>> And justice for all.
>> Thank you. And now we'll
move on to see if
there's any changes
to the agenda
for tonight.
>> No changes that I'm aware
of, Mayor.
>> Okay, seeing none, we will,
I'm going to report out. On
June 17th, the Town Council
held 3 closed sessions. There
was a conference
with legal counsel
on existing litigation,
Bourbon Birdie Investments LLC
with the Town of Windsor, and
then a conference with legal
counsel anticipating
litigation,
initiating litigation pursuant
to paragraph four
of subdivision D of section
five four nine five six point
nine. One potential case,
conference with legal counsel
on existing litigation,
Evergreen Windsor. MHP LLC
versus Town of Windsor. And the
closed session adjourned
at 9:12 PM, and there's no
reportable action taken. And
now we're going to move on
to our presentations. Vice
Mayor is going to read,
read one for us.
>> I have a proclamation
of the Town Council of the
Town of Windsor proclaiming
July 2026 as Parks Make Life
Better Month. Whereas July is
celebrated
across the nation as Parks and
Recreation Month because lives
and communities are better
by parks and recreation now and
in the future. And whereas
parks and recreation promotes
physical, emotional,
and mental health and wellness
through organized and
self-directed fitness, play,
and activity for people
of all ages sorry,
all ages and abilities. And
parks and recreation supports
the economic vitality
of communities
by attracting new businesses,
promoting community
revitalization, increasing
tourism, providing jobs,
increasing property values and
generating revenues. And Parks
and Recreation creates
memorable experiences
through fulfilling programs,
dynamic events,
and new opportunities designed
to engage people
in their communities and
with each other. And whereas
Parks and Recreation fosters
social cohesiveness
in communities
by celebrating diversity,
providing inclusive services,
modeling compassion,
promoting social equity,
connecting social networks, and
ensuring all people have access
to its benefits. And parks and
recreation sustains and
stewards our natural resources
by protecting habitats and open
space, connecting people
to nature, and promoting the
ecological function
of parkland. Now therefore be
it resolved that the Town
Council of the Town of Windsor
hereby proclaims July 2026 as
Parks Make Life Better Month,
and in doing so
urges all citizens
to use and enjoy Town of
Windsor parks, trails, open
space,
facilities and recreational
opportunities, including art,
history, and culture.
>> And here
to receive that is Director
Lehman and staff.
>> Good evening. Thank you,
Mayor and council members.
Olivia Lehman, Parks and
Recreation Director. It is an
honor that I get
to stand up here with,
just a few of our large team to
accept this this recognition.
The this team is incredible
in their commitment and passion
to the work that they do
in our community. Many
of us live in this community,
raise our families here. Our
parents use the Windsor
Senior Recreation Center. Most
recently, one of our staff
members who is now full time
started off in Windsor.
preschool program as a
preschooler and then came to be
a part-time employee and is now
full-time. So, we really have
come at it with the motto
of grow your own. Not only do
we maintain great parks and
programs
within the community,
but we also bring a level
of commitment and pride
to the work that we do. So, we
enjoy this month. We get
to highlight some
of the great people that are in
our community doing this work
every day, but really,
they do it 365 days a year.
days a year. The bathrooms are
open on Christmas
in the parks. The gates are
unlocked on New Year's Day.
And that's because
of the work and commitment
of our team. So, thank you.
>> Thank you. And now we have a
presentation from the Sonoma
County Library Windsor
Branch.
>> Good evening. My name is
Deborah Doyle. I'm you're for
about the next 15 days,
I'm your Windsor Library
Commissioner, and I'd love
to introduce the director
of the library system. This
presentation is going to be
about Windsor,
but it's also going to be
about the overall Sonoma
County Library System. And this
is Erica Thibault, our fabulous
library director.
>> Perfect.
>> Good evening, Mayor, Vice
Mayor, council members, and
City Manager Davis. It's good
to see you all again. I'm gonna
give you a little bit
of information
about what we've been up to
in the last year,
as well as what's been
happening at the Windsor
Library. As you all know,
Sonoma County Library is
comprised of 12 regional
libraries, 2 community
libraries, 3 special
collections, and a library
administration center. Our
system is formed by,
by a joint powers agreement
between the 9 cities and the
County of Sonoma, and this
allows us to provide services
to over half a million
residents countywide. The
Windsor Regional Library, you
know, opened in 1996. We
recently had a renovation
of the library,
and I know many
of you were there. We bought
some new furniture,
we installed some new shelving,
we painted, we have new
carpeting that was courtesy
of the City of Windsor, or the
Town of Windsor, and it really
created a much more open and
welcoming space, and we know
that our residents and our
staff really love it. One of
the things that we've also
seen, we have 2 closures right
now, the Rankin Valley Library
and the Sebastopol Library, and
we are seeing an increase
in foot traffic at the
Windsor Library as a result
of these closures,
about 11% increase. Another
interesting thing that we began
this summer is lunch
at the library, and this is 5
days a week. We provide lunch
to youth 0 to 18. It has been
extremely popular. We're seeing
between 30 and 50 children
every day that we provide the
These are really great numbers,
and it just demonstrates how
the library is helping families
who are experiencing food
insecurity. Overall, the visits
to the branch, we're seeing an
upward trajectory. So, our
weekly visits are at 3,172
patrons. This puts Windsor
near just after Northwest
Santa Rosa and before Sonoma
Valley Library. As you know,
in 2024, the library went out
for its sales tax measure. We
extended the Measure Y sales
tax. This one will start in
April 2027. We passed
with a little over 68%
of the vote. This just
demonstrates how the library
has responded to our
communities and residents and
the great support that they
have for the library. Last
year, we also completed several
modernization projects,
including the Windsor
modernization. We put
in a new patio in the
Cloverdale Library. We
completely renovated the
Petaluma and the Healdsburg
Library, as well as the
Windsor Library. All
of these projects were roughly
$8 million over the period
of a year and a half,
and I hope that you have If you
haven't had a chance
to see the Windsor Library,
please do, but also visit
Petaluma and Healdsburg. We've
also just completed our new
strategic plan. This is a
5-year plan that will begin
this fiscal year. As part
of our plan, we did a community
survey and we received over
7,000 responses. This was a
historic record high
in responses
from the community. We also
received 15% responses
from non-library users,
which is really helpful for us
to identify those services that
we, that we can provide
to lure those non-users
into the library. We also saw
an almost 98% customer
satisfaction rating,
which is really incredible.
And our consultants tell us
that this just demonstrates the
high level of customer service
that our staff provides. As
part
of our community engagement, we
did library commissioner
interviews. We did branch
visits to all
of our branches. We had 3 staff
focus groups, 9 stakeholder
listening sessions, and 12
community listening sessions.
One was held at the Windsor
Library. One of the things so
this is a chart showing the
patron satisfaction
with our offerings. That first
bar is our customer service,
and the dark blue is the very
satisfied,
the light blue is satisfied.
So that is our highest rating.
At the end of the chart, you
see our the concern that
patrons have is really
over the wait times
for holds. And what that is
specifically is
for our eMedia. So, one of the
things people don't understand
with eMedia is that they think
that we just have endless
supplies. But our ebooks are
actually license agreements,
and we have
to purchase them every 2 And so
once we, you know, once that
ends, we have
to repurchase them. They're
very expensive. And so our
budget doesn't always match the
demand for those eMedia items.
But it's still, you know,
it's still a very, you know,
high satisfaction. There's just
a desire from the community for
more funds put towards those
eMedia resources. And what we
did this fiscal year
to increase the budget
for that is we looked at some
request funding that we had,
and we allocated funds
to our digital media. And we
purchased permanent licenses
for many of our long-term
backlist titles. So last year,
we had very high numbers as a
result. Whenever you open a new
library,
we see incredibly high demands,
or when you reopen the library.
We had just over 1.4 million
visits. We also had a
circulation of 4.4 million.
which is very high. As you can
see from the chart,
the dark blue is the physical
media,
and the orange is the digital.
Our physical media has kind
of stayed relatively stable.
Our digital circulation has
increased exponentially. But we
still are having very high
circulation despite those
library closures. Out of 100
library jurisdictions, The
Sonoma County Library is 6th
in terms of our Libby, which is
our main eMedia platform,
and also in terms of Link+.
So, Link+ is a service where
you can request items from
over 70 libraries
around the state of
California. So, we are 6th
in the state, and there's 181
library jurisdictions,
and we are 11th in size. So
that just goes to show how
supportive how much the
community supports the library
and how active they are
in reading. And now I'm going
to turn it over to Deborah, who
is going
to give you some information
about what's going on at the
Windsor branch.
>> We'd also like
to thank the town of Windsor
and the Friends of the Library
for being so generous in terms
of how we renovated the library
a little bit. It's still too
small. I think everybody knows
that it's still too small, but
for now, It's
in very good shape. And as
Erica said, the circulation and
the visit numbers are going up
when the other branches are
closed, but they stay up,
which is the interesting thing.
So, once they discover the
Windsor Library, the numbers
are actually staying up. So,
from July 2025 to June 2026,
the Windsor Library had a total
of 127,104 visitors. Averaging
approximately 10,500 visitors a
month. I think that's amazing.
In the same time period,
we checked out a total of
170,000, 171,000 physical items
and offered 519 events
with a total overall attendance
of 8,363 people. We've got tai
chi and yoga for adults. We've
got knitting for adults. We've
got book buddies. If you
haven't signed up
for the summer reading, please
do so because the kids and the
adults get prizes. The Read
for the Dog program is one
of the best programs ever.
Just watching it gives
everybody
in the room a smile,
and it allows the children who
may be a little nervous
about reading to actually read
to a dog. And it's just,
it's so good
for them and so good
for everybody. It's a great
after-school hangout
for teens. The story times for
the kids and their caregivers,
we usually have 50 to 60
attendees per story time, which
fills up that conference room.
It absolutely fills up the
conference room. And then
there's a Build Club
for teens. And let's see, in
June, we had, alone, we had
11,818 patron visits. So, it's
truly an amazing thing. And the
Summer Lunch at the Library,
which she's mentioned,
is really a very special thing.
It started a long time ago
with a grant
from a major foundation in
San Francisco, and the
California Library Association
kind of started with it. And it
has grown and inspired states
all over the country to make
sure that the kids who don't
have enough food can eat
something, and sometimes their
parents even kind of come in
to take advantage of it. And
one
of the other special things
about this is that we have
teens who are also working
in the program. So, the teens
are the ones that are actually
organizing the things
for the kids to do
during the lunch
at the library, and so it's
really a wonderful community
event. I,
as I was the commissioner for
6 years, Mike Neely also
deserves a special thanks. He
was a member,
he was my appointee
to the oversight committee.
And that's one
of the special things
about the library funding. We
have an oversight committee
that takes a look
at how we spend the sales tax.
And we think that's very
important. So, they provide a
report annually about
how they think we did,
what they think we should do
in the future. So those
oversight committees are
incredibly important. And I'd
also like to thank the
Library Advisory Board, which
is, again, civilians who are
appointed, who then are out in
the community and tell me and
tell Erica what they think that
the community of Windsor wants.
So, all in all,
the library system and the
Windsor Library are doing very
well, and we appreciate you
taking the time
to listen.
>> Thanks so much.
>> Thank you very much.
>> Um, questions?
>> Any questions?
>> I would like
to say something about Chair,
former Chair Deborah.
>> Hold up for a minute. Do you
want
to do this next little stage?
Yeah, and I'll invite you back
up. Okay, let's do this. But do
we have questions regarding the
presentation?
>> No?
>> Okay, so please stay up,
please. Yes, we're going
to move on to item 7.3. No,
Deborah. Stay up here. Don't
go. Stay right here. So, it is
my pleasure to recognize
Deborah Doyle for her
outstanding service as a member
of the Sonoma County Library
Commission representing the
Town of Windsor from 2020 to
2026. Deborah has been a
tireless advocate
for libraries at the local,
state, and national levels.
Her leadership has helped
strengthen library systems
expand public support,
and promote access
to lifelong learning,
and helping secure vital
funding for the Sonoma County
Library System. Throughout her
service to Windsor, Deborah has
generously shared her
expertise, passion,
and thoughtful leadership
to help advance library
services to our community. Her
commitment to public service
and ensuring that libraries
continue to thrive has made a
minimal meaningful and lasting
impact. On behalf of the Town
Council and the residents of
Windsor, thank you, Deborah,
for your 6 years
of dedicated service,
leadership, and advocacy. We
are grateful for you and wish
you all the best in your future
endeavors. I know you're not
disappearing, right?
>> I'm honored. I know I'm not
disappearing.
>> Good. So let me,
let me give you this. Do you
want to say a few words?
>> She's so diffident. So, I,
I just want to say that I was a
new library director when I was
hired at Sonoma County
Library, and I'm so,
so grateful that I had
Commissioner Deborah Doyle as
the chair of the commission
at that time. She really
provided an enormous amount
of leadership and guidance
to me,
and I couldn't have done it
without her. She also has
mentored and coached me not
only in my role as director
but also at the state and
national levels. She roped me
into advocacy work and even
though she's leaving the
Commission, I know that I will
continue seeing her
in our dual roles
in advocacy. So, thank you,
Deborah, for all of your hard
work and all the things that
you helped me accomplish.
>> Just briefly, because you
have so many other things
to talk about tonight,
it's truly an honor to be,
to be to have been your
commissioner. I've been
involved in libraries
for a long time, but I also
knew that when I came up
to see my dad, that one
of the things that we were
going
to be doing when I was up
from San Francisco was going
to the library, cause Dad had a
library card. He moved up here
as the town was incorporating
and loved this town. And so, I
hope that I have done him
proud. And my mom was a
teacher,
and I hope I've done her proud.
There are all kinds
of things going on We are so
lucky in California
in so many ways, and one of
those ways is because we don't
have as much censorship. We
have a Freedom to Read bill
that passed our legislature and
that Governor Newsom signed a
couple of years ago. That
doesn't mean there isn't some,
and that doesn't mean that we
shouldn't be helping people who
are facing it. And so, I'm
grateful that this town is
supportive of the freedom to
read and loves its library.
>> Thank you again. Perfect.
Okay, we're going to move on
to our upcoming,
upcoming town events.
Councilmember Leep, you want
to start
with the first 2?
>> Certainly. Thank you,
Mayor. The first announcement is
for Summer Nights on the Green
concert series on Thursday,
July 16th, 2026. That's, day
after tomorrow. Actually, I
guess it's tomorrow at the
Town Green. The band is
Freestone Peaches. The farmers
market starts
at 5:30 PM and concert begins
at 6 PM. Did I say 5:30?
>> You did.
>> That's weird. It doesn't say
that. A farmers market starts
at 5 PM and the concerts begin
at 6 PM. Then the Family
Movies on the Green, Tuesday,
July 21st. The movie is Cars,
one of my favorites. New LED
screen, new start time. Movie
begins at 7 PM. Movies continue
on Tuesday nights on the Town
Green through August 4th,
2026.
>> All right, and we have
Volunteer Day coming up on
Saturday, July 25th from 9 to
11 AM at Los Robles Park. Join
your neighbors and help
beautify our community.
