23.

[2:32:12] At the bottom you'll see that it

[2:32:13] confirms we revoked all out of state

[2:32:15] sharing.

[2:32:18] This is our policy that we follow by

[2:32:19] that gives us the shells. It must be for

[2:32:21] official reasons. Uh the reasonable

[2:32:24] suspicion of public cause is not

[2:32:25] required. So we can use it

[2:32:26] forformational things. Uh LPR's shall

[2:32:30] only be used for official law

[2:32:31] enforcement purposes. Uh, and all

[2:32:33] members must go through some type of

[2:32:35] training prior to using this

[2:32:37] information. And the last one that we

[2:32:39] like to go over is you should verify an

[2:32:41] LPR hit before enforcing action as it

[2:32:44] could be a misread.

[2:32:46] Accountability. This is where it comes

[2:32:48] to how we delete photos and how we

[2:32:50] secure them. Um, protected both uh

[2:32:53] technologically way. So, we're making

[2:32:56] sure that it's a double authentication.

[2:32:58] So you type in your password, you're

[2:32:59] getting the email or text that then

[2:33:00] reconfirms that you have access to it

[2:33:03] and then the time period that we delete

[2:33:05] the photos.

[2:33:07] These are our websites that we use and

[2:33:09] what you can view is the transparency

[2:33:10] page. It will show you all our

[2:33:12] statistics regarding how many vehicles,

[2:33:14] the hot list, who we share with, who

[2:33:15] shares with us and then also on that

[2:33:17] page you'll have the Hillsboro policy

[2:33:19] that you can refer to if you have any

[2:33:20] questions regarding how we operate.

[2:33:24] >> Thank you. Any questions?

[2:33:26] >> Yeah, thank you. That was great. I had,

[2:33:28] as you were speaking, I was writing out

[2:33:30] questions, but you kept answering them,

[2:33:32] so I kept checking them off.

[2:33:34] >> I like it.

[2:33:35] >> You I really like the um claim versus

[2:33:38] fact next to each other. That was

[2:33:41] extremely helpful. Let me ask my

[2:33:42] colleagues, do any of you have

[2:33:44] questions? Um, Vice Mayor Rexdale,

[2:33:48] >> thank you so much for the presentation.

[2:33:50] And I know this has been in the news a

[2:33:52] lot lately and my understanding is that

[2:33:56] somebody

[2:33:58] not in Hillsboro,

[2:34:00] you know, made a mistake in the access

[2:34:03] when it when um ICE um or other federal

[2:34:06] agencies were able to access um and I'm

[2:34:10] very confident in our policy and its

[2:34:12] execution. Um we very much appreciate

[2:34:15] you bringing this forward. Um, and I I

[2:34:19] have actually pointed some people to

[2:34:21] that transparency page. Um, and I think

[2:34:25] people are very happy with it. Um, is it

[2:34:27] possible to also put this PowerPoint um,

[2:34:31] a link to it on there?

[2:34:34] >> Absolutely. We can do that.

[2:34:35] >> Very comprehensive and much appreciated.

[2:34:37] Thank you.

[2:34:38] >> I think that's a great idea. Yeah. Any

[2:34:40] additional questions? Yes. Uh, Council

[2:34:42] Member Crow,

[2:34:43] >> thank you so much. This was really

[2:34:45] interesting and I think maybe we could

[2:34:47] do something in with the newsletter um

[2:34:50] to get this information out and it's

[2:34:52] really uh that's a dramatic drop in

[2:34:54] burglaries from 2023 till last year and thinking about it I realize that the

[2:35:00] chatter about burglaries isn't nearly as

[2:35:02] much as it was a couple of years ago. So

[2:35:05] I just have a couple questions. Um, are

[2:35:08] the bad guys switching plates and does

[2:35:10] that have an effect on success? And can

[2:35:13] the LPR flag a vehicle with the wrong

[2:35:16] plate? Like does it have that kind of

[2:35:18] technology if a if if a plate goes by

[2:35:21] and it's not registered to that car?

[2:35:24] >> Yeah. Uh, it is known for um criminals

[2:35:29] to switch license plates. Um, but it is

[2:35:32] a good tool to use to get the initial

[2:35:36] investigation started and then you can

[2:35:39] work backwards to find out, you know,

[2:35:43] where the plate originally belonged to.

[2:35:45] And we can work backwards in those

[2:35:47] cases. And I'll let Chris talk about the

[2:35:50] second question

[2:35:52] >> regarding the first one. Well, we for we

[2:35:53] just had a residential burglary a couple

[2:35:55] of days ago. Um, I did a search, found a

[2:35:58] vehicle that had a stolen plate. It was

[2:36:00] a Mercedes wearing a Toyota plate. Uh,

[2:36:02] it was reported on the 9th. The crime

[2:36:04] happened a couple days before, so it

[2:36:05] didn't alert us right away because it

[2:36:07] has to be reported stolen. Now that we

[2:36:09] have photos of the vehicle in town, our

[2:36:11] detectives can write search warrants to

[2:36:13] cell phone dump that exact area at that

[2:36:15] second to find out what phones were in

[2:36:17] that car driving by, which then lead it

[2:36:19] to there. And also, it was stolen out of

[2:36:21] San Jose and it's on a street with block

[2:36:23] readers. So we can actually go back

[2:36:24] through their cameras to see what

[2:36:26] vehicle took them there to get that

[2:36:28] plate prior to breaking in here. So it's

[2:36:30] very effective. Even with stolen plates,

[2:36:32] we're able to find them pretty easily.

[2:36:35] >> Another question.

[2:36:36] >> Thanks. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you, Corporal

[2:36:37] Chris. And then um I just have one. How

[2:36:40] protected is the data? We talked earlier

[2:36:42] in our budget meeting about AI, you

[2:36:44] know, making uh IT vulnerability uh more

[2:36:49] of a reality.

[2:36:50] >> The images are extremely protected. I

[2:36:53] have never heard of someone getting into

[2:36:54] a license plate reader. I've seen the

[2:36:56] live feed cameras be accessed through

[2:36:59] multiple companies, but the actual

[2:37:00] images taken. I have no record of actual

[2:37:04] license plate photos being taken

[2:37:06] anywhere.

[2:37:07] >> Well, thank you. I appreciate it. I know

[2:37:08] that Hillsboro was conservative in their

[2:37:11] roll out of LPR that they really took

[2:37:13] their time, but it looks like it's very

[2:37:15] successful program. I appreciate it. I

[2:37:17] will also add on that note um there is a

[2:37:20] multiffactor verification to log into

[2:37:24] our flock data. So we'll have to enter

[2:37:28] our email to gain access and then they

[2:37:30] send us a code to allow access into the

[2:37:34] system.

[2:37:36] >> Yeah, that that's a good question. I I

[2:37:38] had that question as well in terms of

[2:37:40] knowing who entered the database. Yeah,

[2:37:43] you just answered that question.

[2:37:45] Appreciate it. Any additional question?

[2:37:46] Um, Council Member Chong,

[2:37:48] >> thank you. Um, just a comment. Um, as a

[2:37:51] commissioner to the police departments,

[2:37:53] I work closely with Chief and, um, I

[2:37:56] know Chris is our auditor for the flock

[2:37:59] cameras and I think that in any of the

[2:38:02] news report articles that we have read

[2:38:04] about, it is it it does involve human

[2:38:07] air. And I, you know, so it's really

[2:38:10] comforting to know that Chris is very

[2:38:12] disciplined in terms of the monthly

[2:38:14] audit, in terms of the physical checking

[2:38:16] of the the inspections of the camera and

[2:38:19] also the material uh the in terms of the

[2:38:22] requests. So that um you mentioned

[2:38:24] earlier that if the request is not in

[2:38:28] compliance with our policies, they may

[2:38:30] not have access to it. And if they are

[2:38:33] not in compliance and they behave badly,

[2:38:35] you have the opportunity to take away

[2:38:37] their privilege to do so. Um however the

[2:38:41] um the the sort of the connectivities of

[2:38:44] all these police departments that having

[2:38:46] the support and the image as you

[2:38:48] mentioned about the um what is this uh

[2:38:52] Hillsboro Berling game and the other

[2:38:55] cities is that

[2:38:57] >> yeah that they that you were

[2:39:00] collectively be able to you utilize the

[2:39:02] tool and the in information to track

[2:39:04] down the vehicles and the perpetrators.

[2:39:06] So that in that sense is very effective

[2:39:09] to solve the crimes.

[2:39:11] >> Thank you.

[2:39:12] Um again that was an

[2:39:15] outstanding presentation and I I agree

[2:39:17] if we can um have that on on the sites

[2:39:20] for residents it would be great. We'll

[2:39:21] refer them and they could take a look at

[2:39:23] that especially the slides where you

[2:39:24] going through the claim versus the

[2:39:26] facts. Those are the questions we've

[2:39:28] been having. So extremely helpful,

[2:39:30] extremely useful. Um

[2:39:33] thank you so much. Much appreciated.

[2:39:36] Thanks.

[2:39:48] Probably has

[2:39:50] school homework. She probably has

[2:39:52] homework to do. Um, the next item on our

[2:39:56] agenda is the town updates from our city

[2:39:58] manager, Doug Davis.

[2:40:01] >> Thank you. I want to thank my staff for

[2:40:03] allowing me to have a couple of weeks

[2:40:04] off in this last uh last month. And I'm

[2:40:07] going to turn over the town update to

[2:40:09] our assistant city manager, Mandy Brown,

[2:40:12] who ran the town excellently in my

[2:40:14] absence.

[2:40:15] >> She did.

[2:40:18] » Thank you. And we're so glad you're

[2:40:20] back.

[2:40:22] Uh good evening, mayor, vice mayor, and

[2:40:24] council members, and a happy belated

[2:40:26] Mother's Day and grandmother's day to

[2:40:27] everybody.

[2:40:29] and just have a very brief update this

[2:40:31] month. Um, uh, we talked about this a

[2:40:33] bit during the budget hearing earlier,

[2:40:35] but, uh, as part of the county's effort

[2:40:37] to advocate for the VLF funding in the

[2:40:40] state budget, uh, there was a

[2:40:42] coordinated bus to Sacramento on April

[2:40:44] 21st, and I know Vice Mayor Ragsdale was

[2:40:46] able to attend and speak in support of

[2:40:48] the funding. There was a second bus um

[2:40:51] on May 7th and we had um representatives

[2:40:54] from our legislative consultants at CPPG

[2:40:57] attending on behalf of the town as well

[2:41:00] as many other representatives. So just

[2:41:02] keeping everyone apprised of this effort

[2:41:03] and we'll stay tuned with the proposed

[2:41:05] budget when it comes out and make sure

[2:41:07] we share that information.

[2:41:11] Um another issue of note has been the

[2:41:14] horizon center. Um, and there's been

[2:41:16] some activity with the Sanonteo County

[2:41:18] Board of Supervisors meeting to vote to

[2:41:20] purchase the former Star Vista site. Um,

[2:41:23] while it's not directly related to the

[2:41:25] North one El Camino proposed project,

[2:41:28] um, I know many parties are interested

[2:41:29] in this. So, these materials have been

[2:41:31] updated on the town's website linked to

[2:41:33] the county meeting and materials and,

[2:41:36] uh, video recording. So, we'll continue

[2:41:38] to monitor anything related to this

[2:41:40] issue and update the website

[2:41:42] accordingly.

[2:41:43] Another

[2:41:45] topic discussed on that same very busy

[2:41:48] county board of supervisors meeting was

[2:41:50] uh the ebike ordinance. Uh and so the

[2:41:53] these are just a couple of highlights on

[2:41:56] what was discussed. Um but uh really

[2:41:59] looking at adding local regulations

[2:42:01] discussing the enforcement provisions

[2:42:03] and we have added those materials from

[2:42:06] that county meeting with the proposed

[2:42:08] ordinance um to the Hillsboro website.

[2:42:10] So hillsbor.net/ebikes /ebikes and this

[2:42:13] will be something that we continue to

[2:42:14] monitor as they continue their

[2:42:16] discussions on this topic.

[2:42:20] We've been getting quite a few calls

[2:42:21] about the Whimos in town. So, I just

[2:42:23] thought I would share um an update

[2:42:25] because we we do get questions about

[2:42:27] them. Uh they are allowed to operate in

[2:42:31] town and through the peninsula. It's not

[2:42:34] within the town's jurisdiction. uh they

[2:42:36] were approved by the DMV and then they

[2:42:38] received further approvals from the CPU.

[2:42:41] There was legislation a couple years ago

[2:42:44] SB915 that would have provided the

[2:42:46] regular authority to local governments,

[2:42:48] but it was not successful. Um but we'll

[2:42:51] continue to monitor things like that if

[2:42:53] they are proposed in the future. If you

[2:42:55] do see a Whimo that is behaving badly,

[2:42:58] you can email support.com.

[2:43:01] Uh but also the Hillsboro Police

[2:43:03] Department and the city manager's office

[2:43:05] also have a government affairs lays on

[2:43:07] that we can we can talk to and um she's

[2:43:09] very responsive if there are ever

[2:43:11] issues. Um mostly it's just questions of

[2:43:13] if they're allowed to operate in town.

[2:43:15] Not not too many issues yet.

[2:43:22] Another one we've been getting some

[2:43:23] questions about is are short-term

[2:43:25] rentals allowed in town? Um the answer

[2:43:28] is no. And so this is that same slide

[2:43:30] that just reminder that they are not uh

[2:43:33] they are not permitted in the town of

[2:43:34] Hillsboro per our municipal code and

[2:43:36] Marcel um our new code enforcement um

[2:43:39] staff uh is actively monitoring this and

[2:43:42] responding to inquiries and so we have

[2:43:44] his email address at the bottom of the

[2:43:46] slide. If you do think there there's an

[2:43:48] Airbnb in town or a short-term rental uh

[2:43:51] you can let him know and he'll look into

[2:43:53] it.

[2:43:56] Uh we uh had a Hrek meeting um and have

[2:44:00] gotten some updates uh from the school

[2:44:02] district on the construction beginning

[2:44:04] on the Crocker multi-purpose room. Um

[2:44:07] it's going to cause uh probably

[2:44:09] substantial amount of traffic impacts

[2:44:11] and so they're trying to get ahead of

[2:44:13] that. Um they actually have these cute

[2:44:15] little magnets with a QR code that

[2:44:17] they're going to give me some extras of.

[2:44:19] Um but I have a couple here. um if you

[2:44:21] guys want to take them uh just to make

[2:44:23] sure that people know where to get the

[2:44:25] updates and so I've put the link up

[2:44:27] here. They have a dedicated email

[2:44:28] address and we will work closely, the

[2:44:31] city manager's office, uh police

[2:44:33] department and public works um we've

[2:44:35] been working with them um on what

[2:44:37] they're going to do to minimize the

[2:44:39] impacts and make sure people are aware

[2:44:41] of where the construction will be. U but

[2:44:44] just so we can um help them spread their

[2:44:46] message as the construction gets

[2:44:48] underway.

[2:44:51] Memorial Day. I'll um probably let this

[2:44:53] come out in the council reports at the

[2:44:55] end of the meeting as well, but I just

[2:44:56] wanted to plug it for Memorial Day

[2:44:58] coming up um beginning at 10:00 with the

[2:45:01] parade here at Town Hall followed by the

[2:45:03] observance ceremony at North School

[2:45:05] Field and our wonderful musical festival

[2:45:07] and carnival.

[2:45:11] Um coming up, June is going to be a

[2:45:13] pretty busy uh meeting. So, we have

[2:45:15] quite a few things planned. a

[2:45:17] presentation from PG&E on the EPSS

[2:45:20] outages, uh the Prop 218 hearing on

[2:45:23] water rates, a couple other uh big

[2:45:26] topics will be an update on Tobin Clark.

[2:45:29] Uh we spoke during the budget hearing

[2:45:31] about an update on the long range

[2:45:33] financial funding plan. Um as well as

[2:45:36] some of our larger uh infrastructure

[2:45:38] projects, the Parkside Bridge and the

[2:45:40] Macadmia access. So, those are all

[2:45:42] tenatively scheduled for June and then

[2:45:44] we'll continue into July with hopefully

[2:45:47] some updates on Baywood and then Town

[2:45:49] Hall complex as well. So, um just

[2:45:51] looking ahead so we have those on the

[2:45:54] calendar.

[2:45:56] And this is our uh slide that we' like

[2:45:58] to end in on the emergency preparedness

[2:46:00] resources. So, you can easily screenshot

[2:46:02] it um and refer to it um as needed. And

[2:46:06] that's it. Thank you.

[2:46:08] >> Thank you. Thank you, Assistant City

[2:46:10] Manager Brown. Thank you. Um

[2:46:14] the next item um is actually a public

[2:46:18] comment on items that are not on the

[2:46:20] agenda. Um city clerk, do we um this is

[2:46:23] a public comment. Do we have anyone

[2:46:26] either on Zoom or in the chambers on

[2:46:29] items that are not on the agenda?

[2:46:31] >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor Cole. Uh yes, Ana

[2:46:33] Dal and members of the youth commission.

[2:46:35] Thank you.

[2:46:37] >> Welcome.

[2:46:45] hardest working uh artist working youth

[2:46:48] commission in the peninsula maybe in the

[2:46:50] state.

[2:46:53] >> Hi everyone, I'm Anya. I'm the chair of

[2:46:56] the Hillsbor Youth Commission. Um so

[2:46:59] we're really happy to be giving a quick

[2:47:01] update and thank you to the city council

[2:47:02] for welcoming us. Um I'll start with the

[2:47:06] a friendly subcommittee.

[2:47:12] Hi, I'm Ava and I'm reporting for the

[2:47:16] age friendly committee. We talked

[2:47:18] earlier about our tech day and Samaritan

[2:47:21] House coat drive which were both really

[2:47:22] successful. And recently on April 25th,

[2:47:26] we held our community chess tournament

[2:47:28] which saw around or over 20 people

[2:47:32] attending which was really successful

[2:47:34] and we were really excited about it and

[2:47:36] it connected people of all age groups

[2:47:38] and we got a lot of positive feedback.

[2:47:43] » Hi everyone, I'm Alexa. I'm on the

[2:47:45] communications subcommittee um and I'm

[2:47:48] here to talk about the Hillsboro

[2:47:49] Highlights Initiative um which we were

[2:47:51] tasked by Mayor Cole and we have about

[2:47:54] five or six interviews published and

[2:47:56] here are the most recent ones.

[2:48:00] >> I'd love to emphasize that we've only

[2:48:02] started with mayoral interviews but we

[2:48:04] plan to uh extend to other forms of

[2:48:06] media such as an interactive website.

[2:48:09] >> Wonderful.

[2:48:12] » I'm Brody Friedberg. I'm also on the

[2:48:14] communications subcommittee and I'm a

[2:48:15] co-ub chair along with Alexa. Uh we're

[2:48:17] putting on our pride event on June 9th

[2:48:20] uh in in town hall and in front of town

[2:48:22] hall. Um there will be more information

[2:48:24] posted in uh Hillsboro official media,

[2:48:27] but we welcome all residents, staff,

[2:48:29] council members to attend.

