[0:36] >> The town Council Tom at the winter redevelopment agency.
[0:43] Roll call please.
[0:47] [calling roll]
[0:55] >> Thank you.
[0:57] >> And I would like to read a unity statement we have been
[1:01] doing for maybe six months now.
[1:02] In the heart of Windsor we stand together bound
[1:04] by the strength of our relationship
[1:06] the spirit of service, the pursuit of shared purpose.
[1:10] Consistent with our values of community and diversity,
[1:12] we embrace and acknowledge our relationship
[1:14] with people and history.
[1:16] We honor the land that sustains us, recognizing its history,
[1:20] its growth, and the development that
[1:22] shapes its modern community.
[1:24] Through careful stewardship and planning,
[1:25] we build a town that balances progress with preservation,
[1:28] ensuring Windsor remains a place of belonging,
[1:32] goodwill, and unwavering purpose.
[1:34] It's our commitment to respect cultures, make space
[1:37] for connection, honor our history,
[1:39] and create a deep appreciation for a whole community.
[1:42] Vice Mayor, can you loosen the Pledge of Allegiance please.
[1:46] >> Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
[1:48] Ready, begin.
[1:51] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States
[1:53] of America and to the Republic for which it stands,
[1:53] one nation under God, indivisible,
[1:55] with liberty and justice for all.
[2:04] >> Thank you, vice mayor.
[2:06] At this time I would like to ask if there's
[2:08] any changes to the agenda.
[2:11] >> No changes that I am aware of.
[2:14] >> Seeing none, we are going to move right
[2:16] into our presentations and proclamations.
[2:18] Today I'm going to start with our item 6.1.
[2:22] It is recognizing our outgoing honorary youth mayor who
[2:27] unfortunately cannot be here.
[2:28] But I really wanted to thank Victoria Guzmán.
[2:32] She did a great job serving as our youth mayor
[2:36] for the first half of this year.
[2:37] Thank you to her.
[2:38] And then next, I have our -- following our next youth mayor.
[2:49] This one is really special to me for a couple of reasons.
[2:52] Once you hear the name, you might guess one of the.
[2:55] The other reason is it is my last year serving as mayor.
[2:59] So this is my last honorary youth mayor during my time here.
[3:03] At this moment I would like to recognize Evelyn Noelle Reynoza
[3:10] Oseguera as our next youth mayor.
[3:13] Evelyn, can you come up?
[3:19] Congratulations.
[3:20] Would you like to say a few words?
[3:24] >> Yes.
[3:25] >> Speaking the mic please nice and loud.
[3:28] >> I'm happy to have my family and friends here in Windsor.
[3:31] I hope I make them proud by being the youth mayor.
[3:35] >> Thank you.
[3:36] I'm sure you will.
[3:37] Evelyn, could we take a picture with you?
[3:43] Do you guys want to stand up here,
[3:51] and Tommy and I will go in the front.
[4:21] Perfect.
[4:22] Then we're going to go ahead and move on to our announcements.
[4:25] Council member, can you begin with the first one?
[4:30] >> Our first announcement tonight is about the summer
[4:33] nights on the Green Concert Series.
[4:36] This Thursday, which is tomorrow, on the Town Green,
[4:42] the band will be Apple Z. And the farmers market starts at 5
[4:46] p.m..
[4:47] The concert begins at 6 p.m..
[4:49] >> We have volunteer day coming up this Saturday August 8th,
[4:52] from 9 a.m.
[4:53] To 11 a.m.
[4:54] At Wilson Ranch Soccer Park.
[4:56] Join your neighbors and help unify our community.
[4:58] For details and to RSVP, Park Tech parks and rec at (707)
[5:05] 838-1267.
[5:06] >> We have the native plant seed propagation Saturday,
[5:10] September 19th from 1030 to 12:30 p.m.
[5:14] At the Windsor Regional Library.
[5:17] Participants will learn from the Habitat Corridor project
[5:20] many different strategies and techniques
[5:22] for propagating native plants so that they may
[5:24] start their own home nurseries.
[5:29] >> The Windsor Day Parade is Saturday September 26th.
[5:33] The parade theme is Fly Me to the moon.
[5:35] It will begin at 10 a.m.
[5:36] Parade entries are due by September 4th.
[5:39] For entry and parade details visit kiwaniswindsor.org.
[5:44] >> Finally we have the Sunday Farmer's Market every Sunday
[5:47] through December 6th.