For details and to RSVP,
please contact Parks and
Recreation at 707-838- And then
we will be having National
Night Out Tuesday, August 4th
from 6 to 8 PM at the Windsor
sorry, at the Town Green
Market Street, presented by
Windsor Police Department.
This is a free family-friendly
event which features emergency
vehicles, games,
and safety information from our
first responders and local
resources.
>> Saturday, September 26th is
the Windsor Day Parade. The
parade is Fly Me to the Moon.
That's the theme. The parade
begins at 10 AM. Parade entries
are due September 4th.
For entry and parade details,
visit kiwaniswindsor.org. As
always, the Sunday Farmers
Market every Sunday through
December 6th, 9 AM to 12:30,
and that's on the Town Green
Market Street.
>> Thank you, everyone. Town
Manager, do you have a report
out or report?
>> Thank you, Mayor Reynoza.
John Davis, Town Manager. 2
items tonight. So first,
as some of you are aware,
we've started the process of
reviewing and updating the
station area plan. The team
in Community Development has
been working hard on that. So
we'd like to invite everyone to
the station area plan community
meeting,
which will be this coming
Monday, July 20th, from 5 to 7
here at Town Hall. There will
be some refreshments.
And this is an opportunity
to share your ideas
about the future
of the downtown. So, we'd love
to hear from you. Translation
services will also be available
if needed. Also,
before you go, if you want
to take a moment to complete,
there's a brief anonymous
4-question survey at the back
of the room. If you want
to take that and leave it
for us, it only takes a few
seconds and it will help inform
the plan. Secondly, just,
there's been a lot
of talk this week about the
Windsor Creek Elementary
School site. Lots
of questions, and I wanted
to call out that Director
Streeter did a great
presentation last night
at the Planning Commission
meeting just regarding process
and trying to answer some
general questions about, you
know, what things may look like
regarding that property as
things go forward. And so that
is that video is posted
to the town website. The town
actually has a special page
dedicated to the Windsor Creek
site,
so you can find the video
of the presentation there, and
I encourage anybody that has
questions about the process
to watch that. That concludes
my report. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. Now I'd
like
to ask if there's any conflict
of interest to declare
for tonight's meeting. Seeing
none, we're going
to go ahead and move on
to our public comment section.
So, any members
of the public wishing to speak
to the council on any consent
calendar items or any item
that's not listed
on the agenda may do so
at this time. Pursuant to the
Brown Act, the council is not
allowed to consider issues or
take action
on any item not listed
on the agenda
during this period. So, we have
3 minutes. We have a new clock
up here, to my right,
and then the timer's, I think,
still over there. Anyways, you
have 3 minutes. so please,
if you want to speak,
go ahead and start lining up
at the podium. Anyone watching
from home, you can email us at
owncouncil@townofwindsor.ca.gov
at any time,
and that email goes to all
of us up here,
including the town manager.
Thank you very much. And if you
wish
to state your name and address,
you may do so,
but it's not required.
>> Okay. Good evening,
council members and Madam
Mayor. My name is Jesse
Valerie. I live in the
Oakfield neighborhood. I'd
like to make a comment on the
Windsor Creek Elementary site.
I'd like to ask how the town
evaluates cumulative impacts
and determines what is
considered safe. We know each
project undergoes environmental
review under CEQA and traffic
analysis, but my question is,
how safe how is safe actually
determined? What data,
assumptions,
and standards are being used to
conclude that the cumulative
impacts on traffic
infrastructure and emergency
evacuations are acceptable.
Are those analysis based on
today's conditions and the
current number of approved,
proposed,
and under-construction
developments, or are these
projects still being evaluated
largely
on an individual basis? Using a
conservative estimate of 2
vehicles per household, the
Armando Rizzulo development,
the Mill Creek project,
the existing Oakfield
neighborhood, And Windsor
Mobile Country Club represent
roughly 860 homes and
approximately 1,700 vehicles.
If the proposed Gallaher
project is approved,
that number grows
to approximately 1,200 homes
and nearly 2,500 vehicles
relying on essentially the same
road network. At what point
does the town determine that
the cumulative impact has
reached a level that requires
reevaluation? Is there a
capacity threshold for our
roads and evacuation routes,
and if so,
are we approaching it? As
someone who lives
in the neighborhood,
I already see cracked
sidewalks, limited parking,
speeding traffic, and
infrastructure that struggles
to serve today's residents.
So, my concern isn't simply
about growth, it's about
whether our infrastructure and
emergency access are keeping
pace with that growth. Growth
is important, but so are public
safety and thoughtful planning.
I respectfully ask the council
to help residents understand
how these conclusions are
reached,
what evidence supports them,
and how the town ensures that
the cumulative impacts are
being fully considered before
additional density is approved.
Additionally, I urge the
council to vote
against rezoning the Windsor
Creek Elementary site for
residential when that is
presented. Thank you.
>> Hi, Council. Good evening.
My name is Melanie. I live
in the Oakfield neighborhood.
I'm here tonight representing
myself and many of my neighbors
opposing the rezoning. There's
a lot of reasons why we
oppose, but I'll keep,
I'll keep the focus
on the ones that matter most.
Density and access. The
Oakfield neighborhood is small.
With Condie Lane being the only
road in and out. A 360-plus
unit development is too dense
for this site,
especially stacked on top of
Coral Creek's 100-plus units
already in development.
Together, that's over 400 new
families funneling through one
access point. wildfire
evacuation. The single road
bottleneck is not a
hypothetical risk. Most
Sonoma County residents have
evacuated for wildfire
at least once. Many know what
it feels like to be stuck
in gridlock, fearing
for your life, unable
to move. This was my experience
living on the edge of Coffey
Park during the 2017 Tubbs
Fire. Adding hundreds more
households to a neighborhood
with only one way out isn't
just a planning problem, it's a
public safety problem. traffic
and parking. Look
at what's already happening
at Shiloh Terrace. We don't
have
to guess what it looks like, we
can just see it a few blocks
away. The housing math isn't
adding up. Between Heritage
Park, Cascadia Burbank
Housing, Cora Creek, and
Shiloh Crossing, there are
already 346 units proposed or
in development nearby. The
already constructed
developments, Shiloh Terrace
and Redwood Views, are both
currently struggling
to fill vacancies,
and no survey has been
conducted
to demonstrate demand
for another 360+ units on top
of that. In addition, the
Windsor's low-income housing
quota has already been met.
Open space. Windsor is already
short on parks, and the
Oakfield neighborhood does not
have a park. The field on this
property is the only green
space we have. Once it's paved,
it's gone. My partner and I
built our lives in the
Oakfield neighborhood,
believing the school site would
remain zoned for public use.
The neighborhood felt safe and
community-oriented the kind
of place to put
down roots and start a family.
With all these points I've
mentioned. we are wondering if
we made a mistake. the bottom
line is we're asking the
council
to not approve a rezoning of
from public use
to high-density residential.
Thank you for your time.
>> Good evening, council.
My name is Kevin Scanlon,
currently a 29-year Resident
of the town of Windsor,
Windsor Creek residential and
elementary school neighborhood.
I've been
in the government realm for
over 40 years and an educator
for 27 years. I was a volunteer
for 16 years at Windsor High
School. Well,
after nearly a 2-year journey
to save the Windsor Creek
Elementary property
for the town use, Windsor
Unified School District
Superintendent and his board
continued to align themselves
with Gallagher's company and
disregards the town's desire
to keep the property. as public
for use of the Town of
Windsor. Gallagher the other
night filed this application
to build seeking a 7-building,
4-story-high,
370-plus unit area. We again
thank the Town Council and
Town Manager and Town Attorney
for their efforts
to absolutely try
to do the right thing
in the negotiations With
Windsor Unified School
District over the Windsor
Creek Elementary site.
Windsor Unified School
District has been amassing
their funds for over the last
22 months via the Santa Rosa
City School debacle,
pre-kindergarten,
transitional kindergarten
programs, Quail Acres seed
monies, their $100 million
budget,
and now their second attempt
at securing bond monies, which
are significantly less than
their failed bond attempt in
2024, we again think is very
suspicious. As Windsor
Unified School District was
wheeling and dealing, they
forgot their primary mission
to educate their students.
Windsor Unified School
District has 8th graders
graduating at a lack
of conversational Spanish level
from Cali Cameca. Windsor
High School seniors are not
being tested for their overall
proficiency leaving the school.
Now, someone discovered phonics
actually works at Mattie
Washburn, but that was
after it was resurrected into
the curriculum this past school
year. Recently, the school
board decided to use more
of our tax dollars
to provide a 4-year contract to
the superintendent and his
business officer to the tune
of $314,000 a year and
$240,000 a year respectively.
The state of California this
year alone will cost us $128
billion statewide
for the education system. The
governor just wiped out the
state superintendent position
starting in January 2027, and
there will be an education
commissioner who will directly
report
to the governor and no longer
to the public. The per student
cost was raised
to an unsettling amount of
$27,000 a year
with no known reason or level
of success based upon our cost.
It has been said who you
associate with is an example
of your character. Well,
Windsor Unified School
District and School Board has
proved that their association
with Gallagher Builders says a
lot about the Windsor Unified
School District and School
Board character.
Superintendent Decker has the
power and control to back out
of this whole situation
with one signature. However, he
doesn't possess the fortitude
to do the right thing nor have
the loyalty
to this town or its students
of the district,
especially as he commutes out
of town and district
at the end of his
>> Please wrap up.
>> Thank you. In summation,
the decisions of the Windsor
Unified School District and
school board will one way or
another affect our town
forever,
yet the educational level
of success remains
in a stifled state
of improvement. Thank you very
much.
>> Thank you. Anyone else
from the public? Okay, I'm
going
to close the public comment.
And now moving on to items,
12, which is our consent
calendar items. We have the
12.1, approval of minutes
from June 17th. 12.2,
acceptance
of municipal well improvements
for the Los Amigos shallow ASR
water supply wells installation
and testing project. 12.3,
Los Amigos monitoring well
installation and development
drilling service agreement.
12.4, adopt
of an ordinance amendment
Title 5, Chapter 3, skating
park regulations. 12.5, Town
of Windsor management policy
for fiscal year '26-'27.
12.6, the Youth Park and
Recreational Commissioner
appointment. 12.7, appointment
to the Sonoma County Library
Commission. And 12.8, ratify
check register number 645. Do I
have a motion or and, or any
comments?
>> I make a motion
to move the consent calendar,
and I do have one comment if I
can.
>> I'll make a second.
>> Okay, great. I just wanted
to make a comment that item
12.3 comes from capital funds
and not I mean, I'm sorry,
it comes
from the water funds,
which is not a capital fund.
It is a enterprise I'm sorry,
enterprise fund. Sorry,
enterprise fund and not the
general fund.
>> Roll call vote,
please.
>> [CALLING ROLL]
>> Thank you. And now we're
going to move on
to our public hearing, 13.1,
amendment to the Town of
Windsor Zoning Code, Title 17
of the Municipal Code.
>> Okay, good evening, Mayor
Reynoza and council members.
I'm Kim Jordan. I'm one
of the planners in the
Community Development
Department. And tonight, we'll
be discussing zoning code
amendments for housing element
implementation and compliance
with state housing law. You'll
be considering Planning
Commission's recommendation
to the Town Council. So
tonight, we'll be going
over a little bit of background
and what the amendments
actually are, how they're
implementing the housing
element. Some feedback requests
regarding some optional items
relating to ADU,
separate conveyance and
definitions,
the environmental review
required, findings
for approval, and tonight's
recommended action. So a little
bit of background. In August
of 2023, the Town Council
adopted the town's General
Plan Housing Element. That was
after approximately 2 years of
a public process that involved
multiple public meetings
with the Planning Commission
and Town Council and multiple
opportunities
for community engagement.
After Town Council's adoption
of the housing element,
it was certified in August of
2023 by the Department of
Housing and Community
Development. In November of
2024, the Town Council adopted
an updated zoning code that was
a housing-focused zoning code
that was funded by the state.
And then, as we know,
there are always ongoing
changes
to state law that the town has
to deal with, and that all
those often involve needing
to amend our zoning code. In
June 23rd of this year,
Planning Commission held a
public hearing and adopted a
resolution recommending that
Town Council adopt The
amendments to the zoning code
that we'll be discussing this
evening in order to implement
the programs that are included
in our housing element and
to implement state housing law.
So, the zoning code text
amendments we'll talk
about tonight, they fall
into a couple of categories.
The main category is to
implement housing element
programs. The town's housing
element includes about 41
different programs that the
town agreed to implement on a
certain schedule when the town
adopted its housing element.
So those have already been
reviewed by the town throughout
its public,
the public review process
for the housing element,
and they're included in our
certified housing element. The
4 specific programs that we're
trying to implement as part
of these amendments are H-2,
which is use of sites from
previous housing element
cycles. H7,
which has a variety
of programs related
to accessory dwelling units.
One of them is that the town
continues
to update its zoning code
to be consistent
with state law. H26 is
to update our zoning code
to be compliant for
transitional and supportive
housing requirements,
and H27 related
to residential care facilities.
And then we're also back
to talk to Town Council as to
whether or not they're
interested in allowing ADUs to
be sold separately as
condominiums. Each time we
bring the ADU ordinance back
to Town Council
for consideration,
we ask if the Town Council
would like to allow ADUs to be
sold separately as
condominiums. So, we'll be
talking
about that again this evening.
And then there's a variety of
technical corrections and
clarifications we'd like
to make
to the zoning code as part
of our large update that we did
in 2024. So, to talk about the
housing element programs, H-2,
use of sites from previous
housing element cycles, there's
language that we're proposing
to add to Article 2 residential
and Article 3 related to
commercial sites. rights that
says that when a project site
that was included
in our previous RENA cycles,
the 4th and 5th cycles,
includes a certain amount
of affordable housing,
that development is allowed
by right. And those sites are
shown here. They're located
on Shiloh Road
on the north side
between basically Business
Park Court and Old Redwood
Highway. So, there would be
specific language,
which is included in the packet
that allows those projects,
if they're proposed,
to be developed by right.
That's not a significant change
to what's allowed now. Right
now, residential is allowed as
a permitted use
in those zoning districts,
and then residential in a
mixed-use project is also
allowed by right. And then
there's site plan and design
review required
for those projects. So, it's
not a substantial change
to include that language
in the zoning code in order to
implement that housing element
program. The next housing
element program is H7, is to
promote accessory dwelling
units. So, we're making minor
updates to our ADU and junior
accessory dwelling unit
sections
of our zoning ordinance
to implement changes
in state law. They're mostly
minor language changes related
to how we define square footage
that's counted and building
height changes that have
occurred. We also needed
to add a section that deals
with what is the appeals
process if an ADU is denied.
However, the towns never denied
a permit for an ADU, so.
It seems moot, but HCD does
want to see that
in our zoning code. And the
process is that should an ADU
permit be denied, it is a
one-stop appeal process that
goes to the community
development director
at a public hearing. H-26,
we're required to add
transitional and supportive
housing to our zoning Code and
treat it the same way that we
treat other housing
developments, single-family and
multifamily housing. So, if a,
if a supportive housing or
transitional housing project
was submitted to the town,
we need
to treat them the same way with
the same permit requirement,
that we would treat
single-family or multifamily
housing.