[2:48:33] » Yeah. And then um a few weeks ago we had

[2:48:35] an AP study event for high schoolers. We

[2:48:37] had about 25 people attend um as seen in

[2:48:40] the photo. And then for Memorial Day,

[2:48:41] we'll have uh we'll be participating in

[2:48:44] the parade as well.

[2:48:46] >> Great.

[2:48:49] >> Hi, my name is Jesse and I'm a part of

[2:48:50] the environmental awareness

[2:48:51] subcommittee. Um here are some of our

[2:48:53] initiatives from earlier in the year

[2:48:54] that I believe we presented in the March

[2:48:57] meeting, but recently we went to Crocker

[2:49:00] in April and we hosted an Earthweek

[2:49:02] event. Um it was a two-day event where

[2:49:04] the first day we collaborated with

[2:49:05] Rethink waste to provide presentations

[2:49:07] and activities about waste sort waste

[2:49:10] sorting and management and then the next

[2:49:12] day we hosted a thrift store to try to

[2:49:15] encourage sustainable consumerism where

[2:49:17] we collected clothing donations and then

[2:49:19] displayed them for the students to come

[2:49:21] and grab. And then we also had a bike

[2:49:24] power smoothie display which was really

[2:49:26] popular that day.

[2:49:31] Hi, I'm Lauraai from the health and

[2:49:33] wellness subcommittee and throughout the

[2:49:36] year um each year we plan this event at

[2:49:41] Crocker where we

[2:49:45] um like sorry

[2:49:49] um presents different wellness cards

[2:49:52] with resources on them and give them out

[2:49:55] to any of the students with um different

[2:49:58] food and snacks available. And this year

[2:50:02] was super successful and all the

[2:50:04] resource cards were taken and we got a

[2:50:07] lot of good feedback. And every month

[2:50:10] we'll post our Instagram post with

[2:50:14] information and resources about that

[2:50:16] month's connection to mental health. And

[2:50:20] I think it's gotten good feedback and is

[2:50:23] able to help people in need with those

[2:50:28] resources. And then we also put some um

[2:50:31] like

[2:50:33] pro like support for health care on

[2:50:37] Crocker and along different schools.

[2:50:42] Um and then these were some of the

[2:50:43] pictures of our event at Crocker. And we

[2:50:48] also did trivia

[2:50:51] um to inform students about different

[2:50:55] mental health and wellness objectives.

[2:51:00] Um that include how much sleep you

[2:51:05] should be getting, the stress levels

[2:51:08] that youth usually

[2:51:12] um undergo and things like that.

[2:51:20] Okay. Um and then just like real

[2:51:22] quickly, as um most of you probably

[2:51:24] know, we had the HYC team ebike survey

[2:51:27] and we um shared some of that data with

[2:51:29] Assembly Member Papin and Supervisor

[2:51:31] Spear. And we're also working on um uh

[2:51:34] writing the write up for some national

[2:51:37] conferences. And then we recently um

[2:51:40] submitted our brochure to go into the

[2:51:42] Hillsboro recreation brochure to um

[2:51:44] spread awareness to uh athletes,

[2:51:47] coaches, and um parents regarding injury

[2:51:51] prevention um especially for female

[2:51:53] athletes and what um some simple things

[2:51:55] that teens can do. Um and yeah, that's

[2:51:58] about it. Um we're wrapping up the year

[2:52:01] now year now and we're really thankful

[2:52:03] to the town for supporting us and um

[2:52:06] just wanted to shout out all the

[2:52:08] commissioners for all of the creativity

[2:52:10] they have and their execution on all of

[2:52:12] their initiatives. So thank you.

[2:52:15] >> Thank you.

[2:52:22] » Quite impressive. It's amazing. Um we we

[2:52:24] have a couple of comments. Yes, council.

[2:52:27] >> Thank you so much. I think you're all

[2:52:28] going to be um participating in the

[2:52:30] Hillsboro Memorial Day parade. And thank

[2:52:32] you to all of you who have signed up to

[2:52:34] volunteer that day. And if um if there

[2:52:37] are any more who haven't signed up who

[2:52:39] can volunteer, we can still use

[2:52:40] volunteers, especially on the field with

[2:52:42] the games. So, thank you so much.

[2:52:45] >> And a comment or question from Vice

[2:52:47] Mayor Rexdale.

[2:52:48] >> Uh just a quick comment. I know we we

[2:52:51] tried to squeeze you guys down a little

[2:52:53] bit. We're still working on the cadence

[2:52:54] of your presentations and uh you guys

[2:52:57] did an amazing job. I know we gave you a

[2:52:58] little less time because we started at

[2:53:00] three today with budget, so we're a

[2:53:02] little punchy, but um if if you want to

[2:53:05] see how an elected official gets freaked

[2:53:09] out with having one minute of public

[2:53:11] comment, you can watch the uh

[2:53:13] supervisor's meeting and my comment on

[2:53:16] ebikes and it was not coherent at all.

[2:53:19] And you guys are amazing. Thank you.

[2:53:23] >> They are amazing.

[2:53:24] >> Thank you for the mayor. It was

[2:53:27] fantastic. First of all, the breadth of

[2:53:30] the things that you're working on. It's

[2:53:32] really clear how well you delegate and

[2:53:34] how well each of you take your

[2:53:36] responsibilities seriously. It's really

[2:53:39] inspiring and I'm just really proud of

[2:53:41] all the work that you've done. So, thank

[2:53:43] you. Keep it up.

[2:53:45] >> Yes, I I echo all those sentiments and

[2:53:48] have a wonderful summer. somewhere

[2:53:50] around the corner. But we're just so

[2:53:52] impressed. You guys are awesome. Keep it

[2:53:54] up.

[2:53:55] >> Attaching the treats to the mental

[2:53:57] health cards. Absolutely brilliant.

[2:54:01] >> All right. Thanks again.

[2:54:09] » All right. Well, that was very creative.

[2:54:10] City clerks.

[2:54:12] Wonderful. Yes, we got all the

[2:54:14] information. Um, next item, we'll be

[2:54:17] moving on to items on the agenda. Do we

[2:54:19] have any conflicts of interest on items

[2:54:21] that are on the agenda?

[2:54:24] Seeing none, we'll move on to the

[2:54:26] consent calendar. Item 1, 2, 3, 4,5. Um,

[2:54:29] do any of my colleagues wish to

[2:54:32] um remove any items from the consent

[2:54:35] calendar?

[2:54:38] All right. May I have a motion to

[2:54:40] approve the consent calendar items 1 2 3

[2:54:42] 4 five. Second. All right.

[2:54:48] City clerk. May we have the vote to

[2:54:49] please.

[2:54:52] >> Thank you. Mayor Cole Adams.

[2:54:54] >> Yes. Schwang.

[2:54:55] >> I. Krillic.

[2:54:56] >> I.

[2:54:57] >> Rexdale.

[2:54:58] >> I.

[2:54:58] >> Cole.

[2:54:59] >> I.

[2:54:59] >> Thank you.

[2:55:01] Next we have public hearing

[2:55:04] resolution authorizing the 5-year rate

[2:55:07] series for sewer service um charges for

[2:55:11] a 5-year period effective July 1st,

[2:55:13] 2026. and that will be presented by

[2:55:15] assistant finance director Rich

[2:55:16] Santiago, Gabe Sasser, project manager

[2:55:19] of HFNH consultants and I believe they

[2:55:23] are on Zoom with us. Yes.

[2:55:25] >> Okay, great. Uh, good evening, Mayor

[2:55:27] Cole and Council. Yeah, tonight is the

[2:55:30] public hearing adopting the resolution

[2:55:32] to authorize the 5-year rate series for

[2:55:34] the sewer service charges. Um the last

[2:55:37] one adopted was in June of 2021 during

[2:55:39] the 218 process and this past July we

[2:55:42] adopted the fifth year of that five-year

[2:55:44] rate series and so we started a cost of

[2:55:47] service study. Um actually Gabe Sasser

[2:55:49] can't join us tonight. So actually Rick

[2:55:51] Simson uh senior vice president of HF&H

[2:55:54] will be online presenting and we also

[2:55:56] have Ludvy Karu from the best and crier

[2:55:59] online as well.

[2:56:01] Um whenever you're ready Rick.

[2:56:03] >> Great thank you so much. Uh, good

[2:56:05] evening, Mayor Cole, Vice Mayor

[2:56:07] Ragsdale, Council members. As Rich

[2:56:10] mentioned, I'm Rick Simson, senior vice

[2:56:12] president with HFNH. And for tonight,

[2:56:14] I'm here to present a summary of the

[2:56:16] sewer rate study process and our

[2:56:18] recommendations for the rate series. And

[2:56:21] this is just a summary of what's been

[2:56:23] provided in a more detailed report

[2:56:25] that's been provided to the uh council

[2:56:28] as well as posted on the town's website

[2:56:30] for uh sewer customers to review prior

[2:56:33] to this public hearing. So tonight we

[2:56:36] are holding the public hearing which if

[2:56:40] there's not a majority protest would

[2:56:42] culminate in a vote uh after discussion

[2:56:44] with the city council whether to adopt

[2:56:46] the maximum sewer rates that were

[2:56:48] included in the proposition 218 notice

[2:56:51] with the first increase becoming

[2:56:53] effective July 1 of this year so it

[2:56:55] appear on the 26 27 uh tax bills of your

[2:57:01] residents and businesses. is

[2:57:05] next slide.

[2:57:08] So just a brief overview over overview

[2:57:10] of what the rate study process is, where

[2:57:13] we've been, and where we still need to

[2:57:14] go. So to date, uh through a competitive

[2:57:17] process, HFNH uh was selected to do a

[2:57:21] sewer rate study for the town. Uh we met

[2:57:24] with town staff and begun the sewer rate

[2:57:26] study in November of last year which

[2:57:29] culminated in presenting our preliminary

[2:57:32] results and receiving feedback at a city

[2:57:35] council workshop that was February 9th

[2:57:38] earlier this year. uh followed up based

[2:57:41] on the uh feedback that we did receive,

[2:57:44] prepared a draft report of those uh

[2:57:48] preliminary findings and were presented

[2:57:50] in March 9th of this year in which staff

[2:57:55] requested council uh to mail the

[2:57:58] Proposition 218 notices with the maximum

[2:58:02] rates over the next 5-year period. Those

[2:58:05] were mailed out March 21st. Uh,

[2:58:08] Proposition 218 requires at least 45

[2:58:11] days for the mailings before there's a

[2:58:15] public hearing that's held in that date.

[2:58:17] We are about 50 days out from that date.

[2:58:20] So, what is left? Uh, so again for

[2:58:23] tonight holding that public hearing uh

[2:58:26] tonight to tally any protests that may

[2:58:28] have been received and then city council

[2:58:31] can discuss and then vote whether to

[2:58:33] adopt the maximum rates.

[2:58:36] Next slide. What goes into a sewer rate

[2:58:40] study? Uh well, first we need to look at

[2:58:44] the two most important components. The

[2:58:46] expenses to provide the service and the

[2:58:49] revenues that are currently generated

[2:58:50] from rates. So you'll see about with the

[2:58:54] solid black line uh revenues at current

[2:58:56] rates uh bring in about 17 million per

[2:59:00] year. expenses. Currently, the year is

[2:59:04] looking to end in 2526 fiscal year at

[2:59:07] about 17.5 million. So, slightly less

[2:59:10] than what revenues are being brought in.

[2:59:13] But that 17.5 million over the next

[2:59:15] 5year period is looking to increase

[2:59:18] based on projections to 19.6 million per

[2:59:22] year. So, the current revenue at current

[2:59:23] rates at 17 would not be sufficient to

[2:59:26] cover those costs. I'll just briefly go

[2:59:29] through what the stack bar is telling us

[2:59:31] with regard to expenses. The first uh

[2:59:35] bar there, the dark green, are the

[2:59:38] general on andm expenses, the labor, the

[2:59:41] materials

[2:59:43] uh that are incurred to operate the

[2:59:45] system. That's increasing to about by

[2:59:48] about 3.4% per year. There's no

[2:59:51] additional headcount that is

[2:59:53] contemplated o over the next 5year

[2:59:55] period.

[2:59:57] The light blue that is for the treatment

[2:59:59] cost. So for the sewage that is

[3:00:02] collected uh through the town's

[3:00:04] collection system is treated at either a

[3:00:07] Berling game treatment plant or Sanonteo

[3:00:10] treatment plant. Those costs based on

[3:00:12] historical average are increasing about

[3:00:15] 5% per year over the next 5-year period.

[3:00:19] The town does have some debt service uh

[3:00:21] for bonds that are outstanding with that

[3:00:24] darker green there. uh those will

[3:00:27] continue, but you'll see there's a

[3:00:28] slight decrease by the time you get to

[3:00:30] 30 31 in those debt service payments.

[3:00:33] And then lastly, the capital

[3:00:35] improvements.

[3:00:38] Currently in the current year, it's

[3:00:40] about uh a $4 million $4.4 million being

[3:00:44] spent on capital. And based on

[3:00:46] projections and the necessary projects

[3:00:48] over the next five years, that'll

[3:00:50] increase to about 5.1 million per year.

[3:00:53] uh with some major projects for lift

[3:00:56] station improvements as well as basin

[3:00:59] INI or inflow and infiltration

[3:01:01] rehabilitation to reduce uh non- sewward

[3:01:04] water getting to the treatment plants.

[3:01:06] So some major improvements over the next

[3:01:08] 5-year period but once again revenues at

[3:01:11] current rates are not sufficient to meet

[3:01:14] future expenses.

[3:01:16] Next slide. The last component besides

[3:01:20] uh revenues and expenses are reserves.

[3:01:24] Uh so as I mentioned earlier, 2526 is

[3:01:28] looking to end about $500,000 short in

[3:01:31] revenue compared to expenses, but you

[3:01:33] have reserves uh each year to draw from

[3:01:36] when there are those shortfalls that are

[3:01:38] either planned or unplanned. So the town

[3:01:42] had started uh 2425

[3:01:46] fiscal year end. So June 30th, 2025 with

[3:01:49] about 13 million in reserves. So over

[3:01:52] the next few years, even with the rate

[3:01:55] series increase that we're suggesting,

[3:01:57] it would have been higher if you didn't

[3:01:58] have these reserves. We're drawing on

[3:02:00] some of those reserves until you get to

[3:02:02] 2728

[3:02:04] where we stabilize the revenues compared

[3:02:07] to expenses and just maintain about $1

[3:02:11] million in reserves. And that reserve

[3:02:13] target is made up of a couple different

[3:02:16] components. The minimum reserve uh is

[3:02:19] six months of O andM. So for those

[3:02:21] dayto-day expenses that you need to

[3:02:23] cover because you do bill on the tax

[3:02:26] role you get most of your monies in in

[3:02:29] December and April. So there are times

[3:02:32] obviously between those periods you need

[3:02:34] to pay labor expenses capital. So a

[3:02:38] minimum amount for that six months of

[3:02:41] operating. And in addition to get to the

[3:02:43] target res reserve, we add on top of

[3:02:46] that O andM the average annual capital

[3:02:49] of about 5.1 million. So with the series

[3:02:52] of increases we're recommending you'll

[3:02:55] stay right at that reserve target so you

[3:02:56] have a healthy fund for those unexpected

[3:02:59] uh potential capital needs if something

[3:03:02] does occur and you can maintain a good

[3:03:05] cash flow as you receive most of your

[3:03:07] revenues in two chunks during the year.

[3:03:12] Next slide, please. So, what does that

[3:03:14] result in rates-wise? So, for the town,

[3:03:17] there's a set charge per equivalent

[3:03:20] dwelling unit. Uh, since 99 more than

[3:03:24] 99% of your customers are residential.

[3:03:27] That just means one .edu is a resident

[3:03:30] equivalent dwelling unit. So currently

[3:03:33] they're charged $4,311

[3:03:35] per year and that will increase over the

[3:03:38] next five years to $4,93748

[3:03:43] per year.

[3:03:45] For those nonresidential customers, they

[3:03:48] are also charged on a peru basis. But

[3:03:52] what that means is an EDU is about 78

[3:03:55] units of water. So how much water is

[3:03:57] discharged into the system over a

[3:03:59] calendar year? So commercial customers

[3:04:02] through uh an affiliation with

[3:04:05] California data collective, they're able

[3:04:07] to gather the data for each specific

[3:04:09] customer uh commercial customer and look

[3:04:12] at how much water is sewered. They use a

[3:04:15] three-year average to help with

[3:04:17] volatility. So for instance, if a

[3:04:20] commercial customer uses 156 units of

[3:04:24] water on average for that winter indoor

[3:04:27] winter water use, annualized water use,

[3:04:31] they would be charged two edus. So two

[3:04:34] times the 78 units of water is that 156

[3:04:38] units of water for a commercial

[3:04:40] customer. They would be charged two

[3:04:42] edus.

[3:04:45] Next slide.

[3:04:47] Again, that was a quick overview of the

[3:04:49] process. Uh, but what we'll do from here

[3:04:52] and we'll I'll pause here to answer any

[3:04:55] questions, but we would like to open the

[3:04:57] public hearing and receive any remaining

[3:04:59] protests that residents or businesses

[3:05:02] may bring to the chambers.

[3:05:05] Upon uh closing the public hearing, we'd

[3:05:09] ask the city clerk to tally the protest

[3:05:11] to determine whether there is a majority

[3:05:14] protest or not, which would require

[3:05:16] roughly around 2,000 protests. And then

[3:05:19] if there is not a majority protest, open

[3:05:21] it up to city council to vote whether to

[3:05:23] adopt the maximum rates as presented and

[3:05:26] included in the proposition 218 notice.

[3:05:29] So again, with that, I'll pause if

[3:05:31] there's any questions.

[3:05:34] Um, thank you Mr. Simonson for the

[3:05:36] presentation. Um, does anyone on the

[3:05:38] council have any questions or clarifying

[3:05:40] comments? Go ahead. Yes.

[3:05:42] >> Thank you. Um, I have one question. It

[3:05:44] may be for Paul Willis, but thank you

[3:05:46] very much for your presentation.

[3:05:48] Appreciate Appreciate that, Rick. Um,

[3:05:51] could there be any future upgrades or

[3:05:54] costs that Hillsboro will be obligated

[3:05:56] to cover um, regarding the Berling game

[3:05:59] and Sanonteo wastewater treatment plants

[3:06:02] uh, effects from sea level rise?

[3:06:06] >> So, I haven't heard about Berling game.

[3:06:07] I know um San Monteo the clean water

[3:06:09] program uh they have projected or

[3:06:12] constructed it for the next 30 years and

[3:06:14] their maximum buildout uh considering

[3:06:17] what they've been doing along El Camino

[3:06:20] corridor and a lot of their new

[3:06:22] construction um they're both near the bay so they have a levy systems to

[3:06:28] protect them so similar to what Foster

[3:06:30] City did if they do need to plan even

[3:06:33] more than what they have now they can

[3:06:35] always build those up and use tie gates

[3:06:37] to keep sea level from getting back into

[3:06:41] the treatment plant. What we are seeing

[3:06:43] though with San Mateo is uh there is a

[3:06:46] future potential capability. The plant

[3:06:49] is uh built so they can produce um uh

[3:06:52] recycled water. So we've already talked

[3:06:55] to them that in the future if that's a

[3:06:57] possibility and they'll be able to plum

[3:06:59] recycled water to our border. Then at

[3:07:01] that time we'd be interested in finding

[3:07:03] out how much if that'll counteract u

[3:07:06] some of the cost and allow us to build

[3:07:08] because as you know each of our

[3:07:10] municipalities have a initial supply

[3:07:12] guarantee or daily use of water and to

[3:07:15] in order to hit maximum numbers for

[3:07:18] future growth uh the use of of recycled

[3:07:21] water might be a key to do that.

[3:07:24] So in the case of the Sanonteo plant,

[3:07:27] they could sell their recycled water and

[3:07:29] offset any extra costs that they might

[3:07:31] incur as a result of having to protect

[3:07:33] from sea level rise. That you're saying?

[3:07:35] >> No, that's two separate things. So I

[3:07:37] you're just I was just talking about um

[3:07:39] what they could in the future charge us

[3:07:41] for that we may want to participate.

[3:07:44] >> Oh, we might have future charges for the

[3:07:46] recycle water part

[3:07:47] >> if we'd like to uh purchase into that.

[3:07:50] Yes, it usually is a is a lower price

[3:07:52] like 75% of the closer to the mic. I'm

[3:07:54] sorry.

[3:07:54] >> It's usually a lower cost uh for the

[3:07:56] water, but it offsets the need for our

[3:08:00] potable water if we come against our

[3:08:02] maximum daily demand that we're allotted

[3:08:05] to from uh SFU.

[3:08:08] >> So if they if they do incur costs

[3:08:10] because they have to protect both plants

[3:08:12] from sea level rise, we're not protected

[3:08:15] by our current contract. We would be

[3:08:17] That's correct. More pass through costs.

[3:08:20] >> That's right. our costs have been

[3:08:22] encapsulated in the current projects

[3:08:24] that are there now.

[3:08:26] >> Thank you, Paul. Through the mayor.

[3:08:29] >> Yes. Um, council member Trunk.

[3:08:31] >> So, I I think that um Paul, I thought

[3:08:33] this would be a good question. Um, Seeel

[3:08:36] Water Treatment Plant just built. It's a

[3:08:39] brand new facility. It's beautiful. And

[3:08:42] so I think that I remember when I went

[3:08:46] touring the facility, they talk about

[3:08:48] the sea level rises and that was in the

[3:08:51] plan in their design.

[3:08:53] >> Correct.

[3:08:53] >> What you're talking about is the potable

[3:08:55] water that the recycle potable waters

[3:08:58] that

[3:08:59] >> we um at the time did pose to them

[3:09:03] whether they would be able to establish

[3:09:05] the purple pipes to our border. And that

[3:09:08] turned out to be a very costly proposal.

[3:09:12] Correct.

[3:09:12] >> It's costly. Correct. But the plant is

[3:09:15] capable of supposedly producing that uh

[3:09:19] recycled affluent that can be used for

[3:09:22] certain things. Not for indoor drinking

[3:09:24] water, but for one of our biggest needs,

[3:09:26] landscaping, irrigation,

[3:09:28] >> or dual plumbing, flushing for a lot of

[3:09:31] the components for commercials uh

[3:09:34] structures now would be dual plumbing.

[3:09:35] Uh so they can use that for uh flushing

[3:09:38] in the water which would be a good use.

[3:09:42] >> Thank you.

[3:09:43] >> Any additional questions from the um

[3:09:45] councils?

[3:09:48] Okay, we will now open to for public

[3:09:51] comments or additional protests if any.

[3:09:56] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. I don't have any

[3:09:57] speaker cards and I don't have any

[3:10:00] raised hands on Zoom for public comment.

[3:10:04] >> All right.

[3:10:06] We will close um the public comments

[3:10:08] public hearing section. Um city clerk,

[3:10:11] do we have a total tally on the protests

[3:10:14] to determine whether a majority protest

[3:10:15] has occurred?

[3:10:16] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Yes, we just

[3:10:17] received one protest. So to achieve a

[3:10:20] majority, we would have needed to

[3:10:21] receive at least 1,953

[3:10:24] protests. So a majority does not exist.

[3:10:27] >> All right. A majority does not exist.

[3:10:29] Does the is there um a motion for um the

[3:10:33] city council to vote on whether to adopt

[3:10:34] the maximum silver rates included in the

[3:10:36] proposition?

[3:10:37] >> So move.

[3:10:38] >> Do we have a second?

[3:10:40] >> Second.

[3:10:41] >> City clerk, could you take the roll

[3:10:43] call, please?

[3:10:45] >> Thank you. Adams,

[3:10:46] >> yes.

[3:10:47] >> Dwang,

[3:10:48] >> I.

[3:10:48] >> Crow,

[3:10:49] >> I.

[3:10:49] >> Ragdale,

[3:10:50] >> I.

[3:10:50] >> Cole,

[3:10:51] >> I.

[3:10:52] >> Thank you. Motion carries.

[3:10:53] >> Vote carries. 520. Thank you. Our next

[3:10:56] item is um resolution setting and

[3:11:00] confirming the fees and charges for

[3:11:02] fiscal year 2026 to 2027 and resolution

[3:11:05] authorizing water and sewer connection

[3:11:07] fees for fiscal year 2026 to 2027

[3:11:11] effective July 1st 2026

[3:11:14] and that will be presented by um it's

[3:11:18] going to be presented by assistant

[3:11:20] finance director uh Rich Santiago.

[3:11:22] >> Good evening again council. Um yes, this

[3:11:25] was presented to you earlier in the

[3:11:27] budget study session, but now it's the

[3:11:28] resolutions to approve setting

[3:11:30] confirming the proposed fees and and

[3:11:32] charges for fiscal year 2627 and the

[3:11:35] resolution authorizing water and sewer

[3:11:38] uh connection fees that would be

[3:11:39] effective July 1st.

[3:11:42] So for the water and sewer connection

[3:11:43] fees, that's updated annually with a uh

[3:11:47] CPI index from the engineering news

[3:11:49] record construction cost index. It's a

[3:11:51] 0.5 uh percent increase from the prior

[3:11:54] year as you could see there. So that's

[3:11:55] what's in the proposed master fee

[3:11:57] schedule. And then for the overall fees

[3:12:00] in um from the master fee schedule,

[3:12:03] there's no new or deleted fees for

[3:12:05] police, engineering, and public works

[3:12:07] special services for fiscal year 26.

[3:12:10] However, all of those fees and charges

[3:12:12] do have um changes to them just based on

[3:12:15] staffing labor rates. We do that

[3:12:17] annually just to keep up with um the

[3:12:20] cost of services rendered for them. The

[3:12:22] big change as we presented earlier in

[3:12:24] the budget study session is the building

[3:12:26] and planning um fees. Those did get

[3:12:29] updated. There was a a cost of service

[3:12:32] study that they began at the start of

[3:12:33] the year and it did increase the um

[3:12:37] services that they cover for those fees

[3:12:39] and it's part of the proposed budget for

[3:12:41] fiscal year 2627

[3:12:43] and that's part of the master fee

[3:12:44] schedule. It was also presented to

[3:12:46] council in April as well as the FAC in

[3:12:50] on April 28th which they recommended

[3:12:52] approval and then again you heard it uh

[3:12:54] this afternoon during the budget study

[3:12:56] session.

[3:12:58] So um before we open up the public

[3:13:00] hearing um we'll take any questions you

[3:13:02] have. Thank you for the presentation.

[3:13:04] Any um questions from the council?

[3:13:08] >> Council member Crowley. Yes.

[3:13:10] >> Uh this is I think a question for Tim.

[3:13:13] Um just the building and planning fees.

[3:13:16] Um I just noticed that the sub I just

[3:13:18] want to make sure this is correct

[3:13:20] actually because I know you underwent a

[3:13:22] very detailed deep dive study on all of

[3:13:26] these to reflect the cost of service.

[3:13:28] But I noticed that the substantial

[3:13:30] alteration and tear down went up quite a

[3:13:32] bit and ended up being more than a fee

[3:13:36] for a new dwelling, a full demo. So is

[3:13:39] it I just want to make sure that's

[3:13:41] accurate. Yeah, through throughout the

[3:13:43] process, we were evaluating for how much

[3:13:45] staff time went into each one of these

[3:13:47] types. And this particular one ends up

[3:13:50] being one that uh I guess for simple

[3:13:52] words, it just eats up more staff time

[3:13:54] to get to the finish line. And

[3:13:56] previously, the fee did not have all the

[3:13:58] public noticing fees in the main fee.

[3:14:00] Those were added on separately. So, the

[3:14:02] fee is actually not as far apart as it

[3:14:05] looks.

[3:14:06] um the vacant lot and full demo, those

[3:14:10] tend to go through a lot smoother with

[3:14:12] less neighbor comment. It's the large

[3:14:14] alterations, second story additions when

[3:14:17] we start getting into moving stuff

[3:14:19] around and uh setbacks. So, a lot more

[3:14:22] neighbor input, so more staff time.

[3:14:24] >> Thank you. I appreciate it. Thanks for

[3:14:26] taking a second look. And and just a

[3:14:27] note kind of to the public that our

[3:14:29] permit fees for building projects come

[3:14:32] with expert inspections to make sure

[3:14:35] that the work's done right and that

[3:14:36] you're getting what you pay for. Thank

[3:14:38] you, Tim.

[3:14:40] >> Yes, Council Member Adams.

[3:14:41] >> I just want to underscore uh what

[3:14:43] Council Member Krill just said,

[3:14:46] particularly for the public who may just

[3:14:48] be tuning into this issue and see pages

[3:14:53] and pages of specific fees. I just want

[3:14:57] to remind them uh of all the times that

[3:14:59] Rich has pointed out, we have reviewed

[3:15:01] these. So um my I I just want to make

[3:15:05] sure that people know this has taken a

[3:15:08] long process but I'd also like all of us

[3:15:11] to know is there any uh remedy if we got

[3:15:17] one of these many things wrong and we

[3:15:20] hear about it and we decide you want to

[3:15:22] bring something back to us

[3:15:24] >> in regards to anything on the fee

[3:15:26] schedule. Yes. I mean throughout the

[3:15:28] year it doesn't it normally we do it

[3:15:30] obviously during the budget process but

[3:15:32] if there's any fee that we need to

[3:15:33] adjust or anything you could bring it um

[3:15:36] during the year we would just have to go

[3:15:37] through the the same uh public hearing

[3:15:39] process

[3:15:41] >> uh through the mayor.

[3:15:42] >> Yes council member

[3:15:44] >> uh I think that for the fee studies

[3:15:46] whenever that we have to delete or add

[3:15:49] new fees you the staff will bring

[3:15:51] forward for the council to consider

[3:15:53] isn't it?

[3:15:54] >> Yes. Yeah. And normally that's part of

[3:15:56] it, but we didn't have any this year

[3:15:57] other than just the just to the fees

[3:15:59] with the billing.

[3:16:00] >> Well, well, this is a big undertaking.

[3:16:02] And so, um, so is this an annual review,

[3:16:05] uh, in terms of just every year because

[3:16:08] I recall that every year we we do get a

[3:16:11] report on the updates of the fee

[3:16:13] schedule.

[3:16:14] >> That's right. Yeah.

[3:16:15] >> Okay. So that would be another

[3:16:17] opportunity for us to reflect and ask

[3:16:19] questions if if there's um should we

[3:16:22] hear from the residents um considering

[3:16:24] some of the fees? Well, I mean this is

[3:16:27] the adoption of the fees, right?

[3:16:29] >> But yes. Yeah. If you hear anything,

[3:16:31] obviously you can voice it to us and we

[3:16:33] can look at as staff at the staff level

[3:16:36] and consider,

[3:16:37] >> right? So there's opportunity for you to

[3:16:39] evaluate it and make sure that you know

[3:16:41] the the fees are current and it's uh

[3:16:44] updated accordingly. Thank you.

[3:16:48] >> Okay. Thank you. Um I will now open for

[3:16:50] public hearing and comments. Do we have

[3:16:53] anyone on Zoom or in the chambers? Thank

[3:16:55] you, Miracle. I I don't have any speaker

[3:16:57] cards and um no members uh of the public

[3:17:00] raising their hand on Zoom. Thank you.

[3:17:03] >> Okay. Um, I will close public comments

[3:17:06] and um,

[3:17:08] do we have a motion to adopt the

[3:17:10] resolution setting and confirming the

[3:17:12] fees and charges for fiscal year 2026 to

[3:17:15] 2027 and to adopt the resolution

[3:17:18] authorizing water and sewer connection

[3:17:20] fees for fiscal year 2026 to 2027

[3:17:22] effective July 1st, 2026.

[3:17:25] >> So move.

[3:17:26] >> Do we have a second?

[3:17:28] >> Second.

[3:17:29] >> Great. Um, could we please have the roll

[3:17:31] call?

[3:17:34] >> Adams,

[3:17:34] >> yes.

[3:17:35] >> Schwang,

[3:17:36] >> I.

[3:17:36] >> Crow,

[3:17:37] >> I.

[3:17:37] >> Rexdale,

[3:17:38] >> I.

[3:17:39] >> Cole,

[3:17:39] >> I.

[3:17:40] >> Thank you.

[3:17:41] Motion passes 5 to zero.

[3:17:44] >> Um, next item is to receive a report on

[3:17:46] town vacancies, recruitment, and

[3:17:49] retention efforts in compliance with

[3:17:51] Assembly Bill 2561

[3:17:54] and government code section 3502.3.

[3:17:57] And this will be presented by

[3:17:58] administrative services manager William

[3:18:00] L.

[3:18:03] >> Good evening, mayor, council members.

[3:18:05] Um, as the mayor mentioned, this is our

[3:18:07] annual report on the town vacancy

[3:18:09] recruitment and retention efforts. This

[3:18:12] presentation will look fairly similar to

[3:18:14] last year's. Uh, just as a quick

[3:18:16] legislative recap, this is a requirement

[3:18:19] from Assembly Bill 2561 that was

[3:18:22] approved in legislation last year.

[3:18:26] and it requires a public hearing at a

[3:18:29] council meeting on the status of

[3:18:30] vacancies, recruitments, and retention

[3:18:32] efforts. And this happens prior to

[3:18:35] budget adoption, which is why we're

[3:18:37] doing it in May before the budget

[3:18:38] adoption in June. Um, an invitation was

[3:18:42] sent to the bargaining units and the

[3:18:44] employee organizations if they wanted to

[3:18:46] make a presentation um or provide

[3:18:49] comment at this meeting. And if we have

[3:18:52] any bargaining unit that has a greater

[3:18:54] than 20% vacancy rate, uh we must

[3:18:58] provide some additional information um

[3:19:00] such as total vacancies, uh total

[3:19:03] applicants and um average number of days

[3:19:05] to complete hiring process opportunities

[3:19:08] um to improve compensation and other

[3:19:10] working conditions.

[3:19:14] So this was provided in the staff

[3:19:16] report. Um we used April 30th last year

[3:19:19] as um as the cutoff date. So we're doing

[3:19:22] that again this year. Uh one apology for

[3:19:25] the typo under unrepresented uh one

[3:19:28] vacancy out of 31 is 3.2% not 9.4%

[3:19:33] um that was in the staff report

[3:19:37] and similar to last year. So I just

[3:19:40] wanted to provide a projection. Um this

[3:19:42] is what our vacancy count is expected to

[3:19:45] look like um towards the end of the

[3:19:48] week. So it's just to demonstrate that

[3:19:51] um as a smaller agency just one or two

[3:19:55] um vacancies or additions really affects

[3:19:58] our our number um and a greater scale

[3:20:01] than say a county agency that has you

[3:20:04] know 5,000 employees.

[3:20:08] So some of these changes are the result

[3:20:10] of a lateral police officer starting on

[3:20:12] May 4th. Um we have a senior building

[3:20:16] planning technition starting on June

[3:20:17] 15th which is not included in those uh

[3:20:20] four vacancies in the public works

[3:20:22] clerical and um you might notice there's

[3:20:27] a slight difference in total FTEES from

[3:20:29] the police officer association and the

[3:20:31] public works clerical unit. Um the 32

[3:20:35] and the 31 were flipped and that's

[3:20:37] because in January we reclassified the

[3:20:39] code enforcement officer to a code

[3:20:41] compliance coordinator and that move the

[3:20:44] position from the police unit to the

[3:20:47] public works clerical unit.

[3:20:50] And just briefly on our recruitment

[3:20:52] efforts. So currently at a glance for

[3:20:55] this fiscal year um we've ran 11

[3:20:58] recruitments with three active and or

[3:21:01] continuous. We have reviewed 235

[3:21:05] applicants. We've done 38 interviews and

[3:21:08] practical exams. And out of those, we

[3:21:12] interviewed 119 out of the 235

[3:21:15] applicants. And right now, we have six

[3:21:18] police officer candidates that have

[3:21:20] moved past the command staff interviews

[3:21:22] and are in backgrounds or further along.

[3:21:25] And then we have two uh non-p police um

[3:21:28] i.e. nonsworn

[3:21:30] um positions that are in pre-employment

[3:21:34] and this is just um a change year

[3:21:37] overyear based on what I presented last

[3:21:39] year. So the main factor for the change

[3:21:42] especially in the number of applicants

[3:21:44] is um we done more police officer

[3:21:47] interviews this year and less um

[3:21:50] maintenance worker interviews for

[3:21:51] maintenance workers. um they do more of

[3:21:54] a practical exam where they invite a lot

[3:21:57] more candidates um to be screened. Um

[3:22:00] and in terms of police, there's just

[3:22:02] some fewer candidates but more

[3:22:04] interviews scheduled.

[3:22:09] And this is kind of like a timeline of

[3:22:11] our um recruitment process. And I just

[3:22:15] want to give a shout out to our HR

[3:22:18] management analyst, Elizabeth Zhao, who

[3:22:20] started with us last March. Um, she

[3:22:22] couldn't join us tonight, but those

[3:22:25] recruitments, those applications,

[3:22:27] everything I showed on the previous

[3:22:28] slide, she's really taken that over and

[3:22:31] she's responsible for um basically all

[3:22:34] of the coordination with the departments

[3:22:36] and um getting the job announcements

[3:22:39] out, scheduling the interviews and um as

[3:22:44] we move forward with candidates

[3:22:45] onboarding them and so on.

[3:22:49] So what are some of the recruitment and

[3:22:51] retention challenges this year? Um it's

[3:22:55] pretty much the same challenges that we

[3:22:57] were facing last year. We still have a

[3:22:59] very competitive job market and you hear

[3:23:02] all the time about you know tech layoffs

[3:23:04] and you know in that industry in local

[3:23:07] government it's not really affected by

[3:23:10] um any sort of mass layoffs at this

[3:23:12] point. So it is a really competitive

[3:23:15] local government job market. Uh we do

[3:23:18] live in a high cost of living area and

[3:23:20] there's certain e economic factors such

[3:23:23] as you know if if people feel the

[3:23:25] economy is unstable they might be less

[3:23:27] inclined to um you know reach out and

[3:23:30] you know switch jobs or switch careers.