So, if transitional housing
was supported and it's proposed
in a single-family home, and
that single-family home would
be allowed by right, we have to
allow that transitional or
supportive housing
to be allowed by right. So,
in order to do that,
we are just indicating
in the use table that it has
to be consistent
with the government code. And
then we would look at,
we would refer to,
is it a multifamily project?
If it is,
what is the permit requirement?
And that's how we would process
that application. And then
you're just seeing this,
we're listing
for supportive housing
since multifamily projects are
in let me stop here. So,
in a commercial district,
supportive housing would come
in the form of multifamily,
and since multifamily housing
Is a permitted use. Supportive
housing has to be identified as
a permitted use
in a commercial district. So
that's what you're seeing
in this table. Residential care
facilities, where we needed
to amend, we needed
to add a definition of family
to our zoning code. So, we've
done that. And the same thing,
we need to treat residential
care facilities the Same way
that we treat multifamily
projects. So, for a large
residential care facility,
they're required to get a minor
use permit because that's the
same permit requirement that,
that we have for multifamily.
Small residential care
facilities are treated the same
way as single-family,
single-family projects,
so they're required
to just be permitted
by right. So that's what you're
seeing in this use table.
Planning Commission
recommendations. Planning
Commission recommended that
Town Council adopt the
amendments that we just
reviewed. There were a couple
of feedback requests that we
had from the Commission, and
these are the feedback these
are the recommendations from
Planning Commission that we're
going to talk about now. So,
in our updated zoning code,
it was amended
to allow a developer to receive
a density bonus or an incentive
when a project included a
community healthcare facility.
But the definition of a
community healthcare facility
wasn't included
in the zoning code. So, when we
asked Planning Commission if
they could provide a definition
of a community healthcare
facility. So, this is the
definition of community
healthcare facility that
Planning Commission recommended
be in the zoning code. So, this
is what we're asking as a
feedback request from Council
if they agree
with this definition. So, a
federally qualified healthcare
facility is a community-based
clinic that receives federal
funding to provide
comprehensive primary care
in medically underserved areas,
and they treat all patients
regardless
of insurance status or ability
to pay. And they offer a
sliding scale based
on income,
and they include primary
medical care,
preventive health and dental,
mental health, substance abuse
treatment,
and visiting nursing services
for the homebound. So, they
could include any
of those services. So that is
the definition Planning
Commission recommended,
and we're asking Town Council
to consider this evening.
Windsor has one federally
qualified healthcare center,
and that is Alliance Medical
Center on Old Redwood
Highway. And then the second
feedback request we have and
recommendation from Planning
Commission is whether or not
ADUs should be allowed
to be sold separately from the
main house as a condominium.
So, Government Code Section
66342 does allow ADUs to be
sold separately as
condominiums. Historically,
Town Council and Planning
Commission have asked that we
not move forward with that and
asked that we wait and see what
other communities do.
Sebastopol recently adopted a
separate conveyance ordinance
for ADUs, and Santa Rosa is
considering one. So, we thought
it was time to bring this
forward and draft some language
and see if Town Council wanted
to consider it. This is what we
call an opt-in requirement,
meaning that the town has
to adopt an ordinance
to allow ADDUs
to be sold as condominiums.
So, if the town council doesn't
want to do that at this time,
you would simply make a motion
to not include that particular
provision that we're talking
about tonight. Let's see. And
then the advantage to it,
the sale of ADUs as a
condominium provides a
mechanism that allows a lot
of the concerns that Planning
Commission and Council have
expressed previously
to be addressed, such as how is
maintenance and access and open
space and parking addressed?
How do we address some
of those issues? So, the draft
condominium ordinance requires
creation of a home or property
owners association or a similar
entity, and in order
to qualify for an ADU
Condominium. The way the
ordinance is drafted, it has to
be a legal parcel that was
created 5 years prior
to application for the ADU.
The parcel has to include an
existing single-unit dwelling
and detached ADU. The ADU
that's being converted has
to be physically detached
from the dwelling, and it's not
sharing a wall or roof
with the primary dwelling. And
only one detached ADU
on the site can be converted.
And then the ADU condominium is
required to include separate
utility connections
to the public main
for water and sewer for both
the ADU and the single-family
home. They have
to pay utility connection fees,
and if there's no direct access
to a public or private street,
they have
to include an access easement.
And then also included
limitations post-approval.
So, if somebody did go through
the ADU condominium conversion
process, after that process was
completed,
no new ADUs could be
constructed on the new parcels
that were created
through that process. And then
the lots that created cannot be
further subdivided
by this section. And then we
included a sunset date of
December 31st, 2029, unless the
Town Council chose
to extend it. We really don't
know what the interest is. And
as you know,
we haven't done this before.
So, we really, you know,
we kind of wanted
to put our foot
in the water if Council was
interested and see how the
ordinance worked and what the
interest was. And then there
are a variety of technical
corrections and cleanups that
we need to do. There are some
pricing requirements. We wanted
to amend the inclusionary
housing section
to remove the requirement
to default just to HCD's
affordability requirements
because sometimes the financing
for affordable projects has
different affordability levels
that it needs to meet. And so
subject to director approval,
they could use those other
affordability requirements. We
did a minor amendment
to change a title of a section
to better reflect its contents.
We added construction trailer
to temporary use permit because
that's one
of the main uses that happens
under that. We made some minor
clarifications to tree
preservation and protection.
Driveways and side access and
general the general
non-residential minimum parking
stall size, and then notice
of application cleanup. And
then we do have one minor
cleanup related to Exhibit L,
and you're seeing it here
on the screen. It's also
at places. We needed to add it
should have said general
multifamily and non-residential
minimum parking stall instead
of just non-residential
uncovered. So that is the
change that we're asking for,
for as a clarification. So, if
council does decide
to introduce the ordinance,
we'd ask them
to please include amended
Exhibit L. And then
for the environmental review,
this These actions are exempt
from CEQA. Public Resources
Code Section 21080.17 has a
specific exemption
for ordinances for accessory
dwelling units and junior
accessory dwelling units. And
then Public Resources Code
Sections 21080.085 has specific
exemptions
for any actions that are needed
to implement a housing element.
And then we also are using the
common-sense rule that says
that there is no indication
that these actions have the
potential
for harming the environment.
And then in order to approve
these text amendments,
there are 3 findings that have
to be made. One is that's
consistent with the general
plan and any specific plan or
master plan, that they would
not be detrimental
to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience, or
welfare, and that the proposed
amendment is internally
consistent with other parts
of the zoning code. The
findings are basically the
same. In order to implement our
general plan and housing
element, we do need
to make these, and they are
consistent and already are
included as programs the town
is required
to implement as part of our
certified housing element. And
they're also needed to comply
with state housing law. And
then they're just minor
technical clarifications and
cleanups. So tonight,
we're asking you
to hold the public hearing,
accept public comment,
and introduce an ordinance
by title only, and then also
accept the amended Exhibit L.
And that's the ordinance title
for, for ease. And then I'm
available for questions. Thank
you.
>> Okay, thank you very much.
Vice Mayor, Council, do you
guys have any questions? Who
would like
to start? I have a question,
but I'll let you go.
>> I did have some questions
about the mental and medical
units on a project allowing a
density bonus. Is there any
limitation to the size of the
parcel that might encompass?
So, in other words,
we have a 15-acre subdivision
with a medical building. How
could that happen,
and what kind of densities
could we be looking at?
>> So, there isn't. So, what
the provision says is that when
an applicant proposes a housing
project,
if they include a community
care facility, they can receive
a density bonus or an
incentive. The intention of
that is that the town doesn't
have a lot
of medical facilities or care,
and it was a way
to bring medical care closer
to that population. That might
need it. That was the intention
when it was adopted.
>> Okay. And there would be
in the ordinance,
if that facility is vacated,
right, we're left with, with,
with the increased density.
And that's what's been a
concern. Well, that'll be a
comment rather than a question.
>> I just want
to add that I had a similar,
very similar question because
we've seen buildings go up. So
my question is, so they,
they bring you this permit,
they said yes, we'll have a
healthcare facility. What do
you have
in place so that it you know
for sure it is going to go
in when they open?
>> So, I would say Planning
Commission had similar concerns
and questions and it's
discretionary on the part of
Planning Commission or Council
to grant the density bonus. So
those are all, I think,
questions that you would have
to vet if an application came
forward and somebody was asking
for the density bonus because
they were including or
proposing a community
healthcare facility. And then
the town would need
to include that in their
affordable housing regulatory
agreement.
>> How that how enforceable
that is and what that looks
like, it looks
like I don't know. But the town
council has the discretion
to approve that or not. It's,
it's not granted because it's
requested. It's over and
above state law.
>> Okay. Did anyone else have a
question related to that? No.
Do you have any other questions
before I move? No. Okay. Vice
Mayor?
>> Yes, thank you for the
presentation. I have some
questions about the ADUs and
how so if a family were
to want to sell their ADU,
they then have to create their
own homeowner's association?
>> That is correct.
>> And then so what would that
look like? Because generally a
homeowner's association has a
board and a whole process. And
so if it's just me and I'm
selling my ADU, then I have
to create a board for it?
>> The members, it's so my
understanding would be the 2
members would be the owner of
the single-family home and the
owner of the ADU. That's the
extent of it. Just like any
other condominium association,
it's the members of that
condominium association. And
those are the 2 members
of the condominium association,
the owners
of the ADU and the owner of the
single-family residence.
>> Okay, and then because it's
a condominium,
the original owner owns all
of the land of the parcel
but not the building. Then
they're able
to sell the building
to the new owner, right?
>> That is how state law set up
ADU separate conveyance that
can only be sold Separately as
an ADU. I mean,
as a condominium.
>> As a condominium. And then
so for parking
for these ADUs,
and so if I have an ADU
on my property,
am I required then
to provide parking
for that ADU? So do I then,
you said there was an easement,
so then I have
to give an easement like
in my driveway for that person
to have a parking spot
for the ADU?
>> That's possible.
>> I mean, I think that that's
we haven't seen the
applications yet, so I think
the person that's selling the
ADU would have to decide how
they're selling the ADU and
possibly a parking space
in front of it. Okay. I mean,
I think they would have
to decide what is marketable
for sale for the ADU.
but this isn't so it doesn't
really necessarily address
like street parking, right? I
mean, I don't
I'm just
trying to see, like,
would I be able
to sell my ADU and say, no,
all you get is street parking
with this ADU,
or do I actually have
to provide parking
from my lot or
for that lot?
>> Right now, state housing
law, for the most part,
for ADUs doesn't require,
in a lot of cases,
onsite parking anyway. If an
ADU is
within a certain distance
of a bus stop, there's no
onsite parking required anyway.
So it could be that the ADU
doesn't need it.
>> All right, I think that's
all of my questions. Thank you.
>> Councilmember Leep, any
questions?
>> Yes. Do you have any idea
how many I guess this applies
mostly to existing ADUs. Do you
have any idea how many
of these units might be sold
in this situation?
>> We went back and we did a
building permit history search
for detached ADUs. We think
there might we went back to
about 2014, and we think there
might be about 40 detached ADUs
that could be eligible. We
didn't and it was just a quick
cursory search. We haven't done
an in-depth search, and that's
what came up initially.
>> And so, these units would
End up requiring the legal
costs of providing
documentation and
organizational documents
for associations and
for easements and all that sort
of thing?
>> It would. I mean,
alternatively,
the town can just allow it
to remain as they are now. It
was just an opportunity
to provide them for sale.
But based
on past concerns raised by
Planning Commission and Town
Council about how do we address
these issues
around parking and open space
on the property and who's
entitled to use what, town
staff drafted this ordinance
based on Sebastopol's ordinance
because we thought this might
address some of those concerns.
>> I'm just trying
to understand the situation.
So, I have an ADU, I want
to sell it to my kids,
and so there has to be a
homeowner's association.
Homeowners' association
requires some documentation,
rules, CC&Rs,
expensive. I'm just trying
to make sure I understand it,
that that is all required.
Easements require legal work,
documentation, cost, all
of that.
>> That is true. That is the
proposal.
>> It's an interesting
experiment.
>> Alternatively, I mean,
that is a way
to provide homeownership
to another person, family,
or just income to a property
owner that could maybe use that
income
in a circumstance where it may
not be possible to subdivide
the property any other way
because the property is not
large enough.
>> It sounds to me like it does
definitely offer opportunities
for small home ownership
to a lot of people,
wouldn't you agree?
>> That is the theory and the
intent behind it, yes.
>> Thank you.
>> I have a question regarding
transitional supporting
housing. Can you give an
example of what that would be?
>> I'm going to read the
definition because I don't
like to misspeak about it. So
supportive housing is permanent
housing that doesn't have any
limit on the length of stay.
And it's, there's typically a
target population. They could
be people that had experienced
homelessness or that they have
disabilities or they're seniors
or veterans. And then it
connects people with the
services that they need that
can be on or offsite so that
they can be successful.
In that living situation.
>> So, going back to where you
identify where you're updating
the zoning, right,
where they can be, is there any
restrictions or does it depend,
like, can they be
near a school? Can it be
near a daycare? What kind of,
is there any restrictions
to this type of housing?
>> What the state has what the
state requires is they have
to be treated
like any other residential use.
So if somebody submits an
application and they wanna have
a supportive housing project
in a single-family home,
then the town has to treat it
like any other single-family
home. And so
since single-family homes in
Windsor are permitted
by right,
it would be permitted
by right. If an applicant
submitted an application for
supportive housing and it was
in a multifamily project,
that type of housing,
and that type of housing
required a minor use permit,
then they would need to get a
minor use permit because that's
how the town permits
multifamily housing. So,
these the requirement simply is
saying that the town is going
to treat it the same way that
we treat single-family or
multifamily housing of this,
the same type.
>> Okay. Do you wanna
>> Is that a change in terms
of it seemed
to me supportive housing
in the past and
in other jurisdictions,
it was limited to a number
of residents. Is that something
separate or is that eliminated
now?
>> Sorry, residential care
facilities have different
sizes. They can be up to 7 and
bigger.
>> It was permitted if it was
up to 6 residents in a do you
think that's still the same?
>> You are correct,
Councilmember, that there was a
limit in order to be permitted
by right. I don't have that
section in front of me, but we
could definitely take a look
at it.
But there was there used
to be the up to, is kind
of what you're recalling.
>> So, we do have the different
sizes for residential care
facilities,
but I that's not what I have
in our housing element for
supportive or transitional
housing.
>> Thanks.
>> Vice Mayor?
>> Yeah, I have one more
question about that. So, can
you back up to the slide that
has the minor use permit
on it? So, so large residential
house, large residential care
facility has
to have a minor use permit.
You're saying that's also true
for supportive housing,
or it just has to be treated
like any other low-income
project?
>> Okay, so for residential
care facility,
which is also true for
supportive I'm gonna go back.