[3:23:35] So how are we addressing some of these

[3:23:37] challenges? Well, we you did see um we

[3:23:40] have a lot more interviews this year.

[3:23:43] That's because for police officers, we

[3:23:45] are really um engaging in a very

[3:23:48] aggressive recruitment cycle. Um, as of

[3:23:50] right now, if you go on um the two major

[3:23:53] local government job websites, which are

[3:23:56] Calops and government jobs.com, if you

[3:23:59] search for police officer there, it's

[3:24:02] basically every city right now in

[3:24:04] locally has an active police um officer

[3:24:07] recruitment, lateral um training, um you

[3:24:11] name it. And um uh we want to be

[3:24:15] aggressive because if we get a very

[3:24:17] qualified applicant, it it's a very high

[3:24:20] likelihood that they're applying

[3:24:22] elsewhere too. So we want to um reach

[3:24:25] out um and um get that candidate um

[3:24:29] interviewed ASAP

[3:24:32] and also leverage our current budget

[3:24:33] outlook. We just had the budget study

[3:24:35] session and you know we are we are um

[3:24:38] being fiscally resp responsible. Um

[3:24:41] there are other cities that are facing

[3:24:44] um a greater budget deficit. Um and some

[3:24:48] are even discussing, you know, hiring

[3:24:51] freezes or more savings in their budget.

[3:24:54] You know, we never want to, you know,

[3:24:57] celebrate other cities, you know, not

[3:24:59] doing well. But that does create an

[3:25:01] opportunity. Like I mentioned, if you

[3:25:03] know it's a very competitive job market,

[3:25:06] then um that might lower the um the uh

[3:25:11] available position pool a little bit and

[3:25:13] you know that allows us to be a little

[3:25:15] more aggressive

[3:25:18] and also definitely explore new benefits

[3:25:20] programs and training opportunities. Uh

[3:25:22] we had one of the goals listed on the

[3:25:25] council priorities as um exploring a new

[3:25:27] paid family leave program. Um, Elizabeth

[3:25:30] has also been pushing and promoting a

[3:25:33] lot of leadership development, not just

[3:25:35] for management and supervisor staff, but

[3:25:37] pushing training opportunities um,

[3:25:40] available to all staff.

[3:25:44] So, that was just a quick um, review of

[3:25:48] um, current vacancies and our efforts.

[3:25:50] So, this is a public hearing. So, um,

[3:25:53] first I'll take any clarification

[3:25:54] questions you might have. Then I

[3:25:56] recommend opening the public hearing. uh

[3:25:59] taking public comments and then closing

[3:26:01] public hearing for final Q&A. Um this is

[3:26:04] just a report only. So there's no um

[3:26:06] action item for the council to take.

[3:26:08] Thank you very much.

[3:26:09] >> Thank you for the presentation. Any

[3:26:11] question from the council? Council

[3:26:13] member Krollic.

[3:26:15] >> Thank you, William.

[3:26:16] >> Um yeah, I have a couple questions of

[3:26:18] these four public works clerical that

[3:26:21] are open, but one you said was code

[3:26:24] enforcement, which is under building and

[3:26:25] planning. Does does that category kind

[3:26:27] of stretch out into other departments

[3:26:29] besides public works?

[3:26:32] >> So public works, clerical, yes. Um it

[3:26:35] basically stretches into a lot of

[3:26:37] departments because on the clerical side

[3:26:38] there's you know the admin assistants

[3:26:41] and um building planning technicians. So

[3:26:45] any type of technician uh plus

[3:26:48] maintenance workers, lead workers. So it is really encompassing of like the

[3:26:53] public works um maintenance worker side

[3:26:55] but also kind of like our clerical um

[3:26:58] you know journey level tech side as

[3:27:00] well.

[3:27:01] >> Okay. Thank you. And I just have one

[3:27:02] more question. Are are we planning to

[3:27:04] keep any of these positions open or

[3:27:07] we're working to fill everyone?

[3:27:10] >> So we we work with the departments

[3:27:12] directly. Um, for example, with the

[3:27:15] maintenance worker positions, we we like

[3:27:17] to fill it as much as possible, but then

[3:27:19] we also have, you know, temporary

[3:27:22] maintenance worker recruitments open.

[3:27:24] So, in in the case of, you know, um a

[3:27:28] maintenance worker resigning or

[3:27:30] separating, you know, we have, you know,

[3:27:32] active personnel ready to go, you know,

[3:27:34] in order to, you know, promote excellent

[3:27:36] customer service, continuity of service.

[3:27:38] So, it it's really a position by

[3:27:40] position basis. Um, but we work closely

[3:27:44] with all departments to make sure they

[3:27:47] we we get recruitments out as quickly as

[3:27:49] possible if they need an urgent position

[3:27:51] to fill.

[3:27:52] >> So, it sounds like when there is an open

[3:27:54] position, that department does kind of

[3:27:57] re review to make sure that that's the

[3:27:59] best use.

[3:28:01] >> That is correct.

[3:28:02] >> Thank you.

[3:28:04] Any additional questions from

[3:28:06] the mayor?

[3:28:06] >> Yes. Um, council member Chong,

[3:28:09] >> thank you William for your presentation

[3:28:11] and um, I'm delighted to hear that you

[3:28:14] are very proactive and progressive in

[3:28:17] terms of the the job market um,

[3:28:19] realizing that there's compet

[3:28:22] competitions there and then um, so

[3:28:25] really delighted that you're very

[3:28:26] proactive about that. Uh my question is

[3:28:29] that there is a timeline that you had

[3:28:31] the pre-recruitments

[3:28:34] then the recruitments then the um

[3:28:37] postrecruitments

[3:28:38] what is the sort of the the time the

[3:28:43] schedule for from the the pre to the

[3:28:47] post.

[3:28:49] >> So that I I don't want to sound like a

[3:28:52] copout answer but it's also you know

[3:28:55] dependent on the position. So, for

[3:28:56] example, I said we like to be very

[3:28:59] aggressive with the police officer

[3:29:00] recruitment. So, I know command staff

[3:29:03] there are reviewing applications

[3:29:06] basically as they come in. So, within 24

[3:29:08] hours they're reviewing the application

[3:29:11] um and we're trying to identify

[3:29:12] candidates. So that window that timeline

[3:29:16] from the pre-recruitment to recruitment

[3:29:18] that's um that's kind of protracted a

[3:29:20] little bit from say maybe like a you

[3:29:23] know a senior building and planning tech

[3:29:26] position which you know we can stretch

[3:29:28] it out a little bit more to 30 days and

[3:29:30] that's mainly to you know get that job

[3:29:33] announcement out there to get qualified

[3:29:34] candidates. Um it not to say that that

[3:29:38] position is not also very competitive

[3:29:40] and hard to fill. Um but yeah, it it's

[3:29:44] based on

[3:29:46] job by job, position by position and um

[3:29:48] Elizabeth has been very proactive in

[3:29:50] reaching out to the departments u when

[3:29:53] we have separations, when we have

[3:29:54] retirements um and whatnot to really

[3:29:57] gauge um their need to go out for

[3:30:00] recruitments and um we um we basically

[3:30:04] issue them as needed by the department.

[3:30:07] And I see that uh Chief Colola is ready

[3:30:10] to address some of the issues on the

[3:30:13] police department.

[3:30:15] >> Thank you. And I I want to say thank you

[3:30:16] to our HR department because they do a

[3:30:19] fantastic job getting everything that we

[3:30:23] need. Um, this slide is probably a

[3:30:26] little bit of more about us because we

[3:30:28] do have like a a pre-recruitment where they have their oral interviews

[3:30:33] and then once we decide to go forward

[3:30:35] with an officer they or a dispatcher

[3:30:38] they go into a background process and as

[3:30:41] you can imagine that process is um

[3:30:45] pretty stringent right they have to go

[3:30:48] through a background portion and then a

[3:30:50] polygraph and if they complete both of

[3:30:52] those success successfully, then they go

[3:30:55] into a conditional offer, which they

[3:30:58] will get the job if they pass a medical

[3:31:01] and psych. So, there's four different

[3:31:03] stages. And once they get to the medical

[3:31:06] and psych department, that's where HR

[3:31:08] comes in and they schedule all of that

[3:31:10] stuff for us. And

[3:31:13] William is correct. It's been very

[3:31:15] cutthroat because everybody's hiring and

[3:31:18] so to get the background done quickly,

[3:31:21] you know, we put a lot of pressure on HR

[3:31:24] and like did we get this back and

[3:31:26] they've been doing great. So, we're

[3:31:28] actually uh putting three in the academy

[3:31:31] in June. So, really looking forward to

[3:31:33] that. We have uh five in the background

[3:31:37] process. So, hopefully those will

[3:31:40] continue to move forward. And uh I want

[3:31:44] to thank my team because we've done some

[3:31:47] amazing jobs with recruitment. We put

[3:31:49] together a recruitment team. There's

[3:31:52] five officers all ranging in rank. Uh

[3:31:58] in May, I'm sorry, in March, they went

[3:32:00] to the Travis Air Force Base during

[3:32:02] career day and they promoted Hillsboro

[3:32:05] Police Department. We also have another

[3:32:08] recruitment coming up this month at uh

[3:32:12] the police academy in San Jose. So,

[3:32:15] we're doing a lot of things. We're

[3:32:17] trying to get the word out and trying to

[3:32:19] get the best possible people to serve as

[3:32:22] officers for Hillsboro.

[3:32:24] >> Thank you, Chief.

[3:32:26] >> Thank you. Any additional question? Um,

[3:32:29] Vice Mayor Rexdale,

[3:32:31] >> I just had a question. Uh William, I

[3:32:34] think it was the slide right before this

[3:32:35] on the comparison to last year. I Yes. I

[3:32:40] just wanted So

[3:32:42] is the the plus meaning there were more.

[3:32:45] Can you what like what's the plus one

[3:32:47] mean? Just one more than last year.

[3:32:50] >> Yeah. So one more recruitment um at this

[3:32:55] point in time than last year.

[3:32:59] >> Oh, okay. So then the the 299

[3:33:03] Yeah. So last year we had know we

[3:33:05] screened over 500 or yeah 500 applicants

[3:33:10] just because we had more maintenance

[3:33:11] worker recruitments last year.

[3:33:13] >> Really I figured I was reading it wrong.

[3:33:15] Okay. So there were 299 more last year

[3:33:20] >> applicants. Yes.

[3:33:21] >> Okay.

[3:33:21] >> Yes.

[3:33:21] >> I I thought I must be reading it wrong.

[3:33:24] Okay. And I'm also just want to say so

[3:33:25] happy that Elizabeth is working out so

[3:33:27] well. Thank you.

[3:33:29] >> Okay. No additional question. Just one

[3:33:31] quick question for um police for HPD. Do

[3:33:34] we um are all the 32 FTEEs all sorry 31

[3:33:40] um are they all fulltime FTEES or do you

[3:33:44] have fractionated

[3:33:46] full-time equivalents in there? In other

[3:33:48] words, halftime, part-time, is it all

[3:33:51] full-time? The 31 include uh I believe

[3:33:56] they include everyone

[3:33:59] but management, right?

[3:34:03] » It's all sworn positions. So anyone

[3:34:07] lieutenant or uh well all all sworn up

[3:34:11] to the sergeant level and then

[3:34:12] lieutenant, captain, chief of police are

[3:34:16] all um within the unrepresented.

[3:34:19] >> Okay, that's that's fine. That's good.

[3:34:21] CL a question for me. Um, Council Member

[3:34:25] Krillig, yes, you have a question.

[3:34:26] >> Thank you. So, um, thank you again for,

[3:34:29] you know, this is a big lift and it's

[3:34:31] with a small town like ours, every

[3:34:33] position is so important and I was just

[3:34:36] thinking we we never want to lay anybody

[3:34:38] off. We don't, but just as I referenced

[3:34:40] before, I'm really happy and I know that

[3:34:43] our best practices is to take a good

[3:34:45] look at the department, what we really

[3:34:46] need. But if if AI is helpful in

[3:34:51] reducing headcount, perhaps it could be

[3:34:54] a winwin in that the people in that

[3:34:56] department would some would they would

[3:35:00] get some of that savings. So the town

[3:35:02] would get some savings, but the other

[3:35:03] people in the department would get some

[3:35:05] savings recognizing uh or would get an

[3:35:08] increase recognizing that it's even with

[3:35:10] AI, it's going to be more of a lift for

[3:35:12] them. But hopefully we continue to do

[3:35:15] that analysis so that we're as efficient

[3:35:17] as we are as we could be.

[3:35:21] >> Thank you. Any additional questions? No.

[3:35:23] We'll go to public comments.

[3:35:26] >> Do we have any public comments on Zoom?

[3:35:29] >> Thank you. And let's see. Just give it a

[3:35:32] second. But no, we have no public

[3:35:34] comment on Zoom and I have no speaker

[3:35:35] cards. Thank you.

[3:35:37] >> Okay. See no public comment. I will

[3:35:39] close public comment. And this um item

[3:35:42] has no um no action is required. So we don't have a resolution.

[3:35:47] All right. Next item, new business,

[3:35:50] which is um resolution adopting two

[3:35:52] policies. Thank you, William. That was

[3:35:55] great. Um resolution adopting two

[3:35:59] policies. Um, policy 421, disruption of

[3:36:02] telephonic or internet service during

[3:36:04] meetings in accordance with Senate Bill

[3:36:07] 707.

[3:36:09] Two, policy 42:2, public comment

[3:36:13] regulations, and that will be presented

[3:36:15] by our city attorney, Christopher Diaz,

[3:36:17] and city clerk, Miss Satush.

[3:36:20] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole, and city council.

[3:36:21] Christopher Diaz is your city attorney.

[3:36:23] Uh, we're going to talk tonight a little

[3:36:24] bit about disruption um and public

[3:36:27] comment policies. All of this is

[3:36:29] generated by SB77. Uh for purposes of

[3:36:31] tonight, disruption has two meanings.

[3:36:33] One, it means the technical disruption

[3:36:35] we might incur with uh the Zoom platform

[3:36:38] and then also means disruption of any

[3:36:41] agitators that might come from the

[3:36:42] outside and provide public comment on

[3:36:44] Zoom. We want to provide some tools for

[3:36:46] the council to deal with those issues if

[3:36:48] they do pop up. I know some agencies in

[3:36:50] the past couple of years had Zoom

[3:36:52] bombing incidents and so we want to make

[3:36:53] sure that we have the tools in the

[3:36:54] toolbox to address those issues.

[3:36:57] So just an agenda of what we'll talk

[3:36:59] about this evening and I have about 20

[3:37:00] slides so expect about a 20-minute

[3:37:02] presentation but we'll talk a little bit

[3:37:04] about the purpose behind SB77 and how it

[3:37:06] got generated in the state legislature.

[3:37:08] We'll talk about the updates for

[3:37:10] eligible legislative bodies which is a

[3:37:11] new defined term within the Brown Act

[3:37:13] including the disruption policy

[3:37:15] requirement that we're here to basically

[3:37:17] take action on tonight. We'll also talk

[3:37:19] about public comment regulations which

[3:37:21] we're proposing uh very simple

[3:37:23] regulations which just deal with again

[3:37:25] any kind of disruption that occurs from

[3:37:27] a commenttor. And then lastly I'll talk

[3:37:30] a little bit about a teleconferencing

[3:37:31] update that uh came out of SB77. I won't

[3:37:34] spend too much time on this but if

[3:37:36] council is interested in a future

[3:37:37] presentation or just more materials

[3:37:39] we're happy to provide those to you so

[3:37:41] you understand all the options to

[3:37:42] teleconference into a meeting.

[3:37:45] So, the first is really where did SB77

[3:37:48] come from? Um, it got generated last

[3:37:51] year, and I can't recall if it was a

[3:37:52] two-year bill or just a one-year bill,

[3:37:54] but when it first got generated, it was

[3:37:56] primarily designed to, um, give more

[3:37:59] tools in my opinion to labor groups and

[3:38:01] a little bit of tying of the hands of

[3:38:03] local agencies in dealing with those

[3:38:05] labor groups. And so, was modifications

[3:38:07] to the Brown Act, a little more pro-

[3:38:08] labor um, in raiding them. And it wasn't

[3:38:11] surprising because the author of the

[3:38:13] bill, Dazzo, is a former labor union

[3:38:15] organizer. And so she was going that

[3:38:16] direction with changes to the Brown Act.

[3:38:19] Um there was a lot of opposition to that

[3:38:21] bill initially and ultimately what

[3:38:22] happened with SB77 like all things in

[3:38:24] Sacramento is the bill got gutted and

[3:38:26] amended to some extent and it ended up

[3:38:28] becoming a bill about modernizing our

[3:38:31] technology to deal with greater public

[3:38:33] access. And so I think the author of the

[3:38:35] bill looked at what transpired during

[3:38:37] the pandemic, how much more public

[3:38:39] access the public had to meetings with

[3:38:40] Zoom, basically zooming in from their

[3:38:43] home to get uh to to watch a meeting to

[3:38:45] provide public comment. And so they

[3:38:47] wanted to build all of those

[3:38:48] requirements into the Brown Act. So

[3:38:51] again, the updates under SB77 again a

[3:38:54] new requirements for specific

[3:38:55] legislative bodies and those would be

[3:38:56] what's defined as eligible legislative

[3:38:58] body and we'll talk about what that

[3:39:00] definition is shortly. again that need

[3:39:02] to adopt a disruption policy which is

[3:39:04] why we're here this evening. It does

[3:39:05] change the teleconferencing rules a

[3:39:07] little bit but not uh in a major way.

[3:39:09] And then there's other cleanup within

[3:39:11] SB77.

[3:39:13] Now the big update is obviously the

[3:39:15] update for what's now defined as

[3:39:16] eligible legislative bodies. So as you

[3:39:19] know the Brown Act has always defined

[3:39:21] what's called the legislative body and

[3:39:23] that's basically your city council. It's

[3:39:25] your board of supervisors. It's a

[3:39:27] special district's board um board of

[3:39:30] directors. It's also all of your uh

[3:39:32] lower level commissions and committees

[3:39:34] that you create at the council level and

[3:39:36] appoint those people to commissions.

[3:39:38] Those are uh essentially commissions

[3:39:40] that advise you and therefore they are

[3:39:41] considered legislative bodies under the

[3:39:43] Brown Act. What that basically means is

[3:39:45] we have open meeting requirements. We

[3:39:46] need to publish an agenda. Um but now

[3:39:49] the state legislature in their wisdom

[3:39:51] with SB77 has a new defined term called

[3:39:53] eligible legislative bodies. Now, these

[3:39:56] are your larger jurisdictions and so any

[3:39:58] city with a population over 30,000. And

[3:40:01] again, keep in mind, it's only the

[3:40:02] council or the highest level body. SB77.

[3:40:05] All the requirements we'll talk about

[3:40:06] tonight do not apply to any of your

[3:40:08] lower level bodies. It's just you as the

[3:40:10] city council. But again, it applies to

[3:40:13] city councils with a city with a

[3:40:14] population over 30,000. It applies to a

[3:40:18] county board of supervisors in a county

[3:40:19] with a population over 30,000. It also

[3:40:22] includes a city in a county with a

[3:40:24] population over 600,000 and that's the

[3:40:26] prong that we are subject to. So every

[3:40:28] city in Sonteo County is subject is an

[3:40:30] eligible legislative body at the city

[3:40:32] council level. Um and that's because the

[3:40:34] population in Sano County I think is

[3:40:36] roughly around 750,000 uh population.

[3:40:39] And then it also includes those larger

[3:40:41] special districts. So if you have a

[3:40:42] special district with a website covering

[3:40:44] a uh all of a county over 600,000

[3:40:46] population plus 200 employees, they

[3:40:49] would be covered. a special district

[3:40:50] with a website and a thousand plus

[3:40:52] employees, they would be covered and and

[3:40:53] so on and so on.

[3:40:56] Now, what is the bigger requirement? And

[3:40:58] this is not going to be a heavy lift for

[3:41:00] the town of Hillsboro because you've

[3:41:01] kept the Zoom platform since the

[3:41:03] pandemic, since coming back to in

[3:41:04] person. You've allowed your residents to

[3:41:06] attend via Zoom and provide public

[3:41:08] comment. And so, this won't be a big

[3:41:10] change for you. But other agencies that

[3:41:12] basically went back to in person,

[3:41:14] stopped the Zoom platform, and did not

[3:41:16] update the technology within their

[3:41:18] council chambers, this will be a heavy

[3:41:19] lift for them. We do believe that's why

[3:41:21] the state legislature made these

[3:41:23] provisions effective July 1st. As you

[3:41:25] know, most bills when they pass in

[3:41:27] Sacramento, they become effective ju uh

[3:41:29] January 1st, rather, of the calendar

[3:41:30] year. Uh but the state legislature said

[3:41:33] some provisions kick in January 1st, but

[3:41:35] the heavy lift kicks in July 1st. And so

[3:41:37] that's why we're here this evening uh to

[3:41:39] walk you through all these new

[3:41:40] requirements that will apply to us on

[3:41:42] July 1st. So the big requirement, as I

[3:41:44] said, is to to basically allow the

[3:41:46] public to attend and comment via Zoom or

[3:41:49] another platform. Um keep in mind that

[3:41:52] requirement only applies if Zoom is

[3:41:53] operational at the meeting location. And

[3:41:56] so if we're in the chambers, we know it

[3:41:57] works here. So that is um something we

[3:42:00] would have to abide by. If you're in

[3:42:02] another venue and let's say you don't

[3:42:03] have internet or phone access, there

[3:42:05] might be an open question whether you

[3:42:06] really have to u connect the public via

[3:42:08] Zoom. Uh just as we do now, the town is

[3:42:12] also required to post and provide the

[3:42:13] call-in option or the internet link on

[3:42:16] for Zoom on the meeting agenda. So not a

[3:42:19] change there. A new requirement though

[3:42:21] which we have not been doing which is uh

[3:42:23] kicking in with SB77 is we have to turn

[3:42:25] on captioning on Zoom. And so if someone

[3:42:27] has some difficulty hearing or wants to

[3:42:28] see the words, we turn on the captioning

[3:42:30] and they're able to see that on their

[3:42:32] end.

[3:42:34] Now, as I indicated, it doesn't apply to

[3:42:36] every meeting you conduct, but if we're

[3:42:38] in the chambers and Zoom works, we would

[3:42:40] have to basically connect the public

[3:42:41] that way. Um but again if it doesn't

[3:42:44] work at the meeting location you're

[3:42:45] meeting at uh off the table. There's

[3:42:48] also other uh types of meetings uh in

[3:42:50] the Brown Act which uh are laid out here

[3:42:52] that are excluded from the Zoom

[3:42:54] requirement and that would be if you

[3:42:55] attended a judicial hearing, an

[3:42:56] administrative hearing in which you're a

[3:42:58] party. So if you wanted to go to the

[3:43:00] courthouse to watch proceedings take

[3:43:01] place as a council, you could do that.

[3:43:03] Uh if you're inspecting real or personal

[3:43:05] property where the topic of the meeting

[3:43:06] is limited to items directly related to

[3:43:08] that property. If you're meeting with

[3:43:10] federal or state- elected officials in

[3:43:12] Sacramento or in Washington DC, that's

[3:43:14] allowable and you don't need to connect

[3:43:15] the Zoom that way. If you're meeting in

[3:43:17] or near a facility owned by the local

[3:43:19] agency where the meeting topic is

[3:43:21] limited to items directly related to the

[3:43:23] facility, then again, doesn't apply

[3:43:24] there. So, if you're going up to the

[3:43:26] corporation yard or some other facility,

[3:43:28] um, doesn't apply in those

[3:43:30] circumstances. Then finally, if you're

[3:43:31] meeting under the emergency provisions

[3:43:33] within the Brown Act.

[3:43:36] Now, the the main component of why we're

[3:43:38] here this evening is the requirement to

[3:43:40] adopt a disruption policy. And what SB77

[3:43:43] says is that you want to adopt a policy

[3:43:45] as to how you'll deal with the

[3:43:46] technology disruption, but it also gives

[3:43:49] us more uh language within SB77 as well

[3:43:52] as in the Brown Act to deal with

[3:43:53] disruptions of public participants. But

[3:43:56] for purposes of the technology

[3:43:57] disruption, uh what do we need to do and

[3:43:59] what does the policy need to lay out?

[3:44:01] what basically needs to indicate that

[3:44:02] we're going to make if the Zoom fails

[3:44:04] for whatever reason or we lose

[3:44:06] technology in this in this in these

[3:44:07] chambers, we will make a good faith

[3:44:10] attempt to restore that service for at

[3:44:11] least one hour. Now, the hope is that

[3:44:14] you uh fix the issue within that hour.

[3:44:17] But if you did not um what do we need to

[3:44:19] do, and we'll talk about that shortly,

[3:44:21] but keep in mind during that one hour

[3:44:23] recess, and it doesn't need to be the

[3:44:24] full hour, if you fix the technology

[3:44:26] within 15 minutes, you can reconnect the

[3:44:28] public and restart the meeting. But if

[3:44:30] we did have a disruption, you we must

[3:44:32] announce it to the public. So it would

[3:44:33] either be our mayor or city clerk

[3:44:35] announcing that disruption to the

[3:44:36] public. We are required to take a

[3:44:38] recess. Um if there is a close session

[3:44:41] on the agenda and let's say um and I

[3:44:43] know you normally do close session at

[3:44:45] the beginning of the meeting, but let's

[3:44:46] say there's an unfinished close session

[3:44:48] item and you want to reconvene at the

[3:44:49] end of the meeting. If we were to have a

[3:44:51] technology disruption during the course

[3:44:53] of the meeting, you could convene in

[3:44:55] close session to finish that close

[3:44:56] session during that recess while the

[3:44:59] service disruption is being addressed

[3:45:02] and then again during that recess making

[3:45:04] a good faith attempt to restore the

[3:45:06] service.

[3:45:08] Now what happens if we can't remedy that

[3:45:10] disruption within an hour and we're

[3:45:11] sitting here just wondering what to do?

[3:45:13] Well, the Brown Act basically says we

[3:45:15] have an obligation to either adjourn the

[3:45:16] meeting and just basically continue with

[3:45:18] business another day, further extend the

[3:45:21] recess to try to restore the service.

[3:45:22] So, we could take more time or the

[3:45:25] council has the option of reconvening an

[3:45:27] open session, but we must adopt a

[3:45:30] finding by a roll call vote that one,

[3:45:32] good faith efforts were taken to restore

[3:45:33] the service and two, the public interest

[3:45:35] in continuing the meeting outweighs the

[3:45:37] public interest in remote public access.

[3:45:40] Now, we're not going to know uh

[3:45:42] basically from case law because as you

[3:45:45] know, the state legislature crafts

[3:45:46] language within statute. Um we don't

[3:45:49] really know how it's going to be

[3:45:50] interpreted until we see that case law

[3:45:52] and and there's challenges that come out

[3:45:53] of this. But my best guess in looking at

[3:45:55] the finding, I would say if there's a

[3:45:57] situation where you had something on the

[3:45:58] agenda where you needed to conduct the

[3:46:01] business, take care of the action item,

[3:46:03] but let's say there wasn't a ton of

[3:46:04] public interest in the item. Well, in

[3:46:06] that circumstance, I think you could

[3:46:07] probably successfully make this finding

[3:46:09] to say, "Look, we tried our best. An

[3:46:11] hour has passed. We have an action item

[3:46:13] on this agenda that needs to be acted

[3:46:14] upon either tonight or within the next

[3:46:16] couple of days. The public hasn't had a

[3:46:18] big interest in it, and so we believe

[3:46:20] the public interest in continuing the

[3:46:22] meeting outweighs the public interest in

[3:46:23] remote public access. So, that's at

[3:46:25] least an example of how you could make

[3:46:27] the finding. Obviously, it's all going

[3:46:28] to be fact dependent, and we would look

[3:46:30] at the facts that are before the council

[3:46:32] in guiding you in making that finding.

[3:46:36] Now changing just a little bit of the

[3:46:37] gears from disruption of the technology

[3:46:39] to more so disruption from a comment and

[3:46:42] you have not had these kind of

[3:46:44] disruptions from your residents. Uh but

[3:46:46] where we've seen the disruptions occur

[3:46:47] has often been from the outside and so

[3:46:50] uh wanted to to walk the council through

[3:46:52] what options exist within the Brown Act

[3:46:53] to deal with those types of disruptions.

[3:46:55] And this is new law with SB77 as to how

[3:46:58] to deal with virtual disruptions. And it

[3:47:00] basically indicates that yes, if we had

[3:47:02] a virtual commentator who's disrupting

[3:47:04] the meeting, and keep in mind disruption

[3:47:06] doesn't just mean u uh agitating the

[3:47:09] meeting or stalling the meeting, it

[3:47:10] would truly need to be somebody who's

[3:47:12] stopping you from basically conducting

[3:47:14] business. It's a high it's a high

[3:47:16] threshold. But if that did occur, what

[3:47:18] are our options? Well, the mayor or the

[3:47:20] clerk within the policy could provide a

[3:47:22] warning consistent with the Brown Act,

[3:47:23] basically indicating that the behavior

[3:47:25] is actually disrupting the meeting,

[3:47:27] stopping us from proceeding with

[3:47:28] business. And if they fail to cease that

[3:47:30] behavior, it will result in removal.

[3:47:33] Under the Brown Act, under the new

[3:47:35] virtual comment uh disruption

[3:47:36] provisions, it basically says if that

[3:47:38] commenttor persists in disrupting the

[3:47:40] meeting, we have the option of muting

[3:47:42] the speaker, which usually takes care of

[3:47:43] the issue from a Zoom perspective. Or

[3:47:46] let's say it's video and something else

[3:47:48] is going on, then we have the option of

[3:47:50] removing them completely from the Zoom

[3:47:52] platform and continuing continuing with

[3:47:54] the meeting.

[3:47:57] Now, the next few slides are really

[3:47:59] specific to what I think our city clerk

[3:48:01] staff has been dealing with in the

[3:48:02] background in implementing SB77. And so,

[3:48:04] I want to turn over the next two slides

[3:48:06] to Lisa Nushar, city clerk. Lisa,

[3:48:09] >> thank you. Yes. So, one of the

[3:48:11] additional requirements of 70 SB77 is

[3:48:14] that we're required to engage with

[3:48:16] underrepresented communities or

[3:48:18] individuals or communities that don't

[3:48:20] typically participate in our meetings.

[3:48:23] We're also required to have an

[3:48:24] electronic system for accepting and

[3:48:26] fulfilling requests for the meeting

[3:48:28] agendas and documents uh through email

[3:48:31] or another integrated system on our

[3:48:33] website. And uh our website has to

[3:48:36] include um uh information about the

[3:48:39] meeting process. So, general explanation

[3:48:41] of the public meeting process, an

[3:48:43] explanation of the procedures for a

[3:48:45] member of the public to provide

[3:48:46] comments, um a calendar of the public

[3:48:49] meeting dates, including the time and

[3:48:51] location of the meeting, uh and the

[3:48:53] current posted agenda of of the meeting

[3:48:56] body. So, we have all of this

[3:48:57] information on our website currently,

[3:48:59] and it's it's um mostly all in the same

[3:49:01] place, but what we're doing now is just

[3:49:03] making sure it's all consolidated uh and

[3:49:06] consistent with uh SB77 so that all of

[3:49:09] that information is available to members

[3:49:11] of the public in the same location.

[3:49:14] We also have to provide a physical space

[3:49:16] near our current bulletin board in the

[3:49:18] front of town hall where members of the

[3:49:20] public can post their own translations

[3:49:23] of the agenda. So, we're working with

[3:49:25] public works um to install a smaller

[3:49:28] bulletin board next to the existing

[3:49:30] bulletin board where members of the

[3:49:32] public can post agenda translations. Uh

[3:49:35] we do uh plan to put something on the

[3:49:38] bulletin board, you know, to indicate

[3:49:39] that this uh bulletin board is only for

[3:49:42] the purposes of agenda translations. Uh

[3:49:45] and it can only be used for that

[3:49:47] purpose.

[3:49:49] Um, and we also have to, as I mentioned,

[3:49:51] make efforts to invite groups that don't

[3:49:53] normally participate in our meetings.

[3:49:55] Um, so we're just planning to, you know,

[3:49:57] continue to promote signing up for our

[3:50:00] agendas, signing up for the weekly and

[3:50:02] bulletin, all of the kind of, um, uh,

[3:50:05] promotion that we do of ways to engage

[3:50:07] with, um, engage with the council,

[3:50:10] engage with the town, um, reach out to

[3:50:13] community groups, um, those kinds of

[3:50:15] opportunities that we have when we have

[3:50:16] neighborhood groups gathered to just

[3:50:18] continue to promote um, ways to to

[3:50:21] connect with the council and our council

[3:50:22] meetings.

[3:50:26] Um, additionally we are required to the

[3:50:29] SP77 requires that um eligible um B

[3:50:33] legislative bodies are required to

[3:50:35] accommodate um translation

[3:50:36] interpretation requests. Um so we um

[3:50:40] need to provide space and extra time um

[3:50:44] not the actual interpretive you know

[3:50:46] interpretation service uh itself uh to

[3:50:49] members of the public who would like to

[3:50:50] have an interpreter. So we have to

[3:50:53] provide instructions for how someone who

[3:50:55] would like to bring an interpreter to

[3:50:56] the meeting um how they would do that.

[3:50:58] So we're working to put put that

[3:51:01] information in the same place on the

[3:51:02] agenda. Um and in addition and this

[3:51:06] exists now that if there is someone who

[3:51:08] comes with an interpreter and would like

[3:51:09] to use an interpreter, they do actually

[3:51:11] get double the amount of public comment

[3:51:14] time that's available uh to any other

[3:51:16] member of the public. So currently if

[3:51:18] someone had three minutes they would get

[3:51:20] six to allow for that interpretation.

[3:51:24] Um also cities um who have applicable uh

[3:51:28] languages in their in their city would

[3:51:30] be required to translate and post the

[3:51:32] agenda into any language that's spoken

[3:51:35] um by more than uh 20% um of of the

[3:51:39] language language in their city um that

[3:51:42] is spoken by um those individuals. and

[3:51:45] we actually don't in the town have any

[3:51:47] uh languages that apply. So, we won't be

[3:51:50] translating um our agenda, but we do um

[3:51:53] have to, you know, take a look at that

[3:51:55] information annually based on the US

[3:51:57] Census Bureau um American Community

[3:51:59] Survey to make sure that we're adhering

[3:52:01] to those uh to those numbers and making

[3:52:03] sure that we're adhering to the

[3:52:04] translation requirements.

[3:52:07] >> Lisa and I were talking a little earlier

[3:52:09] about some cities that don't have to do

[3:52:10] any translation and it was kind of

[3:52:12] shocking. San Monteo, San Jose, just

[3:52:14] cities that you would think would have

[3:52:16] 20% of of a certain language, but they

[3:52:19] don't. So quite interesting how it's

[3:52:21] shaking out in terms of the percentages.

[3:52:24] So the next policy I wanted to talk

[3:52:26] about just is again those public comment

[3:52:28] regulations to deal with any kind of

[3:52:30] outside agitators, but really limited

[3:52:32] comments consistent with the Brown Act.

[3:52:33] But I want to talk give it a little bit

[3:52:35] of context first. Um, keep in mind under

[3:52:37] First Amendment principles, a council

[3:52:39] meeting is what's considered a limited

[3:52:41] public form. basically means we open up

[3:52:43] the form here on government property for

[3:52:45] people to come to speak but we also

[3:52:46] control it quite a bit. Um we limit

[3:52:49] where on the agenda they can speak. We

[3:52:50] limit the time that they can speak and

[3:52:52] we somewhat limit generally the broader

[3:52:55] topic that they can speak about

[3:52:56] something within your subject matter

[3:52:58] jurisdiction of city council. It's

[3:52:59] basically time place and manner

[3:53:01] regulations under the first amendment

[3:53:02] principles. Keep in mind we can impose

[3:53:05] those time place and manner regulations

[3:53:07] um and and are it's fully consistent

[3:53:09] with the first amendment. The only risk

[3:53:10] is we can't limit speech based on

[3:53:13] viewpoint.

[3:53:15] Now, disruption under the law generally

[3:53:17] seeks to regulate disruptive behavior.

[3:53:19] And so, if someone's doing something in

[3:53:21] this room that's causing us to not

[3:53:23] proceed with the meeting for some a

[3:53:24] certain reason, and I can give some

[3:53:26] context to that, um, we'd want to focus

[3:53:28] on that and not necessarily the content

[3:53:30] of the speech.

[3:53:32] general first amendment principles and

[3:53:33] this is all subject to obviously gray

[3:53:36] areas within the law but it protects

[3:53:37] hate speech generally profanity but it

[3:53:40] does not protect against incitement of

[3:53:42] violence or obscenity.