This is the commercial
district. So,
in commercial districts,
we don't have to include the
transitional housing. We have
to include the supportive.
So, in the commercial districts,
the permitted and prohibited,
which is what you're seeing
here, they reflect multifamily,
how the town treats multifamily
projects. So
in neighborhood mixed-use,
community commercial, town
center, town center, It's
permitted by right. So that's
how we're required
to treat supportive housing.
So that's what you're seeing
here,
if that's the question.
>> Okay, so that's
for commercial, right?
Anywhere else?
>> And then here,
this is what you're seeing
in our residential districts.
And the reason that we haven't
identified what permit type is
required
for the different districts is
until we get an application, we
don't know if it would be
allowed at all or allowed
by right. So as an example,
if we got an application for a
multifamily supportive housing
or transitional housing project
in rural residential, it would
be prohibited because
multifamily is not allowed
in rural residential. So,
until we get the application,
we don't know what the process
is. So that's why we're just
referring
to the government code.
>> And specifically, though,
I want to make sure that the
government code isn't going
to say something like, oh,
because you put consistent
with the government code,
which I know we have
to be consistent,
but that it's going
to override any
of our rural residential or any
of the other sections that we
have.
>> It allows us to be
consistent
with state law and just say
in If multifamily is allowed
and you submit a multifamily
supportive housing,
we're just going to treat it
the same way. I don't see it
making us do something that
>> Does it specifically say in
the government code that it
will be treated
like multifamily,
or do we need
to have it written
into our zoning code
to say that?
>> What it says in the
government code is that the
town, any jurisdiction, has to
treat supportive housing and
transitional housing the same
way it treats that same housing
type.
>> Which is multifamily?
>> No, which is single-family
or multifamily.
>> Depending, right? Yes.
Okay. Thank you. Any
other questions?
>> Mayor, and just wanted
to let you know, Mike Wald has
arrived.
>> Welcome, Council Member
Wall. So now at this time,
hearing no more questions
unless you have one, Council
Member Wall, I don't know how
long you've been. Any
questions?
>> Nope, I heard all of it and
I have no questions.
>> Thank you. I'm gonna go
ahead and open up
to public hearing. Any members
of the public wishing
to make a comment
on this item, 13.1, may
approach the podium and line up
and state your name if you'd
like.
>> Good evening, council
members. My name is Matt
Hoist. I'm a local business
owner focusing
on the construction of
accessory dwelling units. I've
chosen to focus
on ADUs because
of the opportunity it provides
to increase housing supply,
stabilizing our housing costs.
And create more attainable
paths to homeownership.
Throughout my work, I've sat
down with hundreds of families
and discussed their
homeownership needs, financial
challenges,
and long-term goals. These
conversations are why I think
adopting AB 1033, which is
selling your ADU as a condo,
could be so valuable
for the town of Windsor. I
regularly meet parents who are
trying
to keep their adult children
to remain in the community and
know that they cannot afford to
purchase a traditional home. AB
1033 could allow families to
both purchase homes together
that has existing ADUs,
as you guys were just here
discussing,
but also allows parents to go
ahead and gift their kids part
of their property and allow
them to just incur the house or
the cost of construction while
still keeping their family
close and still keeping young
people a part
of this community. And I think
if we don't continue
to keep young people a part
of our community. It is going
to lead to devastating things
in the future,
including reduction
of taxes and community, among
many other things as well. It
could also help individuals who
have been priced out
of purchasing a home
on their own. Smaller ADUs can
buy can provide more affordable
entry points to homeownership
while allowing them to build
equity and remain connected
in our community. For families
with aging parents,
we all know that the cost of
assisted care and facilities
are expensive, and because
of that,
more and more are deciding
to go ahead and build ADUs
on their kids' properties.
What this ends up creating
sometimes is an issue when they
go ahead and pass
on how the property is going to
transfer if they have multiple
children and estate planning as
a whole. I think AB 1033 lends
extremely well
to this and allows them
to sell it as separate piece
of property and helps them
with estate planning. Along
with that, allows them to have
security and independence while
still staying close to families
and creates more one-story
homes here in Sonoma County,
which is lacking. And
especially
with an aging population,
is a great opportunity to
create some more affordable
one-story homes. It could also
give homeowners a great
financial opportunity as they
get towards retirement. We all
know that a lot
of people haven't saved enough
for retirement. It allows them
to sell part
of their residence, helps them
to reduce debt,
supplement their retirement
income, their savings, or
to retain a home
in their old age. AB 1033 will
not solve every housing problem
here in the town of Windsor,
but I think it provides a
practical and flexible tool
for Windsor families. I
respectfully ask the town
council to adopt AB 1033 and
expand pathways available
to homeownership,
local homeownership. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Good evening, Mayor. Let me
pull this down. Good evening,
Mayor, council members,
and staff. My name is Sonia
Bick Barwick, and I'm a
lifelong resident of Sonoma
County and the senior
engagement manager at
Generation and housing. I want
to thank the town staff
for bringing the opportunity
to sell ADUs
before the council. Looking at
new housing requires thoughtful
leadership, and I appreciate
your willingness to consider
another practical tool that can
help address Windsor's local
housing needs. As a parent,
this issue is especially
meaningful to me.
Like many families, I think
about whether my children will
be able to afford to live in
community where they grew up.
My hope is that they will have
the opportunity to stay close
to their family instead
of feeling like they have to
move away because homeownership
is out of reach.
>> Allowing ADUs to be sold
separately creates more
flexibilities for families. It
can give older adults the
options to age
in place while creating
pathways for homeownership
for their adult children,
for first-time buyers,
and others who want
to put their roots down here
in Windsor. I also wanted to
restate that this ordinance
will not change what is allowed
to be built. It only addresses
whether these units can be sold
and not just rented. To me,
this is about keeping families
connected,
supporting multi-generational
living, and giving more people
the opportunity
to build their future
in the community they love.
Thank you for your thoughtful
consideration and
for your leadership.
>> Hi, Betsy Mal with Flame
tree Circle. I still have a lot
of questions
about the ADUs being offered to
be sold separately as condos. I
was following Sebastopol and I
saw that they had passed an
ordinance. And so,
I'm wondering if there's going
to be unintended consequences.
to this amendment if it is
passed. And they did give it a
sunset date,
but I'm asking you,
if you're going
to consider it, that you may
make it a pilot program that
could be canceled or amended at
any point. I don't really
understand an HOA board that
consists of the owner
of one house and the owner
of the other house. The house
is a condo, meaning the
property or the land is not
being transferred. So, the
property taxes stay
with the main house,
and if the ADU is sold and then
improved,
those improvements go back
to the property taxes
on the main house. The I don't
think the property taxes are
split. I could be wrong because
you're not splitting property,
you're only splitting the
building. I think that parking
is going
to become has the potential
to become an issue. Who has
easement if there's just more
people living in the same
spaces where there's not enough
parking? And then you have an
HOA that consists of 2 people.
I just see that there's a
potential
for unintended consequences.
So, I ask you to really look
at this, maybe let Sebastian
Pools play out
for a little bit,
and if you really feel
like you need to move ahead
with this, to do it as a pilot
program so that if there are
unintended consequences that
come through, you're able
to end the program. Thank you.
>> Good afternoon, Mayor,
council members, and staff. My
name is Omar Lopez. I'm the
policy coordinator at
Generation Housing. I just want
to reiterate that
with these ADUs, we're not
building anything more than
what can be rebuilt. Now it
just allows for selling. The
City of San Jose has actually
been kind of leading
on this. I know Sebastopol's a
good local example,
but they are very new. And
San Jose has already sold 2
ADUs. So, a lot of sorts of
these issues that are valid
issues, we can kind of look
at San Jose
for how it's worked out
for them. And they have kind
of like the best-case scenario
where they had an ADU right
next to the primary unit and
you couldn't even tell which
one was which. And they had
independent driveways. and
independent parking spots.
That is the best-case scenario,
but that is something that you
as a council can sort of help
address as applications come
through. And then I think
that's it. I hope you guys do
consider adopting this policy.
Oh, one last thing. I do
politely push back a little bit
on making it a pilot that you
can cancel at any time. That
would just create a lot
of uncertainty. Why would
somebody wanna start the
process if the next day the
thing gets canceled and then it
goes nowhere. So, I understand
doing the sunset date. I think
that's a good way to keep it
something that you can monitor
and see how it goes. Thank you.
>> Anybody else? Seeing none,
I'm going to go ahead and close
the public hearing and bring it
back to the council for
discussion. I think there are a
lot of great questions, a lot
of community good community
feedback. So where would we
like to start? Do we want
to tackle one item
at a time?
>> Mayor, could I just ask if
you have the answer to the
property tax question that
Ms. Malice said? So, if the
land is owned
by the main owner
of the property,
but then the ADU is sold, and
then it's that ADU is then sold
again, and in Improvements are
made upon the condo. I mean, is
there anything that says it? I
mean, I would imagine it can
just keep changing hands
from its current owner
to the next owner
without the say
of the original owner
of the main house. But then if
improvements are made
to that condominium, then
because do the property taxes
go back to the original owner
because the land is not then
owned by the person who is
owning the condo? So, I sell my
ADU. Somebody buys it,
they sell it,
they make a whole bunch
of improvements, and now the
property tax has been
reassessed. Do I pay the extra
property tax or do they pay the
extra property tax?
>> I'm trying to follow the
because I get the question.
It's the now I own the
property, so now the
reassessment, am I responsible
for it, or is the next owner
of the condo,
would they be responsible? And
I don't know, Kim, I have not
looked at the condo sale as far
as the selling of the condos
regarding the property tax. I
think that the ordinance was
focused on the sale, but not
the potential unintended
consequences
of who's paying the property
tax on it,
given that the property still
owned, the land
>> Correct.
>> Is still owned
by the house.
>> But the condos is actually,
condos still have to pay some
of the property taxes. I think
Mr. Streeter.
>> Yeah, if I could just chime
in, Patrick Streeter,
Community Developer. I did look
into this a little bit. The
question came up previously and
I believe condominium owners
pay property tax
for their property,
which they own. They don't own
the ground. They own the
building.
But they own the building,
which is property. So,
in theory, if a condo is made
of, from a,
there's a property That's that
exists that has a main house
and it has an ADU and it's one
property, it's then
condominiumized and there's a
condo that's taken out,
the assessment value
of that original property goes
down for the unit that has now
been taken out
of that property. That is now
an independent taxable unit,
and so any changes made to that
will be the responsibility
of the property owner
of the condo
to pay those.
>> Just as if it was land.
>> Yeah, it's just it's
detached from it.
>> It's detached.
>> Yeah.
>> Because they're paying
the improvement just
on the outside of it.
>> The building is the
property.
>> Okay. That makes sense.
>> Okay. Great question
from the public, and I'm glad
Director Streeter had an answer
for that because that was. Who
would like
to start the discussion? And
again, I've. I was wondering
if, if we wanted to focus,
right? There's various
sections. Do we want
to tackle one at a time?
>> Mayor, maybe
before I know that
Councilmember Sammy, you asked
regarding the transitional
housing and the whether how
they were treated and whether
there was a limit. And I
remember, you're right,
back then the residential care
facilities, for example,
they had the, the limit of 6
beds. They ended up I think
they ended up getting rid
of those standards. But
for our code, they're treated
just as supportive housing and
transitional housing. They're
treated and correct me if I'm
wrong, Kim but they're treated
exact they're just treated for
that the same as other uses
there. So if it's
in residential, treated
like residential, multifamily
treated as multifamily.
>> So, chances are there are no
limits on the number
of beds.
>> Correct. Those limits got
they got rid
of those limits.
>> But there's really nothing
we can do about that. It's a
government yeah. Okay. So,
recommendation 1, anyone want
to make a recommendation
for this, for the density bonus
healthcare facility? Want to
state your position or have a
discussion about it?
>> I think we should discuss it
a little bit. Because is this
something that we want to do?
Do we want to provide a density
bonus or some sort of an
incentive when we don't know if
there's a guarantee that in
perpetuity there would be a
medical facility on that?
>> And if I can just chime in
to provide a little clarity,
this item is
about creating a definition for
community healthcare facility.
The council has already
previously said that you want
to include a density bonus
for childcare facilities or for
community healthcare
facilities. So, if we were
to roll back on that, it would
require a different agenda
meeting.
>> Okay. All right. I'm fine
with the definition.
>> I'm fine
with the definition then.
That's all it is. Yes. Okay.
Recommendation 2. What do we
want to do
about the ADU condos?
Councilmember Wall, please
chime in if you want to. I
can't see you. Councilmember
Salmon? Oh, okay. Yeah, just
chime in when you're if you
have something to share.
Councilmember Leep or Salmon,
do you guys have anything
on what you want to do with ADU
condos?
>> I can make some comments.
>> Okay.
>> I'm really concerned
with the homeowner's agreement,
the agreement between because I
see that it'll be the primary I
can only it's the way I can see
it works. The primary house is
going
to be the one that's going
to create the condominium.
They'll be in charge
of drafting the document
of the homeowner's association,
and then it'll be a 1-to-1
vote. And we've I've had I'm
just not with it. We've dealt
with this
in a grocery market situation
in the town,
and it's not a happy place.
And so, then we have the
definition auxiliary dwelling
unit is different than
subdivided condominium. And I'm
having trouble making that
switch and really comprehending
all the consequences that come
with it. We really haven't
experienced the possible
explosion of ADU construction
in our new developments,
but they're
out there. I think Quail Acres
has a number of units that have
auxiliary dwelling units. And
to see how that plays out
in a single-family development,
I think we need to see it. I
think we also experienced it
with other developments. So,
I'm very hesitant
to do this process
of the condominium creation
in ADUs at this point
to see how it's going to play
out. I do understand the
necessity to try to find ways
that people can create wealth
through homeownership because
it really is troubling in this
time where everything is so
expensive that there's no
gateway. And this is a gateway,
but I just see a lot
of problems
with it that are unsolved
at this point. So, I'll listen
and continue
to think how I'm going to make
my take my position.
>> Okay, perfect.
Councilmember Leep?
>> Yes, I do have a couple of
comments or questions. I don't
know which they are. I think
that the concept of a
condominium is already
established law and policy and
everything. A condo is a condo
is a condo. So, we know what
condos are. So, I'm not afraid
of condos. And that's a simple
question, a simple question
for me. One thing I don't quite
get the impact of is the legal
parcel that was created more
than 5 years prior
to the application. So, does
that mean only the ADUs that
have been in place for 5 years
up till today,
or whatever the right date is,
are eligible to be converted
to a condo?
>> That's correct. And that
well, what do you mean?
>> It could be an ADU built
in the last 5 years.
>> Right.
>> And be subdivided.
>> Right. So, the ADU, right?