[3:53:45] Now the regulations themselves are quite

[3:53:48] limited but it's really just stuff you

[3:53:50] probably have seen elsewhere in other

[3:53:51] agencies and we do have some of this

[3:53:53] within your city council handbook but I

[3:53:55] also know that hasn't been officially

[3:53:57] adopted. What the Brown Act indicates is

[3:53:59] that uh a local agency and a legislative

[3:54:01] body can adopt reasonable regulations,

[3:54:03] but you'd want to adopt those. And so I

[3:54:05] want to make sure council has some tools

[3:54:07] in the toolbox to deal with any kind of

[3:54:09] uh comments that come forth or if we had

[3:54:11] a large volume of speakers for that

[3:54:13] matter. But what what the regulations

[3:54:15] lay out is two prongs. First is time

[3:54:17] limits. Provides discretion to the mayor

[3:54:19] to reduce public comment time down from

[3:54:21] three minutes to two or one minute

[3:54:22] depending on the volume of speakers and

[3:54:24] the amount of business to transact. And

[3:54:26] so if you had a room of speakers from

[3:54:28] the public that wanted to share

[3:54:29] something with you, um you could look at

[3:54:31] the room basically ask people to raise

[3:54:33] their hands if they're here to speak on

[3:54:35] a particular topic. And looking at the

[3:54:37] agenda, if you had 20 items on the

[3:54:38] agenda to get through, but had 300

[3:54:40] people in this room, you do have

[3:54:42] discretion to say we need to reduce that

[3:54:44] public comment time down so that we can

[3:54:46] hear from all of you and get through our

[3:54:47] business. The second is limiting total

[3:54:50] public comment time on a particular

[3:54:51] topic. I like to use this one pretty

[3:54:53] sparingly because it leaves some people

[3:54:55] out of being able to provide comment,

[3:54:57] but in cir certain circumstances, you

[3:54:59] could say, um, we have an an item on the

[3:55:02] agenda. It will return to the council at

[3:55:04] future meetings because this is just an

[3:55:06] initial discussion. We want we have 300

[3:55:08] of you here tonight. We'd like to limit

[3:55:10] the total amount of public comment time

[3:55:12] to one hour. You're going to have some

[3:55:14] people that are going to be left out in

[3:55:15] those circumstances, but the Brown Act

[3:55:16] specifically acknowledges that you can

[3:55:18] do this, but it would be at the

[3:55:19] discretion of the council if you want to

[3:55:21] invoke that policy uh to limit total

[3:55:23] public comment time on a particular

[3:55:24] topic. I usually like to see just the

[3:55:26] minutes reduced because it gets

[3:55:28] everybody the opportunity to speak. The

[3:55:31] second prong is basically Brown Act

[3:55:33] applicability. So, um, as you know, for

[3:55:36] general public comment periods on the

[3:55:38] agenda, we like to have those comments

[3:55:39] limited to something that's within your

[3:55:41] subject matter jurisdiction, something

[3:55:42] that you can take action on at the

[3:55:44] council level if you wanted to,

[3:55:46] something that's within your

[3:55:47] jurisdiction. Now, that term is not a

[3:55:50] precise term. It is quite gray. You do

[3:55:53] take action on a lot of things. And so,

[3:55:55] sometimes there's an open question

[3:55:56] whether something is truly within your

[3:55:58] subject matter jurisdiction. But I would

[3:56:00] imagine if somebody was standing at the

[3:56:01] podium providing public comment under

[3:56:03] general public comment talking primarily

[3:56:05] about the schools um and concerned about

[3:56:07] something happening in one of the

[3:56:09] schools within town, we don't have

[3:56:10] authority over the schools. And so you

[3:56:12] could tell that commenttor, look, I'd

[3:56:14] like you to comport your comments

[3:56:16] consistent with what we can we can hear

[3:56:18] and and deal with. Um, but if you have a

[3:56:20] concern about the schools, um, the

[3:56:22] schools meet on, you know, Tuesdays,

[3:56:23] whatever day it happens to be, but let

[3:56:25] them know that. And that's an option for

[3:56:27] the council to basically steer that

[3:56:28] public comment. And then finally, if

[3:56:31] they're if someone's commenting on an

[3:56:32] agenda item, it should be limited to the

[3:56:35] agenda topic on the agenda. And so if

[3:56:37] they're talking or spewing hate speech

[3:56:39] on something that's uh about uh sewer

[3:56:42] repairs, uh, we can ask that person to

[3:56:44] comport their comments consistent with

[3:56:45] the agenda item.

[3:56:49] So, I'm going to cover this quite

[3:56:50] quickly because I there's a lot here.

[3:56:53] I'll just I'll just say there's more

[3:56:54] slides even behind this one. So, if I go

[3:56:57] through all of this, you'll be here

[3:56:58] quite late. So, I just wanted to cover a

[3:57:00] couple of things. Just the updates uh

[3:57:02] within SB77 for teleconferencing. You

[3:57:05] all should know about the classic

[3:57:06] teleconferencing rules as council

[3:57:08] members. I think uh most of you have

[3:57:09] invoked them one time or another. These

[3:57:12] rules have existed since almost the

[3:57:13] Brown Ax inception. They basically allow

[3:57:16] you to zoom or call into a meeting uh in

[3:57:19] the old days before Zoom. Um so long as

[3:57:21] you have your location listed on the

[3:57:23] agenda, you make your location open to

[3:57:24] the public. They should be able to

[3:57:26] provide public comment at that remote

[3:57:27] location. Um and other requirements, but

[3:57:30] those always exist and that's always an

[3:57:31] option for council if you need to zoom

[3:57:33] into a meeting.

[3:57:35] A new one that just kicked in this year

[3:57:37] with SB77 is the teleconferencing as a

[3:57:40] reasonable accommodation for a

[3:57:42] disability. There was a two attorney

[3:57:44] general opinions out there on this

[3:57:45] topic. One from 2001 where the attorney

[3:57:48] general was asked this very specific

[3:57:49] question. Does federal ADA law force the

[3:57:52] Brown Act to bend to it? Um and this the

[3:57:55] AGS at the time basically concluded it

[3:57:58] does not. They basically said that the

[3:58:00] Brown Act doesn't have an option for

[3:58:02] somebody to teleconference into a

[3:58:03] meeting because of a disability. Um

[3:58:06] therefore agencies you can't accommodate

[3:58:08] one of your council members. Well, fast

[3:58:11] forward to 2004. I want to say when a

[3:58:13] second attorney general opinion came out

[3:58:15] on this very same issue this the

[3:58:18] attorney general's office had a very

[3:58:19] different conclusion and they basically

[3:58:21] said yes federal ADA law should force

[3:58:24] the Brown Act to bend and even if the

[3:58:26] Brown Act doesn't include language that

[3:58:27] allows for reasonable accommodation

[3:58:30] guess what federal law mandates it and

[3:58:32] the AG and all their wisdom they

[3:58:34] basically cited to the Zoom platform

[3:58:36] everything that transpired during the

[3:58:38] pandemic and they said look agencies

[3:58:40] have tools to basically allow a council

[3:58:42] member if they have a disability to come

[3:58:44] into a meeting. And therefore, they had

[3:58:46] a very different conclusion about two

[3:58:48] decades later. Um, and what you see here

[3:58:50] is basically the cotification of that

[3:58:53] attorney general opinion into the Brown

[3:58:55] Act. And so the Brown Act now says that

[3:58:57] yes, if you were to have some sort of

[3:58:58] disability that qualifies under the

[3:59:00] American with Disabilities Act, we have

[3:59:02] to allow you to come into a meeting via

[3:59:04] Zoom. you you basically are counted for

[3:59:07] as in as quorum and basically in person

[3:59:09] for for purposes of the meeting. Um and

[3:59:12] then other basic requirements consistent

[3:59:14] with what we've seen uh post pandemic

[3:59:18] and then I'll cover this slide quickly

[3:59:20] but yes there's other updates. The

[3:59:22] teleconferencing rules have basically

[3:59:23] all been encapsulated into a couple of

[3:59:25] provisions. requirements for all of

[3:59:27] these are included in one section of the

[3:59:29] Brown Act, but basically keep in mind

[3:59:31] that during the state of emergency with

[3:59:32] the pandemic, we always have the option

[3:59:34] to go completely remote. Um, if that

[3:59:37] transpires again, just cause, this came

[3:59:39] out after the pandemic when the state

[3:59:41] legislature saw that people were going

[3:59:43] back to in-person meetings, but they

[3:59:44] wanted some flexibility in the Brown

[3:59:46] Act. If you have a just cause reason to

[3:59:48] zoom in or teleconference into into a

[3:59:50] meeting and there's very specific ones

[3:59:52] included in the Brian Act, you can

[3:59:54] teleconference in without including your

[3:59:56] uh address on the agenda. Also, eligible

[3:59:59] subsidiary bodies, you have the option

[4:00:01] of letting your subsidiary bodies, the

[4:00:03] CCAC, the ADRB, the FAC to go completely

[4:00:07] remote, but you have to adopt findings.

[4:00:09] They would have to agree to it as well.

[4:00:10] And I it seems to me that most of them

[4:00:13] just like to meet in person. So unless

[4:00:15] there's a desire to do that, we won't

[4:00:17] talk about that further. And then

[4:00:19] finally, eligible multi-jurisdictional

[4:00:20] bodies. These are your larger agencies

[4:00:22] that cover wide territory. Um more

[4:00:25] flexibility built into the Brown Act if

[4:00:27] you're traveling. I I want to say

[4:00:28] there's a mileage uh restriction, but it

[4:00:31] has to be it's a quite quite large

[4:00:33] amount of miles to basically access this

[4:00:35] for teleconferencing purposes, but it

[4:00:37] does exist within the Brown Act. And so

[4:00:38] if you are on a large

[4:00:40] multi-jurisdictional body and you're

[4:00:41] thinking about teleconferencing in, you

[4:00:43] might want to ask your legal counsel at

[4:00:45] that body about this provision.

[4:00:49] Quickly, social media restrictions. If

[4:00:51] you're not aware, there are social media

[4:00:53] restrictions within the Brown Act and

[4:00:54] they have been made permanent now by

[4:00:56] SB77. They used to have a sunset clause.

[4:00:58] Basically means if you see a fellow post

[4:01:00] on social media from one of your council

[4:01:02] members, don't like it, don't comment on

[4:01:04] it, just let it be. If you want to share

[4:01:06] the same information, you can do so as a

[4:01:08] as your own post, but you don't want to

[4:01:10] engage with your fellow council members

[4:01:11] post because that could become a Brown

[4:01:13] Act violation. Just imagine if one of

[4:01:15] you comments on something that one of

[4:01:16] your council members posted, then

[4:01:18] another council member sees that you

[4:01:19] have a majority of the council all

[4:01:21] consuming the same information.

[4:01:23] Uh, our city clerk did provide copies of

[4:01:25] the Brown Act to our city council and

[4:01:27] that is a new requirement with SB77.

[4:01:30] Another new requirement is if the

[4:01:31] council, and I know you don't get salary

[4:01:33] here, but if you ever wanted to talk

[4:01:34] about benefits for the council, needs to

[4:01:36] be done at a regular meeting. As you

[4:01:37] know, for local agency executives, we

[4:01:39] can't talk about salary or benefits at a

[4:01:41] special meeting. So, the same rule now

[4:01:43] applies to the legislative body. And

[4:01:45] then lastly, I'll just say that yes,

[4:01:47] SB77 includes the new prong about

[4:01:49] disruptive virtual attendees, and I

[4:01:51] covered some of that uh this evening.

[4:01:54] And with that, there's the

[4:01:55] recommendation to adopt a resolution

[4:01:57] adopting two policies. policy 421 as

[4:01:59] well as policy 422 and I'm happy to

[4:02:01] answer any questions. Thank you.

[4:02:05] >> Thank you. You're right. That is a lot.

[4:02:07] Um yes. Um I will turn to the council.

[4:02:10] Um council member Crowley.

[4:02:12] >> Thank you. Thank you for Christopher.

[4:02:13] Thanks for doing it at the speed of a

[4:02:15] locomotive. So on page 181, the public

[4:02:19] comment regulations number one under

[4:02:21] time limits. Um, it it talks about how

[4:02:25] all public comment shall be limited to 3

[4:02:27] minutes or less, but there's there's

[4:02:29] nothing in there. I mean, as indicated

[4:02:31] tonight, when the youth commission got

[4:02:33] up, the mayor basically allowed them

[4:02:35] discretion. It um could could it say all

[4:02:39] public comment may be limited to three

[4:02:42] minutes or less? I mean, can you give

[4:02:43] the mayor discretion to let someone have

[4:02:47] more time?

[4:02:49] >> Yeah. So with public comments, yes, as

[4:02:51] long as we equitably reduce the time,

[4:02:53] then it is allowable. So yes, it could

[4:02:55] be to your point, if you'd like to see

[4:02:57] that language, we can do that. But yes,

[4:03:00] um there is that discretion. We just

[4:03:02] wouldn't want to do it unequally,

[4:03:04] >> right? Maybe even adding the mayor has

[4:03:06] discretion to allow further time

[4:03:09] as long as it's done in an equitable

[4:03:12] manner or something. Um that's that was

[4:03:15] the only thing that I saw.

[4:03:18] Any additional question? Yes, Vice Mayor

[4:03:20] Rexdale.

[4:03:22] >> Thank you, Christopher. That was a lot

[4:03:24] and um very well done. Uh greatly

[4:03:26] appreciated. I had a couple of

[4:03:29] questions. Um

[4:03:31] so,

[4:03:33] if we came in, we have Zoom capabilities

[4:03:36] usually. If we came in and everything

[4:03:40] was working except Zoom,

[4:03:43] but at the beginning of the meeting, it

[4:03:46] looks to me like we could go ahead and

[4:03:48] just have our meeting without Zoom. But

[4:03:51] I don't know if that's the way it's

[4:03:53] worded. It's it see it's like if there's

[4:03:56] no Zoom or telephone, you can go and

[4:03:58] have have the meeting.

[4:04:00] >> That's a great question. Um I think a

[4:04:03] lot of this will shake out as we see

[4:04:05] this being implemented. Uh my take on it

[4:04:08] is if we come to this room, we know the

[4:04:09] Zoom technically works in here, but just

[4:04:11] doesn't work on that day. I would take

[4:04:13] the position that you've told the public

[4:04:15] they can connect via Zoom. We know the

[4:04:17] technology works in this room, we just

[4:04:19] can't get it to work for some reason. I

[4:04:21] would say don't start the meeting until

[4:04:22] you get that technology up.

[4:04:24] >> I I like that interpretation. Um I I

[4:04:27] don't think it's what it says, but I

[4:04:28] think that since that's how we had

[4:04:30] noticed it, it seems to me the more fair

[4:04:33] way to then give it an hour. Um, okay.

[4:04:37] Um, and then, um, oh, I was just curious

[4:04:41] about the language, um,

[4:04:44] spoken as a first language, I would

[4:04:48] presume. Um, only because what if 20%

[4:04:52] speak French?

[4:04:54] >> There's an additional,

[4:04:55] >> but it's not their primary language

[4:04:57] spoken at home.

[4:04:58] >> Yeah. No, that's a great question.

[4:04:59] There's an additional prong within the

[4:05:01] statute of SB77. says those groups that

[4:05:04] don't speak uh or speak another language

[4:05:06] in a in a amount of 20% within the

[4:05:09] population and then they also need to

[4:05:11] not speak English very well. So it's

[4:05:13] there's two prongs to that. So it's not

[4:05:14] just speaking a second language, it's

[4:05:16] that you do truly speak a second

[4:05:18] language as your primary language and

[4:05:19] then yes, you don't speak English very

[4:05:21] well.

[4:05:22] >> Okay, perfect. Um

[4:05:24] oh um I was curious about this one. So,

[4:05:27] the provision where um public comment

[4:05:30] can go down from three minutes to two

[4:05:32] minutes to one minute at the mayor's

[4:05:34] discretion.

[4:05:36] Can that be

[4:05:38] does that then go for the rest of the

[4:05:41] night? For instance, let's say our our

[4:05:44] first item um general public comment for

[4:05:47] items not on the agenda. There's hundred

[4:05:49] people in here for some some reason. Um

[4:05:52] so, the mayor says, "Oh boy, how about

[4:05:54] one minute each?" They all state their

[4:05:57] piece. They they go on their Mayway and

[4:06:00] then we have one member in the audience

[4:06:02] left. It's it's only 7:30.

[4:06:06] We've got we've got something. Can it be

[4:06:09] up to back to three minutes for that one

[4:06:11] member or is it like the now we're at

[4:06:14] one minute tonight?

[4:06:14] >> No, it's a great question. I would say

[4:06:16] um for the duration of the meeting like

[4:06:19] let's say at the beginning of the

[4:06:20] meeting we see a ton of people in the

[4:06:21] room and and the mayor automatically

[4:06:23] limits comment

[4:06:25] and let's say the item only has one

[4:06:27] speaker. I think the mayor has

[4:06:28] discretion to say let's say it's general

[4:06:30] public comment and you only have two

[4:06:31] speakers yet we know we have agenda item

[4:06:34] 11 coming further in the agenda and

[4:06:36] there's 300 people in the room that want

[4:06:37] to speak. I think she could allow public

[4:06:39] comment to be three minutes each because

[4:06:41] there's only two speakers with the

[4:06:43] understanding when you get to item 11,

[4:06:45] you ask the question. How many here here

[4:06:47] to speak to item 11? You won't know that

[4:06:48] until you ask the question. But if

[4:06:50] everyone in the room was to raise their

[4:06:51] hand, then yes, you look at how much

[4:06:53] what look at the the hour of the clock.

[4:06:55] You look at how much you have on the

[4:06:56] agenda. You see the number of people in

[4:06:58] the room. And yes, at that point, the

[4:07:00] mayor could make the executive decision

[4:07:01] to say, "I'm going to bring that those

[4:07:03] numbers down." you know, and your

[4:07:04] example I think is is if all those

[4:07:06] people were to leave the room and then

[4:07:08] we only have one person left that really

[4:07:10] wants to speak. I do think in that

[4:07:12] circumstance because there's nobody else

[4:07:13] here that we're basically um

[4:07:15] disenfranchising and they're not getting

[4:07:17] the chance to speak or getting less time

[4:07:19] to speak. I think she could say, you

[4:07:20] know what, everybody left. We no longer

[4:07:22] have the need to reduce that comment

[4:07:24] time down. You're the last speaker. I'm

[4:07:26] happy to give you those three minutes.

[4:07:27] >> Okay. Excellent. Um that's very helpful.

[4:07:29] I I love this stuff. Um

[4:07:33] the

[4:07:36] >> um

[4:07:38] yeah I had a question. So on the um

[4:07:41] policy 422

[4:07:44] the very bottom public comments on

[4:07:47] agenda items talks about um removal.

[4:07:53] Uh also so it says unless a speaker

[4:07:56] requests to remove an item. Um,

[4:07:59] but also I know sometimes we remove an

[4:08:02] item. Um,

[4:08:04] and I'd like to build in flexibility

[4:08:07] there and and not

[4:08:11] say that a speaker can request to

[4:08:12] remove. I know some towns don't allow us

[4:08:15] a speaker to request to remove um

[4:08:18] because it then the meetings never end.

[4:08:21] Um, so I was thinking, um, if we could

[4:08:25] rewrite that, um, so that fourth line

[4:08:30] would say unless

[4:08:33] an item,

[4:08:34] >> oh, 181,

[4:08:37] uh, exhibit B, unless an item has been

[4:08:42] removed from the consent calendar,

[4:08:46] and I know that's passive voice, which

[4:08:48] we don't love, but um, I think that

[4:08:52] gives us flexibility.

[4:08:56] Um because like again like I said we

[4:09:00] sometimes remove and then we're not

[4:09:03] explicitly giving permission to the

[4:09:06] speaker

[4:09:08] the general public to remove something

[4:09:09] from consent.

[4:09:11] What's your recommend?

[4:09:13] >> Yeah, I thought it's automatic that they

[4:09:15] have the opportunity to remove an item

[4:09:18] >> um

[4:09:18] >> the agenda from the from the Yeah,

[4:09:22] >> we're allowed. So is the public.