So, he sorry about that. So, I
put this slide up because this
was very intentional,
the way this language was
written, and it really gets
to Sam's point. The town has
approved quite a few
subdivisions,
and they do have the potential
to construct ADUs,
and we wanted to make sure that
any new subdivision application
that is submitted, any new
subdivision that has been
approved,
that those projects have
to be constructed and built and
in existence for at least 5
years
before we're seeing any kind
of ADU, detached ADU
condominium conversion. So,
we're understanding what those
impacts look like
for the town. And then This
ordinance was proposed for
about a 3-year term so we can
see what this looks like
for the town. And then that
it's physically detached
to minimize impacts, you know,
between neighbors. The
buildings don't touch,
there's space in
between everybody. And even
though in some circumstance,
you know, circumstances,
properties can have more than
one detached ADU, that we're
only allowing one conversion.
So that we're trying
to be very conservative in the
approach that we take if the
town is interested in trying an
ADU conversion program.
>> So, I think I now understand
the idea. So, if an ADU is
constructed tomorrow
by a developer, 5 years
from now, they can turn that
into a condo, right? They can
qualify for the application.
They can't for 5 years because
they have to be in existence
for 5 years.
>> Well, the issue with that is
that the ordinance will expire
in 2029.
>> I hear you. I got that.
It's going to expire
before we find that out, which
is a safety valve there.
>> Right.
>> And we've got 47 units. or
whatever you said the number
was, 46 chances to try it out
in the meantime.
>> Right.
>> And I understand that. And
now it makes sense
to me. I was unclear
on what the 5 years meant. I
just want
to say that even though it may
not sound like it, I have
reviewed this and I have asked
already some questions
about it and had them explained
to me. So, I get the point
of this, and I think it's a
very interesting plan for,
for the conversion of ADUs
into ownership.
>> Vice Mayor?
>> Sure. So, on this one,
I am torn
between really wanting
to make sure that any homeowner
in Windsor has the opportunity
to do with their property what
they want, but
at the same time Thank you. I'm
not feeling
like this is just right for
Windsor right now in its
current I'm really hung up on
the HOA/POA issue because if
there's only 2 members of it,
how do you ever get to do
anything if the person you
bought the house
from doesn't agree with you?
So, you never get a choice
on what you want to do with
your own property now because
you don't have the majority of
a POA vote because there's only
2 people in it. So, I just have
this real issue with the way
that that is written,
and there's not a fix to it.
And then what hap like,
is there an arbitration? Is
what are the other options for
the person who has purchased
that condo except for to turn
around and sell it to some
other unsuspecting person who's
going to be a member of the,
the POA?
>> Thank you.
>> Going forward. So that's my
concern with that. And I think
it's, you know, it's an
unintended consequence that I
would love to watch the
Sebastopol go through,
and then we can learn
from them,
and then we can make changes
to our ordinance based
on learning what they're doing,
and then maybe be able
to bring in an ordinance
in a couple
of years that we think is,
is just right for Windsor. So
those are my thoughts on it.
And, and I do understand that,
yes,
this gives people the ability
to purchase, you know, and
but also, you know,
I think that when we think
about ADUs, it's really to try
to keep, you know,
that income coming in already
for the people who are creating
those, right,
as rent right now. So, they're
still going to have some income
if that's the reason that
they're building the ADU. So, I
don't think we're hamstringing
them, but we're, you know,
we're just sitting back and
kind of watching and making
sure we make the best policy
decision.
>> Councilmember Wall, any
comments?
>> Yes, thank you. so yeah,
I think we need to really,
lean into the autonomy
of folks that own their,
their home and their property,
and, completely agree with
Vice Mayor Potter
about this concept of having
to have an HOA,
and then it just I think it's
ludicrous, to be honest. I
think it just makes no sense.
Councilmember Salmon mentioned
giving folks, you know,
the ability to create wealth
off their own property. 100%
yes, it's their property.
Like, we should not be getting
in their way whatsoever. And
then we also oftentimes talk
about our desperate need
for creating housing. And yes,
the less barriers we put
in place,
the more housing we're going
to be able to create. So, yeah,
so those are my thoughts. I
think the HOA is ridiculous,
and we should be removing
barriers and letting people
what they want to letting
people do what they want to do
with their properties, as long
as it doesn't violate any
obvious zoning issues, etc.
Let's get out of the way. The
less government, better.
>> I have another comment.
So, this is our own ordinance.
Is this based is that part
of the ordinance based
on a state law that we have to
say that they have a
homeowner's association?
>> So, the law does require
that condominiums shall be
created pursuant to the
Davis-Serling Common Interest
Development Act, which requires
the HOA for condominiums.
That's why it's put in there.
Now, it could be a simpler
form, but it does require that
it follow the Davis-Sterling
Common Interest Development
Act. And that's clear
in the law. That's why it's
there. And the thought, I
think,
is there's more regulation
about kind of what happens on
the property you own. I don't
know what the I'm sure there
was a thought behind it as far
as making sure that folks
agreed since they're being very
close neighbors. et cetera.
You can imagine the why,
but I mean, it does put another
barrier or another hurdle that
folks have
to jump through.
>> If I could just also chime
in, knowing the history that
this council has with HOAs,
no part of this would require
that the town be a party
to that. The requirement is
that they come up
with their own agreement,
and any ADUs are already going
to have a lease agreement.
It's similar to that. Any
subdivision has that has an HOA
has CC&Rs, which talk about how
they resolve conflicts or how
they make amendments. So this
would be a private agreement
between the seller and the
buyer. The town would
absolutely not be party
to that and not have
to not have
to hear any disputes.
>> I have
to say something.
>> Go ahead.
>> I have to say something.
In the homeowner ADU, the
homeowner's association is the
owner of the home. And if,
if the dogs are barking,
if you, if the cat
they're tearing apart their car
in the driveway, it's the owner
that makes a judgment and says
you're gone. You in this,
we're going
to have a vote possibly,
and it's going
to be a 1-to-1.
>> And there won't I'm sorry. I
mean, because the dog barks.
Is the town not going
to get involved? The dog's
barking. You talk to the
condominium owner and they say,
oh, my dog's not barking. Who
do you call? You put the claim
into animal control. They come
out and the town is involved.
And it seems to me the other
aspect I'll ask the condominium
law, does it have the warranty
of 10 years to I mean,
I would I can't imagine it,
but it may.
>> Well, what I will point out
as far as all the condominium,
the sales, the reality is,
and what we've seen
in the HOAs,
not every HOA is the same,
right? There is an agreement
between, and I think Mr.
Streeter mentioned it,
between the parties So the
reality, if you're buying the
condo, you're also looking
at the HOA and saying,
are these beneficial to me? Is
there a mediation process? Is
there a dispute resolution
process? What are my rights? I
think that that's kind of the
thought that as you're a
purchaser, you're reading what
you're agreeing to.
>> Again, the owner is the
author of that. And if you
don't like it,
you don't buy it? We don't buy
it. I said enough. I think I
know, and I'm sorry
for where I'm at because
>> Well, I think it's I mean,
I appreciate that we are trying
to get new owners out
of this draft. Building
generational wealth is what
we're trying to do here. And
it's unfortunate that an HOA
issue may be what doesn't help
this pass. It's unfortunate.
And I hope that everyone in the
audience who supports this or
on the council,
that we continue to try
to find ways
to build smaller units, homes
Sweat equity, what happened
to that? So many things have
disappeared that got people
into their first homes.
They're disappearing. And rents
are ridiculous. And I don't
know how to get back
to where we were. So, when I
first heard this project,
I freaked out cause I'm like,
oh my God, everyone's gonna
build an ADU now. But then I
learned it was a 5-year prior.
We have 40 ADUs. It's not so
bad, you know, I
like the sunset. I don't
like the parking. I'm worried
about that HOA. That's again,
yeah, you're right,
it might come to the town.
But, so I'll, I am the last
vote, so I will
I'm still not I'm kind of
in the middle right now.
but we do have San Jose. I did
read the article
about the first one that sold
out there. Very exciting
for the homeowner, but I think
we will learn a lot as this
thing moves forward,
and it's going
to be interesting to see what
the government does as they
start hearing stories
of what's coming out,
whether it's positive or
negative,
and if they'll change anything
in the, in the laws for,
for this ordinance. Okay, so,
anyone else want
to add anything,
or should we should I ask
for a motion?
Do we have another item we
have to review? Okay, there was
the amendment Exhibit L also,
but I think that was pretty
clear, just language. So,
again, there's an ordinance
title, but it sounds like the
only one we're really deciding
on is the ADU portion
of this. So, I don't know if
someone makes a motion,
how would they Distinguish what
part they are in favor
of or not in favor of.
>> Okay, so what staff is
asking is that it would be the
ordinance title and then as
amended by revised Exhibit L.
And then what I have heard
is that you,
some council members want
to remove Section 17.8.2 So it
would be up
to whoever makes the motion to
either read the title as
amended to make that clerical
correction and make that motion
if they wanted
to include the ADU,
or if they wanted to exclude
the separate transference
of ADUs,
add that additional bit that
Ms. Jordan just read.
Which is remove that
section.
>> Let me ask a question.
>> Yeah.
>> We can always do the ADU
part later, right?
>> Just, I mean, as a point
of clarification,
as I said towards the
beginning,
each time that we come
to the council
with an ADU amendment, we
always bring this forward.
>> This time we actually
brought a draft ordinance The
only thing I've heard that we
are having a problem with is
the homeowner's association.
Is there something else I'm
missing?
>> Parking.
>> Well, parking is going
to be there. If you'll pardon
my commenting on that, Mayor,
the parking is going to be
there no matter who's occupying
it.
>> I think that's correct.
>> I kind of disagree. I think
what I'm seeing is the
worst-case scenario,
and that's kind
of what we have to look at.
Worst-case scenario is the
primary house sells. We have
new people
in the primary house,
we have unknown people
in the ADU,
and we have problems
between them.
>> And then to say that town
won't be involved,
the town will be involved,
just like we, we are involved
in neighbors, except neighbors
have fences and neighbors have
much more control
over their property.
>> And so this would be a
reason to prevent someone
from selling a piece of their
property because they might
have problems
in the future?
>> It would to me.
I think the ADUs for me
were made as auxiliary dwelling
units and really were made
in terms of so families could
either have a rental or they
could have family members stay.
They could have their children
have a place. They could have
all those things that we're
talking about
in the condominium happen
in the ADUs. But the
condominium is no longer an ADU
in my estimation,
even though we're treating them
like ADUs,
and that's the problem.
They're not.
>> And then when you rent an
ADU, you know how many people
are living there and how many
cars they, they have. It's part
of the rental lease agreement.
But once you sell it, I don't
think you can control how many
people live in the condo and
how many cars they can have.
>> Through the HOA.
>> Well, yeah.
>> That you each have a vote.
>> So, I'm trying to find some
direction on what you'd
like as a motion.
>> Could we please, Ms.
Jordan, have the 17.8
>> It's 17.82.090, ADU
condominium.
>> Okay.
>> And then the one that we're
asking to have amended Is
revised exhibit L.
>> So, is anyone interested in
making a motion? I'll try.
>> We'll see. Okay. So, I'd
like to make a motion to.
>> It would be
in the agenda.
>> Sorry, it's
to introduce and hold
by first reading by title only
an ordinance adopting
amendments to the Town of
Windsor Zoning Code, Title 17
of the Municipal Code, to
implement housing element
programs and to comply
with state housing law.
Revised Exhibit L as amended,
removing Section 17.82.090,
which is the ADU. Condominium
Is there a second?
>> I'll provide a second. Roll
call vote, please.
>> [CALLING ROLL]
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you, everybody.
>> Thank you. I'm sorry.
>> Very healthy discussion.
>> And we can bring
>> No need to apologize. Yes,
we can bring it back. It was a
healthy, healthy discussion.
Thank you so much, everybody.
Item 14.1, our regular
calendar, the resolution
approving a 1% transient
transaction and use tax
ordinance.
>> Okay, good evening, Mayor
and council members. Lauren
Burgess, Senior Management
Analyst. Tonight, I'm
presenting the final package
for the proposed 2026
Transactions and Use Tax
Measure, also known as the
sales tax. This presentation
summarizes the fiscal context,
the measure structure,
accountability provisions,
and the actions
before you this evening.
Tonight's item asks the council
to take several formal steps
required to place a measure
on the November ballot. These
include presenting the final
ballot measure package,
requesting council approval to
submit a 1% transaction and use
tax to voters,
approving the ballot question,
directing the town attorney to
prepare the impartial analysis,
providing for ballot arguments
and rebuttals, and introduce
and introducing the ordinance
that would establish the tax
pending voter approval.
Windsor has maintained strong
service levels for decades, but
our long-term fiscal challenges
have intensified. Costs
for public safety, maintenance,
and operations are now
outpacing our revenues. In the
fiscal year 25-27 budget,
the town had to implement $6
million in reductions. The most
significant impact was the
reduction of the 3 police
officer positions. We also
deferred $5 million
in maintenance and relied on
$8 million
in one-time reserves just
to maintain service levels.
And unlike many cities,
Windsor has no locally
controlled sales tax. We only
receive the Bradley Burns
share. This limits our ability
to sustain essential services
moving forward. A 1%
transaction and use tax meets
Windsor's revenue needs
at a majority vote threshold.
Without new revenue,
we face a projected $4 to $5
million annual deficit
beginning in fiscal year,
with reserves exhausted by
2029. That trajectory would
mean fewer police officers,
slower response times,
deteriorating roads,
potential park closures,
and reductions to youth,
senior,
and community programs.
With the measure, Windsor would
generate approximately $5.7
million annually in new locally
controlled revenue funding
police and emergency response,
street infrastructure
maintenance, And parks and
community service. From
December 2025 through, really
present, our community
engagement has consistently
emphasized, the themes of
protecting essential services
and to ensure strong visible
accountability. Residents made
it clear that trust
in any revenue measure,
depends on how transparently
the town manages its public
funds. In response,
the council and staff went
beyond what is legally required
for a general tax. Independent
annual audits and citizens
oversight commission are not
mandated under state law. They
were added because the council
believes accountability must be
built into the measure
from day one. The oversight
commission will review
revenues, expenditures, and
project progress and will
report publicly to ensure funds
remain 100% locally controlled
and used responsibly. In
June, the council also adopted
account the accountability a
broader, excuse me,
accountability framework
policy, which includes public
reporting and updates on how
revenues support core services.
This framework reflects the
council's longstanding
commitment to transparency,
fiscal stewardship, and
maintaining the community's
trust. The ordinance before you
tonight establish the 1%
transactions and use tax and
outlines key provisions. It
defines the operative date
beginning the first day
of the quarter of more than
110 days
after voter approval. It
specifies the place
of sale and tax rate,
adopts relevant state law
provisions, and includes
exemptions and exclusions. And
to be clear, these exemptions
follow statewide rules and
ensure the tax does not apply
to essential essentials such as
groceries or prescription
medications. These protections
are built into California law
and remain unchanged
Under this measure, as
mentioned,
it also establishes the
Citizens Oversight Committee or
excuse me commission and
requires annual independent
audits. If approved,
the local sales tax remains
in effect until ended
by voters. This is the proposed
ballot question. It clearly
communicates the purpose of the
measure: maintaining essential
local services such as street
repair, neighborhood police
patrols, emergency response.
Parks and community events,
and disaster preparedness. It
also states the tax rate,
the estimated annual revenue
of $5.7 million, and the
accountability requirements:
independent audits, citizens
oversight, and local control
of all funds. Here is the
implementation timeline.