[4:09:25] >> We allow that, but they don't

[4:09:28] allow that. One thing you could do as an

[4:09:30] option to to your point, Vice Mayor

[4:09:32] Ragsdale, is right now I don't think we

[4:09:35] say on the agenda itself that public

[4:09:38] comment on non-agged items relates to

[4:09:40] public comment on consent calendar. And

[4:09:42] so we should say that and this way if

[4:09:44] somebody does stand up there under

[4:09:45] general public comment and has a comment

[4:09:47] on a consent item that you guys feel

[4:09:49] like maybe we should hear this and and

[4:09:51] debate it a little bit. You have the

[4:09:53] discretion to pull it. Um, and I think

[4:09:55] if somebody is there before you raising

[4:09:57] concerns, you could decide, is it enough

[4:09:59] to pull? Is it enough that we just heard

[4:10:00] it and then we can decide on consent?

[4:10:02] But that at least gives you a chance to

[4:10:05] hear the concern before and then you

[4:10:07] could decide to pull it.

[4:10:09] >> Just to clarify that, it's my

[4:10:10] understanding that the public can remove

[4:10:13] an item from the consent calendar.

[4:10:16] Correct.

[4:10:17] We allow that, but not all towns let the

[4:10:21] public request to remove something from

[4:10:23] consent.

[4:10:24] >> And the only reason I think we have that

[4:10:26] language on the agenda is the concern

[4:10:27] that the again the public comment period

[4:10:29] on non-aggenda items doesn't say this is

[4:10:31] the time to comment on consent calendar

[4:10:33] items. We say when we get to consent, if

[4:10:35] you want to pull an item to discuss it

[4:10:37] or raise a comment, that's your time to

[4:10:38] do so. But you could change that just

[4:10:40] slightly and just say public comment on

[4:10:41] non-aggenda items and consent calendar

[4:10:43] items. And then if you hear that concern

[4:10:46] or comment, council could decide whether

[4:10:47] we pull it or not.

[4:10:50] But that's an alternative option. We

[4:10:51] would just have to update the policy

[4:10:53] just slightly. Uh and you give me that

[4:10:54] direction tonight. You could adopt it

[4:10:56] with that change and then I can work

[4:10:58] with our city clerk to implement that

[4:10:59] for the language on the agenda as But

[4:11:01] that that's a change from our current

[4:11:03] policy which is we let the public

[4:11:05] >> I'm okay with leaving our policy as it

[4:11:08] is our informal policy that we let them

[4:11:11] um but just to not tie us down if we

[4:11:15] change that language. So it would just

[4:11:17] say um public comment for an item will

[4:11:20] not be taken unless um an item has been

[4:11:24] removed from the consent calendar and

[4:11:26] then you're not saying who has the right

[4:11:27] to remove it

[4:11:29] >> in that way. just just in case um we

[4:11:33] could get a member of the public who

[4:11:35] comes in and I would like to request to

[4:11:37] remove

[4:11:39] all the all the items and they could

[4:11:42] come to every meeting and say I want to

[4:11:44] remove and then I' I've seen it happen

[4:11:46] in other not in our county.

[4:11:49] >> Well, but but I think uh our residents

[4:11:51] are not only accustomed to but they

[4:11:53] expect to be able to remove something

[4:11:56] from a consent calendar if it's

[4:11:57] something of concern to them. they want

[4:11:59] clarification and maybe we have been in

[4:12:02] different meetings where the subject is

[4:12:04] we're familiar with the subject and we

[4:12:06] don't have any questions but if the

[4:12:08] public has a question and it's

[4:12:10] significant and we get to the consent

[4:12:12] calendar it's my understanding not only

[4:12:15] um should they be allowed to remove that

[4:12:17] item but I think it's only reasonable

[4:12:19] since we're here to listen to them

[4:12:22] >> and and I totally agree with that um I

[4:12:25] just think if we put in the policy that

[4:12:27] a speaker is allowed to remove that

[4:12:30] takes takes away um our flexibility.

[4:12:37] It looks like this this way that it's uh

[4:12:41] put is that the speaker a speaker

[4:12:43] meaning a member of the public could

[4:12:45] remove an item,

[4:12:46] >> right? Um public comment for an item

[4:12:50] will not be taken unless a speaker

[4:12:51] requests to remove an item from the

[4:12:53] consent calendar for discussion.

[4:12:56] >> Right.

[4:12:57] But I see what you mean. It it means

[4:12:59] that nobody could just stand up and make

[4:13:01] a public comment on the consent calendar

[4:13:03] unless they want to remove something.

[4:13:05] >> No, it means that if we're giving the

[4:13:07] public permission to remove items from

[4:13:09] the consent calendar, it could go

[4:13:12] haywire.

[4:13:13] >> But we've been doing it. Well, we've

[4:13:15] been doing it.

[4:13:15] >> Right. Right. Okay. Well, we can revisit

[4:13:18] if that if that if the haywire happens,

[4:13:20] sounds like

[4:13:21] >> Yeah, I think we we

[4:13:24] just to expedite this. I think we should

[4:13:27] uh keep our policy and then if we run

[4:13:30] into a problem we can revisit the policy

[4:13:32] would be my recommendation.

[4:13:34] >> Okay.

[4:13:34] >> And and council member just the what I

[4:13:37] was suggesting um if we just said unless

[4:13:41] the item has been removed then we're not

[4:13:43] changing our policy.

[4:13:44] >> Yeah.

[4:13:45] >> That just gives us flexibility and

[4:13:47] that's Yeah. Unless

[4:13:48] >> because I I like the way we do it. I

[4:13:50] just think if we say that has been

[4:13:53] removed passive voice but that way.

[4:13:55] >> Yeah.

[4:13:56] >> No, I agree with that recommendation

[4:13:58] both of those.

[4:13:59] >> I for the mayor. Can I

[4:14:01] >> Yes. Council me one. Yes.

[4:14:02] >> Thank you. I think we're talking about

[4:14:04] two different things. I think that what

[4:14:07] we the our common practice has been that

[4:14:11] uh when it comes to the consent calendar

[4:14:13] the mayor would ask or council members

[4:14:16] would you like to pull something or the

[4:14:19] public would they like to pull something

[4:14:21] and those items were pulled and then you

[4:14:24] know it usually we have we have the

[4:14:27] courtesy to say I just want to make a

[4:14:30] comments we don't have to pull but the

[4:14:32] public would not have that they would

[4:14:34] have to hold it or they would they would

[4:14:36] have to you know in order to make their

[4:14:39] comments. What Christopher is offering

[4:14:42] is at the comments that is not on the

[4:14:46] agenda to also include the language that

[4:14:49] if they want to speak on one of the

[4:14:51] items on consent that that's their

[4:14:54] opportunity to do so and because of the

[4:14:57] comments then the council on the disp

[4:15:06] now that I hear it I want to pull it. So

[4:15:09] I think

[4:15:10] >> in that comment

[4:15:11] >> that that is that is the two practices

[4:15:14] that we have to decide which way we want

[4:15:17] to go by.

[4:15:18] >> Okay. Um I think I'm going to ask our

[4:15:20] city attorney to review that specific

[4:15:22] section and and maybe report out again

[4:15:25] to us maybe at a subsequent meeting. Um

[4:15:28] unless you have all the answers because

[4:15:30] there seems to be conflicting opinions

[4:15:31] on this at this time. We can certainly

[4:15:33] move on and you can revisit just that

[4:15:35] section.

[4:15:36] >> Yeah. Council's a little just divided on

[4:15:38] which option to choose

[4:15:39] >> of interpretation.

[4:15:40] >> What I can do is I'll come back at a

[4:15:41] subsequent meeting and just with that

[4:15:43] one policy and we can talk about

[4:15:45] options.

[4:15:45] >> Okay. Um one before we close this

[4:15:48] section off um council member Adams

[4:15:49] >> and this is a quick question. The uh new

[4:15:53] regulations

[4:15:55] ask us to encourage underrepresentative

[4:15:58] citizen groups. It does not say that

[4:16:00] they have to be from our town.

[4:16:03] Question. uh are they citizens of

[4:16:06] Hillsboro or and also uh if they want to

[4:16:11] post a new translation of our agenda, do

[4:16:15] we check that translation before we post

[4:16:17] it? And third, how will this be measured

[4:16:21] and will it need to be reported to

[4:16:23] anyone?

[4:16:25] >> Repeat the first question again just so

[4:16:27] I have it. I'm sorry I didn't write it

[4:16:28] down.

[4:16:28] >> And do they have to be citizens of our

[4:16:30] town?

[4:16:31] >> Thank you. I I I do believe the

[4:16:32] expectation under SB77 is that you

[4:16:34] invite the underrepresented groups in

[4:16:36] your community to attend the meetings

[4:16:38] because the idea with SB77 was let's

[4:16:41] create create greater public

[4:16:42] participation for all of the cities and

[4:16:45] board of supervisors and special

[4:16:47] districts. And so it's really getting

[4:16:49] people that would attend your meeting

[4:16:50] that are served by your essentially

[4:16:52] services get them to attend the meeting.

[4:16:54] So I don't imagine it's going outside of

[4:16:56] the jurisdiction. to your second

[4:16:58] question just about checking the

[4:17:00] translation. Um, our clerk noted that

[4:17:03] yes, we're going to post something that

[4:17:05] basically indicates that this is for

[4:17:06] true and correct translations. Um, we'd

[4:17:09] want to make sure we're not necessarily

[4:17:11] checking every translation, but if a

[4:17:13] member of the public was to come up to

[4:17:14] us and say, "Look, I think that's not a

[4:17:16] correct translation. I understand, let's

[4:17:19] say, Mandarin. It looks like hate speech

[4:17:21] of some sort." We might check it at that

[4:17:23] point and then remove it from the box or

[4:17:25] the the bulletin board. One of the

[4:17:27] concerns that we had about the bulletin

[4:17:28] board was does that become a first

[4:17:30] amendment form? And so in order to

[4:17:32] basically control that as much as we

[4:17:34] can, the policy that we're going to post

[4:17:36] clearly indicates it's for true and

[4:17:37] correct translations. We have the

[4:17:39] discretion to remove everything else. Um

[4:17:41] and so in other words, we're we're

[4:17:43] controlling what the the speech is in

[4:17:45] that form. And so that would be the

[4:17:47] goal. And then you had one more

[4:17:48] question.

[4:17:49] >> Well, and also I think with AI, we could

[4:17:52] provide our own u assessment of that

[4:17:54] translation. And I would say we should

[4:17:56] do that before we post it.

[4:17:58] >> Yeah. And

[4:17:59] >> yeah, it's it's really the citizens that

[4:18:01] have the right to post on that board.

[4:18:02] And so we might I mean the clerk's

[4:18:04] office may want to do a check every so

[4:18:05] often just to see what's there and and

[4:18:07] to your point using some uh Google

[4:18:09] translate or some other option.

[4:18:10] >> Yep. And the the third one is how would

[4:18:13] that be measured and does it need to be

[4:18:15] reported?

[4:18:16] >> Great question. uh my understanding and

[4:18:19] my recollection of the statute in the in

[4:18:21] SB77, it basically indicates that the

[4:18:23] agency has no obligation to basically

[4:18:25] verify the accuracy of any of the

[4:18:26] translations, but at the same time, we

[4:18:29] want to make sure stuff isn't up there

[4:18:30] that could be hate speech, could be

[4:18:31] something else problematic.

[4:18:35] >> Um, yes, Council Member Cwley. So, are

[4:18:37] you saying that we are precluded if we

[4:18:39] put this bulletin board on that that we

[4:18:41] can't say that you you put it in the

[4:18:43] town mailbox and the city clerk posts

[4:18:46] it?

[4:18:47] >> I mean, that way all you have to do is

[4:18:49] put your phone on Google Translate and

[4:18:51] it'll say,

[4:18:52] >> "Yeah, the expectation under SB77 is

[4:18:54] that we want to provide a place for the

[4:18:56] public if we're not required to

[4:18:58] translate that they have the option to

[4:19:00] translate for their fellow constituents

[4:19:01] or fellow people within their

[4:19:03] community." And so they get to post it,

[4:19:05] but we still get the ability to control

[4:19:07] it. And so it's almost like a city

[4:19:08] council meeting. It's a limited public

[4:19:10] forum. State legislature has told us we

[4:19:12] have to open up a form through a

[4:19:14] bulletin board, allow the public to

[4:19:15] post, but we can still control it to

[4:19:17] some extent. It's got to be true. It's

[4:19:19] got to be accurate. And yes, to your

[4:19:21] point, if we want to look at the

[4:19:22] translations to make sure they're

[4:19:24] accurate, we have the discretion to do

[4:19:25] so.

[4:19:26] >> Yeah. It seems to make sense that you

[4:19:28] would have to do it through the city

[4:19:29] clerk so that somebody can't post

[4:19:31] something that says everybody take off

[4:19:33] their clothes and run screaming through

[4:19:35] Hillsboro.

[4:19:36] >> Yeah, I mean that's one of the risk

[4:19:37] factors and I think you know uh as this

[4:19:40] gets implemented we will probably see

[4:19:42] updates from the state legislature. Uh

[4:19:44] I'm sure agencies might have concerns

[4:19:46] about certain aspects of this and so

[4:19:48] that'll start to bubble up. But like all

[4:19:49] things in Sacramento, it might take some

[4:19:51] time to see some clarity in the law. And I just realized that um with regards

[4:19:56] to SB uh 707 um and I'm asking for

[4:20:00] further clarification whether residents

[4:20:03] can remove an item from the consent

[4:20:05] calendar because we wanted some

[4:20:07] clarification on that with regards to

[4:20:09] this resolution to adopt this motion

[4:20:13] specifically. I was just asking for

[4:20:15] clarification in terms of can we

[4:20:17] continue what we're doing or does this

[4:20:20] law restrict us in any ways that says in

[4:20:23] order for someone to speak on an item

[4:20:26] that's on the consent calendar they have

[4:20:29] to remove it. In other words, just

[4:20:30] clarification of what the law states so

[4:20:33] we can um have an internal understanding

[4:20:35] of what what rules were guided by.

[4:20:38] >> Yeah. And and I'm happy to clarify that.

[4:20:39] Now SB77 doesn't include anything

[4:20:41] specific to consent calendar but what

[4:20:42] the Brown Act indicates is that the

[4:20:44] public has the right to comment on every

[4:20:46] agenda item on your agenda and that

[4:20:47] would include your consent calendar.

[4:20:49] >> Ah well that answers the question then.

[4:20:51] So they they will have the authority to

[4:20:53] remove an item to discuss it. It's the

[4:20:55] only way they can discuss it. Right.

[4:20:57] Well, the option I provided was either

[4:20:59] they provide the comment by p pulling

[4:21:01] the item as we do now or they provide

[4:21:03] the comment under general public comment

[4:21:05] for non-aggenda items and we'd include

[4:21:06] language to say and consent items.

[4:21:09] >> But then you will have people I I mean I like the separation of the

[4:21:13] non-aggender items and the and the items

[4:21:16] on the on the agenda because it it it's

[4:21:19] first of all it's a different part of

[4:21:20] the whole meeting. It just allows when

[4:21:23] we go into the agenda and someone wants

[4:21:26] to pull something from the consent

[4:21:27] calendar, we can like focus on that

[4:21:28] because other council members may be

[4:21:30] pulling. But I think to put it all

[4:21:32] together could really throw the whole

[4:21:34] agenda in the hands of the um the the

[4:21:38] public as opposed to running the

[4:21:40] meeting. They could potentially be

[4:21:42] running the meeting.

[4:21:43] >> Yeah, I see your point. I mean, I think

[4:21:44] there's options there for the council to

[4:21:46] consider, but we're happy to walk you

[4:21:47] through those through those again at a

[4:21:48] future meeting. You sound questions if you bring this back,

[4:21:53] >> can we put it on consent or do you have

[4:21:56] to go through the whole presentation

[4:21:57] again?

[4:21:58] >> So what the what SB77 says is for

[4:22:01] disruption policies, they need to be

[4:22:02] discussed. They cannot be on consent.

[4:22:04] But this second policy is not the

[4:22:06] disruption policy. It's something that I

[4:22:07] brought forward just as tools in the

[4:22:09] toolbox. And so policy 42:2, if we make

[4:22:12] further changes to it, it would it could

[4:22:14] be on consent.

[4:22:16] >> Great question. Appreciate that. Um, so

[4:22:19] >> I think I see. Is your hand raised? No,

[4:22:23] it is.

[4:22:24] >> Sorry. Council Chong, did you want to

[4:22:25] Oh, okay. Sorry.

[4:22:27] >> It's raised on my computer, but I I did

[4:22:29] want to just point out in case you have

[4:22:31] any input into 707. Uh, if we could just

[4:22:35] have AI translate a

[4:22:38] uh an agenda, so could anyone with any

[4:22:42] device could translate it without our

[4:22:44] having to post it or they're having to

[4:22:47] post it. They could just have it

[4:22:49] translated. Just might want to think

[4:22:52] about that.

[4:22:52] >> Yeah. No, that's a good point. And I

[4:22:54] think if somebody is inquiring, our

[4:22:56] staff can always indicate to them

[4:22:57] there's there's a way to do that on your

[4:22:59] phone and just bring it to the meeting.

[4:23:02] >> Um, okay. Uh, Vice Mayor Ragsdale have a

[4:23:04] question.

[4:23:05] >> Just one quick uh clarifying question on

[4:23:08] page 180 of the packet. Um, so the first uh new policy exhibit A the

[4:23:17] very end on 7

[4:23:20] B2

[4:23:23] uh page 180.

[4:23:26] I just I keep rereading it and I'm not getting it.

[4:23:31] No, thank you for the question. What it

[4:23:33] basically means is that yes, if somebody

[4:23:35] is disrupting the meeting, uh under the

[4:23:37] Brown Act, our first uh avenue of

[4:23:39] controlling that disruption is to mute

[4:23:41] the speaker by warning them.

[4:23:43] >> If that doesn't work, we have the option

[4:23:45] to remove them from the Zoom platform

[4:23:47] completely like just take them out of

[4:23:49] the meeting.

[4:23:50] >> Could we maybe is this wording we have

[4:23:53] to use from 707?

[4:23:55] Could we maybe make it more direct than

[4:23:57] that? because it says or is not

[4:23:59] available using the remote access

[4:24:01] service. What what isn't available?

[4:24:04] That's what what that's the part. It's

[4:24:05] the second half that confused me.

[4:24:11] » Good question.

[4:24:13] >> Looking at that again, yeah, I could

[4:24:15] double check just to see if that's an

[4:24:16] SB77 requirement. Um I can't imagine it

[4:24:19] is. If you just wanted to end it at

[4:24:21] remove the individual from the meeting

[4:24:22] if paragraph A does not address the

[4:24:25] disruptive behavior or disrupting

[4:24:26] behavior period.

[4:24:28] >> Yes, that that's that's much more clear

[4:24:30] to me because I don't know what what is

[4:24:33] not available.

[4:24:34] >> But we do have to vote on 421 tonight.

[4:24:37] Right.

[4:24:37] >> Correct.