Following council action
tonight, ballot materials will
be submitted to the Registrar
of Voters, and the town
attorney will prepare the.
Personal analysis. And under
Elections Code, the council is
authorized
to designate one or more
of its members
to prepare the argument
in favor of the measure. That
designation will occur during
this period so the assigned
council member can prepare this
and submit the argument
by the statutory deadline. The
argument filing period opens
and closes per Elections
Code,
with direct arguments due
August 14th and rebuttals due
August 21st. The county will
administer the consolidated
election On November 3rd,
2026. Staff recommends that the
council adopt the resolution
ordering the measure
to be submitted to the voters
at the November 3rd, 2026
general municipal election,
direct the town attorney to
prepare the impartial analysis,
authorize the preparation of
valid arguments and rebuttals,
and introduce the ordinance
establishing the 1%
transactions and use tax
to be administered by the
California Department of Tax
and fee administration subject
to majority voter approval.
And this concludes the
presentation. I'm happy to
answer any questions and take
any comments or provide any
further detail. Prior
to taking any action,
I just want to be clear that we
should designate a council
member or members
to prepare the argument
in favor of.
>> Thank you very much.
At this time, we're going
to start with questions,
and then I'll open up
to the public,
and then we'll come back
for discussion. So, any
questions from the council
to staff? No questions?
Councilmember Wall? I'll go
ahead and open it up.
>> No questions, but I'll have
some comments when we get
to that point.
>> Okay, perfect. So, I'll go
ahead and open up
to the public. Any members
of the public wishing
to speak,
make a comment regarding this
item, approach the podium. You
have 3 minutes. State your name
if you'd wish. Thank you.
Please approach. Yes.
>> Oops, sorry, it's loose.
Good evening, Council and
staff. I'm John Laba. I live
with my wife and family here
in Windsor. I have written you,
given comments,
and attended many community
meetings, a couple workshops,
and several presentations
about our fiscal situation,
the proposal
for a 1% sales tax increase.
Tonight, I speak as chair of a
new general-purpose committee
we have formed in Windsor
to engage in issue advocacy for
fiscal and governmental reform.
Our group is called Concerned
Windsor Citizens. We come
from all over the political
spectrum and all walks
of life, people who live here
and care deeply what happens
here
in this council chamber and
here in the town we all love.
We are concerned
about the direction of town
government and our leaders who
have known
about our structural deficit
since at least 2021.
For years, the town continued
to increase salaries and
benefits, add positions,
promote staff,
and increase spending
with little discussion of
affordability or financial
offsets how to pay
for it all. The recent hiring
freeze and work deferral does
nothing
to unwind prior increases,
which also compound pension
liabilities. You heard our
testimonies for months.
Several of our members,
in fact, have raised concerns
for years. All
of us have continued to engage
in dialogue throughout the
process. After consideration,
we oppose a 1% forever sales
tax. The proposal
before you has never changed.
No compromise at all since we
started. 1% forever sales tax.
Other options were reviewed,
but they were always presented
as strawman arguments,
immediately discounted rather
than put into basket, a basket
of reforms. This item won't
generate enough
to cover our full deficit, but
complex problems are rarely
resolved
with one simple solution,
and we don't think this is
going to pass. And your own
data said it wouldn't. We have
not seen a good faith effort,
which would look
like compromise: some limits,
sunset to this tax.
Like I said, a basket
of reforms. One thing concerned
Windsor citizens all agreed on
was this: we can never support.
Support a tax with no sunset
and no regular review
by voters. In fact,
the ordinance before you
on page 7 says specifically
in Section 26230 that the tax
may be amended by the City
Council without a vote
of the people. What? Our group
is active and experienced.
Collectively, we have worked as
volunteers, organizers,
consultants, managers,
and sometimes as a candidate
for at least 2 dozen campaigns
over 50 years. We will be
working
on this issue and other issues
like the coming council mayor
races and beyond. We can be
reached at the following email
address:
concerned.windsor.ca@gmail.com.
Again,
concerned.windsor.ca@gmail.com.
We concerned Windsor citizens
are here to stay and will
remain active regardless
of election results. We ask you
to limit this tax proposal
to a term of no more than 5
years. Thank you.
>> Anybody else
from the public? If you don't
mind, you'd please line up. We
can move a little faster if you
line up, or we can stay here
till 11.
>> Take numbers next time.
>> Okay, if no one approaches
the podium,
I'm going to close public comment.
>> Oh, there you go.
>> Council members, staff. My
name is John Broughton. My wife
and I have been Windsor
residents since 2012. The group
that I am now part of,
Windsor Concerned Windsor
Citizens, first met in
December of last year. We were
not happy with how the town
council and town staff were
managing the town's fiscal
affairs. We have concluded that
the current town council has
completely failed its fiscal
responsibilities.
Until last year, there was no
indication that members of the
town council took seriously A
consultant's report issued in
2021, 5 years ago, that the
town faced a fiscal structural
deficit, that the town needed
to act to increase revenues and
decrease costs. Instead, the
council sat on its hands for 4
years as additional staff
positions were created and
filled. Staff positions were
reclassified upwards. Annual
salary step increases for staff
were essentially treated as
automatic. And nothing was done
about the excessive number
of supervisory positions
within the town staff. And as
the town slid toward the
current fiscal crisis, the
council annually gave a bonus
to the current town manager.
In addition to neglecting
long-term fundamental problems,
particularly excessive
personnel costs,
the current town council seems
to have had little or no focus
on the question of why the
town's general fund balance
swung from an increase of
about $400,000
for the fiscal year ending
June 30th, 2024, to a decrease
of about $2.7 million
for the year ending June 30th,
2025. That's a shift of about
$3 million in a single year,
which is more than 10%
of the budget. What changed?
And as importantly, when should
the council have started
dealing with the change? The 2
largest changes were an
increase of $2.2 million
for police services, a 27%
jump, and a $1 million increase
in general government costs,
a jump of 25%. A fiscally
responsible town council
would've gotten details,
for example,
about the sharp increase
in overhead assessed by the
Sheriff's Department. And then
they would have discussed what
to do about these,
what could possibly be done
about these 2 large cost
increases. This council did not
do that. In summary, the
Windsor Concerned Windsor
Citizens Group is
against a permanent 1% increase
in the sales tax in Windsor
because we believe that the
town staff and town council
have been unwilling or unable
to examine the root causes of
the town's current fiscal
problems. Instead, staff and
the council are proposing
to paper over the deficit
Asking Windsor residents
to pay more in taxes
with no demonstration of fiscal
responsibility and certainly no
guarantee that more taxes,
no more taxes will be a
permanent,
certainly a guarantee that more
taxes, this increase
in taxes will be a permanent
fix for the town's fiscal
problems.
>> Hi.
>> Thank you,
council members. This is
Teresa Hendricks, and I live
in Sam's district. And I came
here
to let you know there are a lot
of people who support putting
the 1 cent per dollar spent,
1% sales tax on the ballot
until such time as removed
by a citizen measure approved
by the voters. I can tell you
that we already have a great
group of retired professionals
who want to campaign for this
for you, and you can reach us
at windsorisworthit@gmail.com,
and you can look
for a website coming up
at windsorisworthit.org
to give everybody the facts
about the sales tax and why we
should vote for it and why we
should pass this sales tax. We
feel that
in all the meetings you've held
over the past year, we have
gotten more than enough
documentation of the rise in
external costs and forces that
are forcing Windsor
to put this
on the ballot if we want to
keep our town as beautiful and
great a place
to live as it is now. And let
me just say,
I think this makes sense
to put this on the ballot.
Really, it's a protection
for all of us and our property
values because,
as we were just discussing,
homes are generally the biggest
asset that a family or a person
owns. If our town gets tattered
and goes downhill,
so do our investments in our
homes and any price that we
might want to sell them for
in the future. And more
importantly,
there's a danger that we may
not be as safe a town as we
have always been. We may not
have anywhere near the quality
of parks that we have always
had and recreation programs
we've always had
for our kids. These are the
reasons most people moved here
to Windsor, because it's a
great place. It's a great place
to call your new hometown or
your forever hometown,
and we want
to keep it that way a safe,
family-friendly,
well-kept town for all of us.
So, you do have people who
support this,
and I encourage you to put it
on the ballot as written,
and then you can let the voters
of Windsor decide. And I'm sure
it'll be interesting. Thank
you.
>> Hi, Betsy Malice,
Flametree Circle. In October
of last year,
the executive team
of the town, which I didn't
even know there was one,
and I was even more surprised
to learn that each
of them earns between $200,000
and $350,000 a year, they
invited myself and some others
to a meeting to discuss
Windsor's fiscal outlook. I was
told then that they wanted the
residents' feedback, but they
shared that the solution was a
1% non-sunsetting sales tax.
Tonight, 9 months later,
this council is voting
on a ballot measure for a 1%
non-sunsetting sales tax.
Staff was told
to not spend money
on a consultant. At least 2 of
the council members requested
that the issue just be put
on the ballot and
to let the voters speak
for themselves.
>> Thank you.
>> Can you advise how many
hours and how much salary was
used by staff working
on this ballot measure? This
also doesn't include the
$50,000 that was spent on a
professional survey whose
results were never presented to
the council and whose results
found that the measure in fact
did not have enough support
to pass. Doesn't also include
the $27,000 to put the ballot
on the measure the measure on
the ballot. I've not seen good
faith by this town council
to truly control expenses. The
town has spent a lot of money
on a new ERP software system
that was supposed to save up
to 20%
of staff time and labor,
but expenses, salaries, and
benefits just keep increasing.
The town stated that there's
been, been a hiring freeze for
at least 6 months, yet we're
still employing a full-time HR
recruitment specialist. Why is
that money really being spent
wisely? You keep telling people
a new tax would bring back the
3 vacant police positions and
keep our parks looking nicer,
but the ballot actually reads,
and for government use, even
though that was not verbally
stated in the presentation.
So, it could be used
for more staff,
for more benefits,
for more raises,
or it could be used to backfill
the money that's already been
spent. This council or any
future council could decide
to use it
on anything they wanted,
including giving yourselves a
raise,
which has been suggested
by past councils. Since 2019,
when it was announced that we
were heading towards a fiscal
deficit, I didn't I do not
think the council has been good
stewards of the taxpayers'
money. I don't think you've
made the hard decisions to
really reduce spending. I think
it was just too easy to keep
spending our money. I don't
think more taxes will fix bad
governance. I don't think that
more taxes will correct
overspending. I've talked
to friends and neighbors,
and many do agree
with me. I am part of
Concerned Windsor Citizens, and
if anybody agrees
with me or wants to talk
to me, they can email me at
concernedwindsorca@gmail.com.
Thank you for listening.
>> Anybody else
from the public? Seeing none,
I'm going
to close the public comment,
bring it back to council for
discussion. I guess we could
start with probably the easy
one. I am very interested
in being part
of that writing the
for the favor, in favor
of the argument.
>> Yep.
>> In favor. So, if we could
maybe discuss that first.
There's 2 openings for that.
Is anyone else interested?
>> I would also like
to be considered
for that one.
>> Councilmember Leep or
Salmon or Wall, do you guys
have?
>> How, how many people can be
And Mayor, if I may so there is
the, the common practices
for council,
less than a quorum. There is
obviously an argument that
placing an item on the,
on the ballot or the after,
after the council votes today,
it's not city business anymore.
It's going to have
to we can't use city funds. So
there is an argument that All
the council can participate,
but I think the recommendation
is to have less than a quorum
to avoid any type
of arguments related to the
Brown Act, even though it's an
election matter. So, that's why
the recommendation had 2 blanks
for up to 2 individuals.
>> So, Councilmember Leep or
Wall or Councilmember Salmon,
are you guys?
>> I'd like to be involved. I
mean, I think the wording
in some ways of the argument is
it means everything. But, you
know,
so we can make nominations and
vote, I suppose. Or can we,
can we have a workshop
to put together?
>> No, after so
after you place the item
on the on the so if tonight the
council decided to vote on the
resolution placing the item
on the ballot,
we couldn't use city resources
to, to
in any way promote or campaign
in writing, the argument would
be that would be done on kind
of everybody's own time. Would
be looking like promoting,
campaigning, campaigning.
>> I would be willing
to relinquish it to you, Sam,
if the mayor and you'd like
to write it. I mean,
obviously they don't have
to be written together,
but no, they'd be separate.
They'd be separate arguments,
but it would be two.
>> It would be one. I'm sorry
to interrupt. Oh, it would
actually be one argument.
>> Okay.
>> So, it'd be working
together. So, the way, just
to recap, we would have the law
does give priority
to an argument, especially if
the council designates its
members or a certain amount
of its members or 1, 2
of its members,
that argument gets priority
for being the argument
in favor. Anybody could, or
other groups can oppose and do
an argument against. And then
there's rebuttal arguments that
could be submitted. So, the
individual council members,
individual or individuals
selected, council or council
members selected to write the
argument would also be writing
the rebuttal. But it's still,
it's collective. It's one
argument,
one rebuttal.
>> I'd be happy to defer
to others. I've had my day
in the sun recently,
so I think that I'll follow
Tanya's lead, which is
to defer.
>> I, I, I couldn't hear,
so.
>> No, he's.
>> I said go ahead, Sam and
Rosa.
>> Vice Mayor and Mayor and
Councilmember Salmon, he's okay
with.
>> It's okay with me to stay
out of it.
>> Okay, but there's still
there's still 3.
>> Yes, Councilmember Wall.
>> So do we need
to and I don't mean
to be the thorn
in the side here,
but do we need
to designate someone
to write the rebuttal then?
>> That's what we're trying
to do here.
>> No, it's all one piece.
>> It's not the rebuttal.
>> It's all one.
>> The same, the same,
the same folks you select to do
the arguments are the same that
the actual same folks that
actually also do the rebuttal.
>> That seems a little.
>> No, I think Councilmember
Wall is talking about against
the sales tax.
>> I'm no, the rebuttal is
against, is
against the people who are
against the tax, right? It's
not against the tax, it's
in favor of the tax.
>> Councilmember Wall, can you
be more clarify your,
your request?
>> I'm asking, and I apologize
if I'm missing the point here,
so if we're writing the,
the pros
to passing this tax as,
as council members. I'm
wondering,
is there an opportunity
for someone to be designated
to write the cons?
>> So, so, good question,
council member. The, the
arguments against,
those are anybody could,
could prepare those arguments.
The council doesn't designate
folks
to do the argument against,
only the argument in favor,
since you are placing the
measure on the ballot.
>> And then we haven't voted
yet. Sorry, I think I jumped
the gun.
>> Since we're placing it
on the ballot,
we can only argue in favor
of it.
>> The council is placing it
on it, so the council is
arguing, making arguments
in favor, correct?
>> So, I guess I just
fundamentally have a problem
with that because I want this I
want this
on the ballot so people can
vote on it, but that doesn't
mean I'm necessarily in favor
of it.
>> And that's anyone.
Councilmember Wall can write a
rebuttal. So if you want to
on your own write a rebuttal
against it, that's something
that you can do. But the
council doesn't designate
people to specifically write a
rebuttal.