[4:24:38] >> Um policy 421 we can we so this will be

[4:24:41] modified the second part of this and

[4:24:44] item two will not be part of this what

[4:24:47] we are voting on. So, right. And then the amendment I guess the

[4:24:52] amendment I'm requesting is on page 180

[4:24:56] uh 7B2

[4:24:59] simply reads remove the individual from

[4:25:02] the meeting if paragraph A does not

[4:25:04] address the disrupting behavior

[4:25:06] >> and that is part part of SB77

[4:25:09] already.

[4:25:11] My motion would be that we adopt a

[4:25:13] resolution of we adopt policy 421,

[4:25:17] disruption of telephonic or internet

[4:25:19] service during meetings in accordance

[4:25:21] with seven Senate Bill 707 with the

[4:25:24] amendment suggested by Vice Mayor

[4:25:26] Ragsdale unless the city attorney

[4:25:29] determines that that is not in

[4:25:30] compliance with 707.

[4:25:32] >> Thank you. And I'll just clarify, I'm

[4:25:34] reading the language again. I think

[4:25:35] what's missing there is the word mute.

[4:25:37] So if muting muting the speaker is not

[4:25:39] available using the remote access

[4:25:41] service, then you can remove them from

[4:25:42] the meeting. That's really what I think

[4:25:44] there's a missing word there.

[4:25:45] >> Oh, I see.

[4:25:46] >> Because I'm I'm recalling the statute in

[4:25:48] my head and I think that's how it

[4:25:49] >> reads. Okay. If muting Okay. So So I

[4:25:52] will amend my amendment to just add the

[4:25:54] word as declared by our city attorney.

[4:25:57] Add the word muting in that

[4:26:00] >> uh portion

[4:26:01] >> or muting is not available using the

[4:26:03] remote access service.

[4:26:04] >> Correct. Okay. And I'm not and I'm not

[4:26:07] crazy then because I kept reading it and reading.

[4:26:10] >> Okay. So, we don't have any amendments.

[4:26:12] So, um

[4:26:14] >> so, Council Member Kle motion as amended

[4:26:19] and I'll second it.

[4:26:23] » Um

[4:26:26] >> what? No, we did not amend it because he

[4:26:29] clarified. Just just correcting the

[4:26:31] typo.

[4:26:34] » Oh, I see.

[4:26:36] >> I'd go to add

[4:26:38] council and council member Tronger

[4:26:40] comfortable with adding that word muted

[4:26:42] and yes.

[4:26:43] >> Okay, gotcha. All right, we have a

[4:26:45] motion. We have a We have a motion from

[4:26:48] um Crow and a second seconded by Chang.

[4:26:51] Okay. Um could we take the vote, please?

[4:26:54] >> Yes, Adams.

[4:26:56] We Schwang

[4:26:59] Krillic I Razil I Cole I thank you.

[4:27:15] Okay.

[4:27:16] Final item is city council items. And do

[4:27:19] any of my colleagues have any items they

[4:27:21] would like to report?

[4:27:23] Starting with Council Member Schwan.

[4:27:25] >> Thank you. I have five items, not 20

[4:27:28] pages, but five items that I would like

[4:27:31] to report. First of all, I would like to

[4:27:33] um uh say that the town wide draw on

[4:27:36] April 22nd was really well attended with

[4:27:40] 30 plus um members um attending and I

[4:27:44] want to thank my council colleagues for

[4:27:46] supporting and in attendance and I would

[4:27:49] like to thank Williams lieutenant

[4:27:52] culprit

[4:27:54] and ming and also central county fire

[4:27:57] department's um crews and also chief

[4:28:01] puchi

[4:28:02] for in for participating in the drill.

[4:28:06] Um I'm very grateful um that our

[4:28:09] citizens um our residents actually um

[4:28:12] spending their Sunday morning u with us

[4:28:15] and I think the debrief at the end of

[4:28:18] the exercise was extremely rewarding and

[4:28:21] helpful. Um, and then on April 30th, I

[4:28:26] attended the emergency service council

[4:28:29] and the service the ESC adopted the

[4:28:32] board of ESC adopted the budget. Um, and

[4:28:37] there are in discussions on the

[4:28:39] replacement of the hazmat engines. Um,

[4:28:42] it does require

[4:28:45] a bit of funding. It's like$ 1.5 to2

[4:28:48] million dollars to replace the brand new

[4:28:51] um to buy a brand new engines for

[4:28:53] hazmat. So they're in discussions on

[4:28:56] that. And then um May 3rd I attended fun

[4:29:02] run and while it was drizzling it was

[4:29:05] really well attended and thanks to our

[4:29:07] assistant city manager she brought her

[4:29:10] family to join us. So it was really

[4:29:12] nice. Um

[4:29:15] for

[4:29:19] um Samr

[4:29:21] uh Samr has a um a uh usually displays

[4:29:29] students art um in May. And this year we

[4:29:34] have again two buses wrapped with

[4:29:38] artists student arts um artwork on them.

[4:29:42] So um and the theme is time travelers

[4:29:47] take the bus. It was they were really

[4:29:50] beautiful drawing and renderings and it just really in line to celebrate

[4:29:55] Samran's 50th years of service um in the

[4:30:00] county. And lastly, I would like to

[4:30:03] mention that on May 5th, u Mike Drunk

[4:30:07] and I flew down to San Diego

[4:30:10] um to re to join Chief Puchi and also

[4:30:14] our sir coordinator Kaschow to receive

[4:30:19] the silver award

[4:30:22] um from the

[4:30:25] let's see California Emergency Service

[4:30:28] Associations

[4:30:30] Coast to chapters. Um this award is

[4:30:34] really to um honor the sustainable model

[4:30:39] of the Mandrin Chinese instructions

[4:30:43] programs and um this is especially

[4:30:47] important because um central county um

[4:30:51] uh fire uh department is really

[4:30:54] supported and thanks to our CEO Doug

[4:30:57] Davis also being um very supportive of

[4:31:00] the program And this program uh the

[4:31:04] award was nominated by the late Dina

[4:31:07] Gunning. Um so it was even more

[4:31:10] meaningful to all of us in the central

[4:31:13] county fire departments. So I thought

[4:31:15] I'd join my council colleague to finally

[4:31:18] show the picture. There is a a glass um

[4:31:22] award that Mike drunk is u holding but

[4:31:25] um it was quite meaningful. So really

[4:31:27] appreciate that. Thank you.

[4:31:30] >> Thank you. I think that deserves a round

[4:31:32] of applause.

[4:31:33] >> That's great. Congratulations.

[4:31:36] Very welld deserved.

[4:31:38] And uh, you know, I think all of us are

[4:31:39] so proud of that program that Mike

[4:31:41] instituted that's getting, you know,

[4:31:44] statewide and national attention. So,

[4:31:47] >> thank you.

[4:31:47] It's wonderful. Okay, I just

[4:31:49] have a few things. Parade, parade, My whole dining room table is

[4:31:53] covered with little postits that

[4:31:55] represent the parade lineup. So, we're

[4:31:58] getting close. May 25th, 10 a.m. Many

[4:32:00] thanks to to Marie uh for organizing the

[4:32:03] observance ceremony and Leslie for

[4:32:05] reaching out to all the dignitaries.

[4:32:06] Kristen Z is going to be our um our

[4:32:10] grand marshall and it will be great and

[4:32:12] a special thanks to our city manager and

[4:32:14] the city manager department for their

[4:32:16] support and HPD and public works as well

[4:32:19] as our volunteers. Seems a little early

[4:32:21] because it hasn't happened yet, but it's

[4:32:22] very exciting as it's all coming

[4:32:24] together. Um FAC, we had our budget

[4:32:27] study session. Thank you very much to

[4:32:28] Jan and Rich and the team. Um, and uh,

[4:32:32] we have a town hall subcommittee meeting

[4:32:34] coming up. Not much has happened, so

[4:32:36] it's not that we're hiding things from

[4:32:37] you. Um, but hopefully things will start

[4:32:40] to to move along a little more quickly.

[4:32:42] And, um, so San Francisco airport

[4:32:45] roundtable, we're working on our fly

[4:32:47] quiet program, but in case you haven't

[4:32:49] read about it in the news, um, two of

[4:32:52] the runways are being um, resurfaced

[4:32:55] this summer. So that takes the uh the

[4:32:59] traffic down and the all of the airlines

[4:33:02] had six months to prepare for that and

[4:33:05] they did. They adjusted their schedules.

[4:33:08] But right before the work started, the

[4:33:10] federal government, the FAA, out of the

[4:33:13] blue announced that our two runways that

[4:33:17] are only 750 ft apart and we've always

[4:33:20] been allowed to land two flights at the

[4:33:22] same time as long as there was

[4:33:24] visibility. we don't do it in fog or

[4:33:27] rain or of course at night. Um which is

[4:33:29] why sometimes there's delays in those

[4:33:31] things. All of a sudden said that San

[4:33:34] Francisco wasn't allowed to do that. So

[4:33:36] you can all come up with your own

[4:33:38] theories on why the federal government

[4:33:39] would want to mess with San Francisco.

[4:33:41] So it's a little tricky. There are

[4:33:43] delays. Most of the delays are they're

[4:33:46] holding your flight on the ground um

[4:33:49] before you take off for San Francisco

[4:33:52] because they don't want you to have to

[4:33:54] circle. But but there'll be delays for

[4:33:56] the ne for the rest of the summer really

[4:33:58] because of this. And that is the end of

[4:34:00] that.

[4:34:02] >> Thank you for that update. Um Council

[4:34:04] Member Adams.

[4:34:07] >> Yeah, we my family just experienced this

[4:34:12] yesterday.

[4:34:14] Wonder why they did that. Okay, April.

[4:34:17] Um this is a reporting on the last

[4:34:20] month. Next slide. Poppies are in. Uh

[4:34:24] spent a wonderful day, Earth Day at uh

[4:34:28] Shoreway Environmental Center. All kinds

[4:34:30] of kids. Just great great time. Next

[4:34:35] slide. Uh and we were able to announce

[4:34:39] the winners of the trash to art contest.

[4:34:42] And once again, uh a wonderful fourth

[4:34:46] grader from Hillsboro. Our artists are

[4:34:49] extraordinary. He made this entire scene

[4:34:53] of these ships from uh trash that he

[4:34:58] found and he won first place and it's

[4:35:02] wonderful Reef M who we've seen before.

[4:35:05] Very talented young man. So it was

[4:35:07] really great to see that and to award

[4:35:09] him his award. Next

[4:35:12] uh slide. Uh, and I just wanted to

[4:35:15] compliment Marie and Mike again on the

[4:35:18] H&N townwide drill. It was serious but

[4:35:22] fun. And we also had uh Steven Raldi,

[4:35:26] who is the vice mayor of Milbury, attend

[4:35:29] because he was very impressed with the

[4:35:32] things that Hillsboro is doing uh in

[4:35:35] terms of engaging the public and he

[4:35:37] wanted to see what we were doing. Next,

[4:35:42] uh, Celebrate May was fantastic. I think

[4:35:47] almost every council member was there.

[4:35:50] It was beautiful and well attended and I

[4:35:54] wanted to thank public works again for

[4:35:56] their part in that. Next,

[4:36:00] uh, leadership council is always an

[4:36:03] interesting day. Uh this was the climate

[4:36:07] sustainability and adaptation day as

[4:36:11] part of social dimensions of health. We

[4:36:14] visited uh East PaloAlto. The whole

[4:36:17] meeting was in East Paloalto. We visited

[4:36:19] the pump stations that are available

[4:36:21] with our locks to uh actually prevent

[4:36:26] flooding and they gave us a

[4:36:28] demonstration. Wonderful program. We

[4:36:30] also saw some uh rain swailes and rain

[4:36:35] gardens in individual homes. Next

[4:36:40] uh ad hoc meetings continue uh with uh

[4:36:43] Tolman Clark the ordinance for the uh

[4:36:46] business license revision and at rethink

[4:36:50] waste uh we met once again and we will

[4:36:52] met meet once again next week to get the

[4:36:56] refresh for the outdoor area next. Is

[4:37:00] there a next? No.

[4:37:02] >> Thank you. Thanks for that updates. Uh,

[4:37:04] Vice Mayor Rexdale.

[4:37:07] >> Yes, I have a few. Uh, next slide. Uh,

[4:37:13] continuing uh, VLF. We've talked about

[4:37:15] it tonight. I did I did get to go up to

[4:37:17] Sacramento for one of the days. The

[4:37:19] second day was the day of uh, Celebrate

[4:37:21] May. So, I didn't go to that one for the

[4:37:22] Senate, but I did go to um, testify

[4:37:26] before the assembly. We all got 30

[4:37:28] seconds.

[4:37:30] Um, but it was just a a great

[4:37:32] cross-section of people there to testify

[4:37:34] and the um the committee was very

[4:37:36] supportive. The only person in the room

[4:37:37] not supportive was uh from the finance

[4:37:40] department who said, "Well, this isn't mandatory and we're not doing

[4:37:44] well, but everyone else in the room was

[4:37:46] supportive." Um, ebikes. As I mentioned

[4:37:50] to the kids, I gave a minute of public

[4:37:53] testimony, which was gobbledygook, but I was there all day. Um, there were

[4:37:59] various topics that day. Um, anyway,

[4:38:02] next slide. Uh, council of cities great,

[4:38:06] um, meeting. Uh, I think it was just,

[4:38:08] um, uh, council member Schwang and I

[4:38:10] were there in Belmont. We got a tour and

[4:38:13] update that we got last time uh to see

[4:38:15] all the progress that they've made in

[4:38:17] there. They've got a huge park there um

[4:38:20] and water issues which they have very

[4:38:24] brilliantly um taken care of. Um and I

[4:38:29] went to and as I'm like mumbling my

[4:38:32] words, I went to an executive presence

[4:38:34] in clear communication.

[4:38:37] So that's good. Um town hydro was

[4:38:40] fantastic again. Uh thank you so much.

[4:38:42] Um it was um it was very well attended

[4:38:45] and we did learn a lot. And next slide.

[4:38:49] Um oh I'm going to go to the um

[4:38:53] community California community chase

[4:38:55] choice aggregators conference uh

[4:38:57] starting tomorrow for PCE. Uh we will be

[4:39:00] unveiling the West Light Energy name

[4:39:02] there uh for the industry. um Hillsboro

[4:39:06] Recre. Uh the mayor and I were there and

[4:39:09] um you've I'm sure you've read about

[4:39:11] this. It's happening all over, but um

[4:39:14] because the schools now have to provide

[4:39:16] free prek

[4:39:19] um the the preschools are all having

[4:39:21] difficulty filling filling their spaces.

[4:39:25] And it used to be that when they first

[4:39:28] started the pre-K, a lot of the kids

[4:39:29] would then come across the street uh

[4:39:32] like at South come across the street to

[4:39:34] do after noon um programs. But they're

[4:39:37] finding now that a lot of those kids,

[4:39:39] their family still retains a nanny. And

[4:39:42] so the nanny is going to pick up that

[4:39:44] kid because there's a there's also an

[4:39:47] infender toddler. And um they're not

[4:39:49] going to the afternoon program. and um

[4:39:52] at some point, not now, but they they

[4:39:54] might come to the town for an increased

[4:39:56] contribution in the JPA. So, just um uh

[4:40:00] something to keep in your head. Um ad

[4:40:05] hoc ordinance committee. I'm not sure

[4:40:07] when we're coming back, but um we are we

[4:40:10] are refining. Um we being Mark Hudach is

[4:40:13] refining. Uh next page.

[4:40:16] Okay. So um for mental health month uh I

[4:40:21] went to a session for elected officials.

[4:40:24] It was um schoolboard members and

[4:40:26] council members and uh county

[4:40:29] supervisors with regard to taking care

[4:40:32] of our owned mental health for one. Um

[4:40:36] and there's some tips here. I won't read

[4:40:37] them out but you guys can take a look.

[4:40:40] Um and uh it was a really uh supportive

[4:40:44] environment. And then the second part of

[4:40:46] the training was how to recognize that

[4:40:49] um someone you are interacting with

[4:40:51] might be uh at some stage of a mental

[4:40:54] health crisis and maybe um there are

[4:40:58] ways to suggest help for them and uh

[4:41:01] again just I won't read this out but um

[4:41:04] ways to take care of your own mental

[4:41:06] health and to take care of each other

[4:41:08] and um for instance just just one

[4:41:11] suggestion that they had is um something

[4:41:16] kind of dicey comes up and you know the

[4:41:18] mayor can tell that it's kind of

[4:41:20] affecting a council member emotionally

[4:41:23] the mayor could you know suggest a break

[4:41:25] right the the kinds of thing I think

[4:41:27] that we are we are good about our our

[4:41:31] particular council um and I very much

[4:41:34] appreciate you guys um and I think that

[4:41:36] might be it is there another slide oh

[4:41:38] that those are the people who were there

[4:41:41] and that's

[4:41:43] Thank you for sharing that. Um I'll

[4:41:46] follow up on a few items that were

[4:41:48] already mentioned. Um I will start with

[4:41:51] the uh told Clark um updates briefly. We

[4:41:54] next month it's on the agenda for very

[4:41:57] um detailed presentation by the

[4:42:00] subcommittee. Um it's been five months

[4:42:03] since they got on board. I believe they

[4:42:05] got on board sometime in midocctober and

[4:42:07] they've done a lot of work in the past

[4:42:09] five months. So, we'll get an update

[4:42:10] from them. And my plan or our plan, the

[4:42:14] subcommittee, uh, Council Member Adams

[4:42:16] and myself, our plan is to try to

[4:42:18] transition from this ad hoc to a

[4:42:20] subcommittee, which will be open to the

[4:42:22] public within the next few months as

[4:42:25] soon as we get um, an update to the

[4:42:27] entire council so everybody can be

[4:42:29] brought up to speed as far as what the

[4:42:31] plans are, recommendations are. With

[4:42:34] regards to Hrek, let me just echo again.

[4:42:36] There's a decline in um enrollments in

[4:42:39] our schools across the whole state, not

[4:42:41] just in our municipality.

[4:42:44] And um the TK program has caused this

[4:42:47] financial crunch within our HRE program.

[4:42:50] And um the preschool which used to be

[4:42:54] one of the larger revenue stream for HRE

[4:42:57] has declined because the students now

[4:42:59] have a statemandated TK um program. HRE

[4:43:05] is looking at for at least looking for

[4:43:08] opportunities to expand or create more

[4:43:12] adults, more programs for seniors and

[4:43:14] other adults in the community as a as

[4:43:16] something that will begin to offset some

[4:43:18] of those financial constraints as well

[4:43:20] as baby mom type programs. Um those seem

[4:43:25] to be two populations where there's real

[4:43:27] need questions. People are reaching out

[4:43:30] to um HRE asking what services we have

[4:43:33] in town. So hopefully as we continue to

[4:43:35] make progress in some of the other

[4:43:37] issues that are going on in terms of

[4:43:38] space, we'll be able to accommodate that

[4:43:41] going forward.

[4:43:43] Um I believe that's it. FAC, we already

[4:43:46] got a very detailed update earlier

[4:43:48] today. I don't have anything else to

[4:43:50] add. Um any other final addition from

[4:43:54] the council? Great. Seeing none, this

[4:43:58] meeting is now adjourned. Thank you.

[4:44:01] >> All right.

City Council Meeting May 11, 2026

Transcript