>> Okay, so the council's only
going to write something
officially supporting this?
>> Correct.
>> How is the rebuttal to the
council's argument chosen?
Because it's a limit
of words, right?
>> Correct, correct. So, so
the, the so let me,
let me just kind of go
over it.
>> Just please.
>> Sorry, again,
I'm maybe confusing people.
When you place a measure,
a tax measure, or in this case
on the ballot,
you can designate
on who you want
to do the arguments in favor.
Somebody from the public or
somebody else, whoever it may
be, can draft, whether it's an
organization, a voter can
prepare an argument against.
Once the argument
in favor and the argument
against are received,
and the argument
against there are rules
for priority in case there's
multiple arguments against.
There's rules for priority, and
that our legis our town clerk
as the election official,
ends up selecting it. Then now
you have an argument
in favor, argument against.
Then there's an opportunity
for both sides to rebut the
arguments that were received,
the argument in favor, the
group submitting the argument
against could rebut. And for
the folks that submitted the
argument in favor could rebut
the argument against. The limit
for the rebuttal, the limit
for the arguments in favor and
against are 300 words.
Rebuttal arguments are 250
words. And so, it's a short,
it's not pages and pages.
There's a word limit. And
there's also a time limit,
a time requirement a due date.
Arguments in favor and
against are due August 14th.
The rebuttal arguments will be
due August 21st. Aside
from that, the town attorney I
would be tasked
under the resolution,
if the council adopts it, to
also prepare an impartial
analysis. The impartial
analysis is factual. It's
supposed
to be it's impartial. The law
requires it to be impartial,
just factual for the voters.
And that would also be
submitted. And you normally see
that as an impartial analysis
as part that accompanies the
election material. Hopefully I
provided...
>> And the date for that is
in the resolution?
>> The date
for the impartial analysis?
And we were going
to get that. That's actually
The county sets those dates.
That's not in the resolution,
but we follow the,
the county. It's August 14th as
well. It's when the argument's
in favor and against all. And
that's the county ends up
putting those dates as well.
>> So, remind me again,
so we're going
to actually obviously, I don't
know if there's discussion
about this,
but someone's going
to make a motion on this. So
once that if it passes,
once that's done,
then is the town not allowed to
share facts and information
anymore on their website,
or can they do that?
>> No, that, that,
that's another great question.
So, what you're prohibited
from doing is campaigning,
spending city or town resources
on the campaigning,
but that doesn't prevent us
from providing information,
just factual information where,
you know, obviously When things
get put out, our office looks
at it as well to make sure that
the wording doesn't go into
anything that could be
translated into campaigning.
But you are allowed
to provide information,
whether on the website,
some jurisdictions provide
mailers, etc.
>> So, for example, tonight I
heard some comments that I
don't necessarily agree with.
So for example, would,
would I be able to ask the town
clerk or the town manager
to put on the website things
that this council, this body,
has not approved
to spend money on? Like the
Kaiser Park master plan,
we've said no,
we're not moving forward
with that, or,
or any other things. Would we
be able to show where we are
in the last 4 or 5 years
but tried
to be fiscally responsible?
>> And Mayor, if there are
questions Regarding the council
actions, those are factual
on what the council has voted
on and not voted on. Those are
definitely, if we're answering
questions or any questions that
are out there, that would,
those would be facts, factual.
No, we haven't voted on this.
Yes, the council has voted
on that. Those are things
on the record.
>> But is that a request that
we can make to you to put
on a, is there going
to be a page in the town
Yeah, we'll maintain the
webpage for factual educational
data points.
>> And I mean, technically, the
actions that you've already
taken in the past to
demonstrate your fiscal
responsibility is already
on the website within agenda
packets and minutes.
>> So, there is that too.
>> So, it does exist.
>> Right.
>> And may I, Mayor?
But I think that we're talking
about summarizing that the
council has done So many
actions to reduce our spending
over the last 4 years.
>> Yes.
>> And we have not approved
many things, including
significant infrastructure
projects that we are seeing
huge issues with because we
haven't paved our roads because
they've been extremely
expensive. And so that summary
can go on to that page.
>> Yeah, we would be looking we
would,
we would definitely look
at we could look at kind
of summaries of different
things that the council has
done. I would take a look
at it as far as how it reads.
Again, pushing out information
that potentially has been asked
for in the public versus
anything that sounds like a
campaign or a definitely you
wouldn't see anything that vote
yes on or anything like that.
And we would look
at language to, to, to make
sure that it doesn't cross kind
of across the line and it would
just be information.
>> Similar to some of the
frequently asked questions that
we currently have posted
on the website. Those are
questions that we've heard
over the process
over the past 6 to 8 months,
and we've provided those
answers factually and include
those on the website.
>> And if there were any
others,
we could do that as well.
>> Okay.
>> All right, I guess
>> If I could, Mayor, just
to clarify, I believe that I
heard that there was some
council consensus that the
argument on behalf
of the council could be
Provided through Rosa and Sam.
I'm sorry, Council the Mayor
and Council Member Salmon.
>> You're good with that?
>> I didn't.
>> I heard it.
>> You and I
to do the argument
for argument, and we can ask
for assistance for facts.
>> If there's information
regarding just facts that you
have that that that are
available, those are. Those are
readily available to anybody,
to members of the public. If
anybody wanted
to ask questions, of course we
would normally answer
questions,
factual questions.
>> The other council members
would they would not be able
to get a review
of the statement
until it's submitted and was at
the same time everyone else?
>> Correct.
>> Okay.
>> Right.
>> Just want to make sure.
>> Well, Carissa, are you
comfortable with me or would
you be more comfortable With
Tanya.
>> I, I'm thinking about the
ballot and I'm thinking about
the people reading it and what
it would appear if it said
mayor and vice mayor. I don't
but I mean,
but you're well known,
people respect you, so I,
I just I'm,
I'm okay either way.
>> If you're, if you feel that
strongly and you want
to be a part of it, vice mayor
has said that she would let you
do it. Is okay,
so that I'm fine. So yeah,
you want to be a part
of it?
>> I would.
>> Okay, let's do it then.
>> Okay.
>> Is that fine? So, we're
good?
>> Yeah?
>> Okay. So.
>> I think we can answer your
question.
>> No, we can't. The public
comment's closed. Sorry. I
would've, yeah.
>> Are we, is someone ready
to make a motion,
or do you guys want
to discuss?
>> And I think, Rosa, could I
ask one more question?
>> Of course.
>> This Rosa and I,
as we can engage the community
in writing this, that's the
question. I can't see why not.
>> If you've had questions
for the community
in your writing
of an argument, I mean,
that is up
to I'll leave that up
to you if you wanted
to ask questions,
but that is an art. That's if
you needed additional
information.
>> I just want to yeah; I just
want if we look at that and an
organization comes forward and
we can engage them.
>> Okay.
>> You also have as designated
to write the argument,
there are also, I will point
out,
the argument can be signed by
5 individuals. Usually what you
have in a lot of jurisdictions
is you have it could be members
of the public that could sign
the argument as well. But I
know that those election rules
are in the elections office
for writing
of arguments and arguments
against as well,
and rebuttals. Those are the
elections official would have
the rules. on,
on those arguments.
>> Okay, so yeah, okay,
so it can be signed by 5.
>> Yeah, that's we will need
to we'll need assistance
in terms of, you know,
finding how to make the, okay,
the most accurate statement.
>> Hey, Mayor? Yes,
Councilmember Wall.
>> So, before we,
before we close discussion,
and, and I know you're going
to move to a To ask for a
statement or a resolution. Are
we still having discussion
here?
>> Yeah, we're still having
discussion. I was yeah.
>> So, can I, if you don't
mind, I'd just like
to share that I just want to
make sure that folks know that
there's a significant portion
of the population in Windsor,
by polling data and just
by anecdotal conversations,
that is not in favor of this,
right? So, we know that, and
that's why we go that's why we
want to vote on this,
and that's why I was in favor
of putting this
on the ballot,
even though I'm not in favor
of it passing, because I want
transparency and I want people
to have the voice. I just want
to make sure that everyone
knows that, you know,
the reason a lot of folks are
against this is because a
couple of things. One is that
every single ballot measure not
every single, sorry,
that's an exaggeration. Almost
every single ballot measure
for the last 20 years has had a
tax increase proposed on it.
And there's always a great
reason. It's early childhood
education. It's we need
to fix the schools. It's we
need
to fund the fire department.
And there's always a great,
like, you know, philosophical
bleeding-heart reason why we
need more taxes.
But I'm just going to,
for the record, I just want
to run through,
and if you'll tolerate me,
I greatly appreciate it,
and I'll be quick. Here's just
a list
of the taxes we currently pay,
and I think it's important
for the record. So currently,
if you live in Windsor, you are
subject
to federal income tax, the
California state income tax,
Social Security tax,
Medicare, an additional
Medicare tax if you're a
high-wage earner,
federal long-term capital gains
tax, the California tax
on capital gains,
net investment income taxes,
property taxes,
which is a big one for us.
Obviously, everyone knows
property taxes, the Mello-Roos
special assessments, parcel
taxes, California's the,
the sales tax for California.
We have vehicle registrations,
vehicle license fees,
transportation improvement
fees, smog inspection fees. If
you have, like me, a dog,
you got dog license fees,
fishing license, hunting
license, business license,
concealed carry permit fees,
federal estate taxes, gift
taxes,
early retirement withdrawal
penalties, federal fuel taxes,
California fuel taxes,
and alcohol excise taxes.
Tobacco taxes,
cannabis taxes. We got TOT,
obviously, if you stay here.
We got the 911 surcharge, boat
registration,
and there's more. I'm not going
to take everyone's whole night.
It goes on and on. There's
building permits,
marriage and divorce fees,
passport fees,
professional licensing fees,
Airbnb. We've talked
about this a ton. If you run an
Airbnb. You got trust and
estate taxes, payroll taxes,
property transfer taxes. I'm
going to stop here. The list,
like,
the list is it's unbelievable.
It goes on and on. I'm
like not even a third
of the way through my list. So
I'm just going to leave it
there that this is why people
don't want another tax. And I
know we say Windsor's worth it
and we need it
for this and we need it
for that.
At some point you have
to say no. And there's a big
portion
of people who are ready
to say no more. So that's my
soapbox and I'll get off
of it.
>> So, I really appreciate
that, but I do have
to do a rebuttal. A lot of
those were self-imposed
expenses and a few
of those were something, stuff
that I don't have the luxury
of having that you mentioned.
They were for high-wage earners
and some kind of luxuries. Tax
stuff and boats and Yeah, don't
have the luxury. I'm not even
there.
>> Luxury of a dog, luxury
of wanting to go hunting.
Yeah, I get it.
>> So, thank you.
>> All taxes and fees.
But no, I actually think yeah,
no, I, I thank you. Thank you
for sharing that.
But I did have to anyways,
anyone else have a
>> That's not the point.
>> That's not this is not this
was not I didn't know this was
a rebuttal. I didn't know this
was a debate. I was just
sharing my...
>> It's a discussion.
>> If there's rebuttals,
I would love
to debate these.
>> All right, we're
in line item by line item. And
discussion. So, I appreciate
it. Thank you. Anyone else want
to share some thoughts
before I request a motion?
>> Yes.
>> Yes, go ahead.
>> So, over my years I've been
involved in, I don't know,
I'm going to guess 6 different
businesses, small ones,
women's retail,
nationwide computer retail
businesses, manufacturers,
and I've worked with a lot of
people. I've had so much fun
working with the people
in the government here in
Windsor because they are
honest, they're hardworking,
they care about the town,
and they do a great job.
There's been a lot
of smack thrown
out here tonight not a lot,
but somewhat. And
to throw out, for example, the
town manager has been getting a
bonus. That's just not true.
The town manager's salary is,
if I understand it correctly,
95% of the industry average
for his position. So, the
actual facts are not as so many
people portray them when they
put them out with nobody
to check, to fact-check
for them. So, when I came
in here,
the town was already trying
to figure out how to get the
taxes and the expenditures
in order. And the first
meeting, one of the very first
meetings I went to in April
of '25, was to analyze the
budgetary problems and attack
this thing. And right
after the summer after that,
Town Manager John Davis and his
team went after it.
With a vengeance. And that has
been my experience as I have
been watching this business
of the Town of Windsor move
forward. And anyone who says to
the contrary does not
understand what's actually
going on internally and the
analysis that is being done
in order
to bring the financial
situation of the town
in order. And I,
I fear I don't fear, actually,
because I believe that the tax
is going to pass. But I fear
the people who are gloom and
doom because they just simply
do not see what is actually
going on internally and what is
actually coming
down the road, and we're going
to go fix it. So, I want people
to be very sincere when they
analyze what's going on
in the government
in town.
>> Vice Mayor?
>> I love working here.
>> Vice Mayor?
>> All right,
thank you. I want
to thank all the new group,
the Concerned Citizens of
Windsor. I appreciate you guys
coming and giving public
comment. And Councilmember
Wall knows that I agree
with him
on taxes. I hate the amount
of federal income tax I have
to pay because it's,
it's established not on some
of the incomes that we have
in the state of California.
So, we are taxed more because
we have higher incomes here
in California. Plus we also
have our California state
income tax,
which is not being spent
in any way the way that I would
like for it to be spent. But
the reason why I support this
local tax is because it's just
that it's local, and I do
support my local town. I don't
like the way that my federal
taxes are being spent or my
state taxes,
but I know that here
in the town of Windsor we have
a say and we can say what
happens, and we do listen
to our constituents, and we
have made significant changes
in the way that we do things.
And we listen I listen to
Betsy every single meeting,
and I appreciate the feedback.
And we ask for as much feedback
as we can get
from our constituents here,
because what you want is
important. But also,
there is a money problem,
and we have been making cuts
for a long time. When I first
came onto council 4 years ago,
we were watching very closely
because right,
that was right coming out of
COVID and there was significant
inflation and there were a lot
of problems across all sorts
of money issues. There was a
huge reduction in our tourism
because we had everything was
shut down. And so,
we had changes in our TOT taxes
and there was a lot
of fluctuation there. And so,
as the years have come, have
continued, we have really
pulled back because we've
watched trying
to watch the bounce back
from COVID the inflation,
the significant increases
in insurance,
and the increased cost
of asphalt. And so, trying to
manage those while not seeing
our revenue go up as high as
those costs have been is
significant. And we have made
those cuts. And I understand
that there's a concern.
>> Thank you.
>> I hate when other people
spend the money that I worked
hard on. And
but here locally,
I believe that with our
advisory commission that we're
our advisory commission that
we're putting into play
with the tax measure, if it's
to pass,
and the community input that we
have, we can make the changes
that are going to address the
deficits that we have.
>> Thank you.
>> And I think that's what
we're going
to do. the significant amount
of deferred maintenance that we
have accumulated
over the last couple
of years because we've had
to put those things aside. And
even that, even the amount of
money that we project that we
will get with a 1% sales tax
doesn't 100% fix the deferred
maintenance. There's going
to have
to be more cuts going forward.
Even if we have a tax measure,
we are going to have
to make cuts and we are going
to have to change and make more
efficiencies because we can't
just and this is a problem that
I talk about with my coworkers
because I see huge problems
with Santa Rosa where you can't
just continue down this road
without making changes. Like,
we're asking
for a tax measure,
but we're not going
to keep asking
for tax measures. The state
of California can't keep doing
that. We can't keep spending,
spending,
and then just raising taxes.
We have to make the changes,
and I want Windsor
to make those changes,
and that's my plan is
to make those changes,
and that's what I'm hoping
for going forward,
and I hope that I'll be able
to be part of that
for the next 2 years, is
to make significant changes
to address our issues,
to have a tax measure
to help us out with that and to
address our deferred
maintenance and to really
address our economic impact
going forward and how we can
develop economically
to have more revenue for the
town so we never ever have
to ask
for a tax measure again. And
hopefully in the future the
residents do repeal it. That
would be, that would be
like a once
in a lifetime ever happening
in the state of California
would be to have a town to
repeal a tax measure because
now there's,
now there's a reason. And I
would love to have
in the future be like staff is
recommending a tax repeal.
That would be amazing, right?
And so, I want to be part
of those goals.
But right this minute, because
of some
of the turmoil that we've had
over the past you know, 6, 7
years, we have more going
out than we have coming in.
And that's not poor
stewardship. It's been just a
whole roller coaster. And so,
I am asking
for this tax measure,
and I am asking for the trust
in the community that we will
spend it,
that we will spend it wisely
with the direction
of the community. And so
that's, that's my hope.
>> Councilmember Salmon?
>> Yeah, I wanted
to just the issue of the
10-year a 10-year sunset. And I
guess the question, I, you
know, would you change your no
vote if we had a 10-year
sunset? Would you change your
no vote if we had a 5-year?
And I see one hand, but I think
that the analysis is that no,
that that's not really going
to be the key. And I think
tonight it's pretty obvious the
key is going to be 5 years.
The council,
and that means going back to
2021, has been negligent in
their financing and their duty.
And that's what's going
to be presented. And that's why
we can't take a tax is because
you get the money,
you're just going to continue
to spend it negligently. And
that's what will gather the
votes. Citizens for Concerned
Citizens for Windsor. I got
on council in the same
Citizens for Better Windsor and
was elected based on not me
but on that issue, and that's
what we'll be looking at. And I
think we just want you know the
idea is people are there's
going to be a great number
of people that are
against taxes. And I just, you
know, it'll be hard not to get
defensive if when you say, you
know, I was
on council the whole time,
so you're pointing at me. You
know, I work, we work
with staff as a team. We're
part of that team
to a certain extent. And it's
important that we support staff
and support the efforts. And I
think I've done the best I can.
I'm certainly far
from perfect, but it seems
like we presented the argument.
We'll present the argument to
people and they'll have that
choice. In the Press Democrat
just this afternoon,
the latest article, Santa
Rosa's going
to put a tax measure
on their ballot in November
And go to 10.5% if approved.
They're at 10.25% now,
but that quarter cent is going
to run out. So, they will be
equal if it passes with
Sebastopol, which is
over the state limit. So, it's
hard to deal
with the inflation and cost
of things and say, You were
negligent, Sam,
in the councils you were on.
Especially if I look
out and see a lot of people
that are saying that have
they're not the ones that are
going to suffer
from a 1% sales tax. You're not
going to feel it. Sorry. I'm
not going to feel it. Sorry.
>> Okay. So, I believe that
today's staff and council is
way different. I, I know it is,
than the staff and council that
was here 5+ years past. It's,
it's so different.
>> Pretty different.
>> So different. And I want
to one of the first town
ribbon-cutting ceremonies that
I had,
they passed me a script and I'm
like, oh wow,
they included this
in the script. So, I stood
there at the roundabout
to read this script. And I had
I mentioned the $300,000 a year
bond we have to pay for 30
years for that roundabout.
Now, I didn't vote
on that roundabout,
or I think I had to vote
on the final, final version.
But anyways, somehow,
we got there to that,
to having to have that
beautiful roundabout
for that expensive,
expensive bill. And then
there's a property that was
purchased
with general fund money.
>> Yes.
>> That was again something
that as a resident I didn't
support. Today we get bids
for asphalt. The low bids,
they come in, residents hate
it, have
to go back and fix it. Right
now, people are arguing
about the flock, which I'm
listening, I'm listening
to them. They don't
like the flock cameras. They
want us to get rid
of the flock cameras. So, does
that mean we need to get more
police officers because we're
not going
to have that additional So
there's this whole game that
like, okay, you don't
like this,
so what's an alternative?
But I just, I mean, again, it
does feel personal being told
that we're not doing a good
job, which I guess I have
to look back and reflect
on what I've done the last 4 or
5 years,
if not a good job.
>> Thank you.
>> But with finances. So,
but again, the beautiful part
of this, Council Member Wall,
is that again,
we're bringing it
to the residents. They're going
to vote. They have the ultimate
say. And this has been a long
process. And I've felt really
good about staff. I think you
guys did what,
with the money we had to spend
and all the salaried employees
worked extra, extra hard.
There was no overtime pay.
Salaried employees did the
majority of the work. So, thank
you, thank you so much
to everyone for this. So
at this time, I'll leave it
with that and entertain a
motion.
>> You want me to state it?
>> Please.
>> I think I've got the
language in front of me.
>> And, and right here?
>> Yes, and there are 2
separate there's going to be 2
separate motions for today.
There's going
to be a resolution,
and then there's going
to be the introduction
of an ordinance. And just for,
for the technical aspect
of the ordinance, the ordinance
will be introduced today. The
ordinance will come back
for the second reading, just
like your ordinances normally
do. However, the ordinance will
not take effect, will not be
in effect
until unless it's passed
by the voters. So that's
important to point out. Even
though it's looking
like it looks
like just a typical ordinance,
the approval process,
it is contingent
on the voters' approval. So,
we'll go through that. The
resolution itself has the
authorization authorizing the
direct the authorizing the for
the ballot arguments and
authorizing town council
to designate members to prepare
primary arguments and rebuttal
in favor. To answer, um
Councilmember Wall's question,
theoretically, under the
Elections Code, the Elections
Code is written
in a way that if the body
wanted
to authorize other members
of the council
to write arguments against.
The issue with that obviously
is you're putting it wouldn't
be recommended usually because
if you're putting an item
on the ballot,
you're assuming the majority is
in favor, and that's why you
normally designate folks
to write an argument
in favor. Just wanted
to point that out. You wouldn't
be it opens up to arguments
of obviously of trying to
Trying to trying
to game the system
by controlling both arguments.
Therefore, members
of the public wouldn't be able
to write arguments against. I
don't mean to confuse the
issue. I just know it came up,
so I wanted to clarify because
the election code does have
that opening, but it's not
traditionally done because the
town council you control both
arguments. There's an argument
of do people that are
against it are they able
to actually? We argue
against it. So, 2 motions,
Councilmember.
>> So, I understand that. Are
you saying that we're going
to have to we're going
to have an argument in favor,
argument against, rebuttal
against the rebuttal
against the argument
in favor, and rebuttal against
the argument against?
>> Yes, both sides get
to rebut.
>> In terms of the committee,
can there be does it have
to be the same 2 that write
Yeah, I think you said that.
>> Yes, that's what we're
working on.
>> And how about with the,
the opposition? The same rules
apply?
>> Yes, because it is, it is
the, it's the, the,
the authors makes sense of the
original arguments that get to
rebut the other arguments.
>> Okay, ready? I'd like
to motion
to adopt a resolution, one,
ordering that measures be
submitted to the voters
of the Town of Windsor general
municipal election to be held
on November 3rd, 2026, to
consider a 1% transaction and
use tax, also referring
to as a 1 cent per dollar. 2,
directing the town attorney
to prepare an impartial
analysis of the measure. 3,
provide for valid arguments and
rebuttals, including authorize
the town council
to designate members to prepare
the preliminary argument and
rebuttal in favor
of the measure.
>> Second.
>> Consistent with Election
Code 9282-9285.
>> And, and that'll be it. And
that's
to clarify what will be filled
in council member,
is the mayor and
Councilmember Salmon as the 2
designated council members
to prepare the arguments. And
that's part
of the resolution? Correct.
That that will be filled up.
>> Yes. Can you just put it
in there? So, then the mayor
you.
>> So, do I have a second?
>> Second.
>> Roll call vote,
please.
>> [ CALLING ROLL ]
>> Second, I'd like
to introduce an ordinance
of the Town of Windsor adding
Chapter Six to Title Two.
Of the Windsor Municipal
Code, establishing a 1% general
transaction and use tax
to be administered by the
California Department of Tax
and Fee Administration, subject
to the approval of a majority
of qualified electors casting
votes on November 3rd, 2026,
municipal election.
>> Do I have a second?
>> Second.
>> Roll call vote, please.
>> [ CALLING ROLL ]
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. Okay,
moving on. Individual
councilmember reports,
comments, reports,
meeting conferences. Who would
like to start?
>> I'll go ahead and start. I
went to Sonoma Clean Power
Board meeting the beginning
of the month, and Sonoma
Clean Power Board is working
on reducing their rates through
a rate reduction fund that they
carry. And that is
to help bring rates down
because PG&E has lowered their
rates because they overcharged
for several years. And so, those
rates are being smoothed out,
and so Sonoma Clean Power is
trying
to get as close as they can.
It won't be exactly as low as
PG&E, but they are working
to really try to bring that
down for their customers. And
then secondly,
I know the mayor also went,
but we were able to go to the
Twin Towers ceremony
at the golf course, and that
was a really beautiful
ceremony. And we were glad
to have that, the piece
of steel come into town and
to have people be able
to see it and,
and remember 9/11. And, and
really it was I believe that
those are the things that I
have for this month.
>> Thank you. Councilmember
Leep?
>> Well, I did want to mention
the SCTCA, but unfortunately,
I don't have my notes in front
of me. But I will say that the
committees in SCTCA, the
Transit Authority and Climate
Authority, did are
in the process of approving,
my guess is, and maybe John can
correct me, I believe it's
about $3.5 million in $600,000
towards some road repairs.
Does that sound
about the right number? Out
of Measure M type funds, which
is quite a bit less than we
wanted, but given the score
that we got,
it's a good number and it's
nice to see us
in the winning column. So
that's coming up in the months
to come.
>> Councilmember Wall or
Salmon?
>> Councilmember Wall, you want
to go?
>> Nothing for me.
>> Okay. Attended the
Planning Commission meeting
last night, very interesting,
and thank staff
for the presentation on the
Windsor Creek site and
entertaining in,
in all the other in the other
aspects. I guess I'll do I,
I was acknowledged for 20 years
of trash pickup on Highway
101.
>> Nice.
>> I got a call and they said,
they said, in the Northern
District, we're going to be
acknowledging a long time. And
I'm going, I don't understand
what you're talking about. And
he said, oh, well, I went
through all these records and
you're the longest, so.
>> Wow.
>> Individual. Yeah, that was
very nice.
>> All right. Gosh, it's been
so long
since we've had a meeting,
right? June 17th. So, I went
to San Francisco. I took the
SMART train, then the ferry,
and then walked
to ABAG meeting,
my first one. And it was very
interesting.
>> Good.
>> Yes, yes,
I attended that meeting. And,
and so they, they talked
about the new oh, first
of all,
they have a new chair. It's a
representative from Rona
Park, and I cannot remember her
name, but it's one of our
Rona Park Town Council members.
Anyway, so that's nice.
>> Susan.
>> Susan. It's Susan. Yes. And
so it's like, again, this is a
person that I will we should
connect with, with regards
to the arena numbers,
because they're going
to start talking
about the new cycle. So, we
have a really close connection.
She's going to love it. So
yeah, that, that was a nice um,
I unfortunately did not attend.
I had to go out of town,
so I didn't attend the Latino
Fest. Don't know if anyone else
went to that. Hopefully it was
a success. I did go to the
Taco Fest, which they,
they've continued
to do an amazing job
out there. And then the 3rd
of July, we didn't mention was
a blast. Miss seeing you,
Sam, and Councilmember Wall.
And then what else? And then
the event on Monday with Vice
Mayor was, was wonderful. So
that was it. Okay, so any
future agenda council items
that anyone wants
to request?
>> I would like to I would
like to request so I know we
did a lot
of zoning code talk tonight,
but I do want
to request that we start
looking at some other zoning
code changes. And some
of them are to complete streets
and the way that we're doing
parking, specifically ways that
we can incorporate parking
to help us reduce some
of the blight that we've had
in town and throughout some of
just the way that we've had
design in town. And so,
I really want to look
at those. And there's a couple
other things on that,
but I would like for us to have
that brought forward just so
that we can suggest some things
for our zoning amendments that
help us
to really utilize the frontages
for design and strengthen some
of our zoning so that we can
just make sure that we, we
don't have housing projects
that come forward like Shiloh
Terrace again where we have
significant, you know, parking
issues, but ways that we can
tweak the zoning to make sure
that we're taking care
of that. Thank you.
>> I'm in on that one.
>> I'll support that. Sure.
>> Yeah, I support that.
Okay, thank you. All right,
anything else?
>> I'd like to agenda starting
the process of purchasing the
land right-of-way on the,
the right-of-way in Los Amigos
and Arata Lane
for the roundabout. It may
require eminent domain if we
were at the Planning
Commission meeting. They talked
about the new subdivision, and
hopefully they'll dedicate the
land at the corner
to the town. But there's 2
other corners, and I think the
roundabout there is quite
important because if we don't
get around
to if we signalize it,
it'll stay signalized, I think,
forever. And I think I'd
like a discussion to see, you
know, signalization is cheaper
initially, but I think
over time it's not because of
the maintenance.
>> I think a discussion is
warranted.
>> Yeah, I would agree.
>> Yeah, just a discussion.
>> Discussion.
>> I'd like to talk about,
well, the implementation of our
inclusionary housing ordinance.
We've talked
about that's supposed
to be coming I'd like
to see that come. And maybe we
can get a report on the status
of the Windsor Creek School
site. It may be in dangerous
condition. I've toured it
twice. The last one,
I have no idea what's going on
over there,
and I don't really want
to know,
but it's not a good scene.
>> Thank you.
>> So that may not have
to be agendized,
but maybe we can ask John
to just kind of get a report
of when there's going
to be a cleanup,
if there's going
to be a cleanup,
if there's people still living
there, if there's still
continuing vandalism. I'd ask
how many people have been
to the school site and when.
Okay. Were you taken back? I
was disheartened.
>> I'll have a conversation
with you.
>> Okay. Okay. And the last
thing I'd just like to ask,
the Cal Conference in Anaheim
is coming September 23rd to
September 25th, and don't have
to answer now, but I'd like to
know if other council members
are going to go, because that's
how it's important for me. If I
go, I want other council
members there. It doesn't
really make sense. So just keep
it in mind.
>> I'm looking to hopefully
help.
>> Yeah, that's it.
>> Okay, thank you so much,
everybody. This meeting is
adjourned.