[5:48] 9 a.m.
[5:49] To 12:30 p.m.
[5:50] At the Town Green Market Street.
[5:53] >> Moving on now to the Town Manager's report.
[5:57] And things report com Town Manager?
[6:00] >> John Davis com Town manager, a couple of items.
[6:03] First on a sad note, we are going
[6:05] to lose another tree in the town Oak Grove here.
[6:10] It fell again to the Mediterranean Oak horned beetle.
[6:13] We know that as the ammo B. Next Tuesday the 11th the largest oak
[6:17] tree will start to be removed.
[6:20] It was determined that the infestation is too strong now,
[6:25] and does not come to come back.
[6:26] I do want to tout staff for the steps they
[6:28] have taken to preserve that tree and all the trees.
[6:31] This one was actually scheduled to come out originally
[6:34] maybe last year.
[6:36] They wanted to take one more run at it
[6:37] and see if they could revive it.
[6:39] They were not able to do that.
[6:41] So removing any tree, it is not a light decision.
[6:45] Parks and rec take a long time before they
[6:49] decide it is too late.
[6:50] And so that will start next week.
[6:52] You will see that here at the town hall.
[6:54] If you want to learn more about the oak board beetle or anything
[6:57] about trees, protection efforts, and the town,
[7:00] you can go to the town website.
[7:02] Just Google Tree protection.
[7:04] It'll take you there.
[7:05] Also I wanted to thank Chief Piccinini and the Sheriff
[7:08] for coming out last night to National Night Out.
[7:11] Always a fun event for the kids.
[7:13] The chief staff at PD, all the deputies, we had town staff.
[7:18] Everybody who came out to the event was nice.
[7:21] I want to thank them for the time
[7:22] and effort they put into that.
[7:23] It helps us build community.
[7:25] Closing my report.
[7:26] Thank you.
[7:27] >> Thank you very much.
[7:29] Item number nine, is there any conflict of interest
[7:31] to declare from our council members?
[7:33] Seeing none, we are going to move on now to public comments.
[7:38] Members of the public wishing to speak to the Council
[7:40] on any consent calendar item or any item not listed
[7:43] on the agenda may do so at this time.
[7:46] Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Council
[7:48] is not allowed to consider issues or take action
[7:50] at any item not listed on the agenda during this period.
[7:54] You will have three minutes.
[7:55] We have a clock up here to my right.
[7:59] Also please everyone who is at home, listening,
[8:02] you can always email the entire council
[8:06] at towncouncil@townofwindsor.ca.gve
[8:14] .
[8:14] Member of the public I want to approach
[8:16] the podium at this time, please come up
[8:18] and if you want to give your name and address,
[8:20] that would be optional so we know who to get hold of you.
[8:28] >> Hi.
[8:29] >> Hi there.
[8:30] >> I am Jill Ziegler.
[8:31] Can you hear me?
[8:33] I have been in Windsor since 1985 and a homeowner since 1990.
[8:37] I am here to just raise some awareness
[8:42] about an issue that is getting lots of national attention.
[8:47] And I became aware of surveillance cameras.
[8:50] It is all over the nation.
[8:52] I emailed Mr. Salman at CC's the mayor about my concern.
[8:58] There was an article in the press Democrat
[9:01] about the LAPD canceling their flock cameras.
[9:05] And it said to Go to Deflock.org to see
[9:13] if your community has the.
[9:14] And we do have them in Windsor, quite a few.
[9:17] I searched deeper.
[9:18] The Washington Post this week produced
[9:20] an article that showed over 50 law enforcement agents
[9:23] across the United States have been misusing these flock
[9:27] cameras, stalking their X's and surveilling people illegally.
[9:31] That's messed up.
[9:33] John Oliver produced an entire show on surveillance technology.
[9:38] And the National Congress has put forth a bill
[9:43] to defund these kind of cameras.
[9:45] So that raised my alarm.
[9:47] And I thought, why do we have them in Windsor?
[9:49] I did not know we had them.
[9:51] And it made sense when I researched.
[9:53] It says this is supposed to make our community safer
[9:56] and help law enforcement be more effective.
[9:59] Makes sense to me.
[10:00] But when I started researching it,
[10:02] I found out about places all across the nation that
[10:05] have done audits on how their cameras are being used here
[10:08] in Maricopa County has a 7% error rate.
[10:11] So they have canceled.
[10:13] Indiana has canceled almost all of their flock cameras.
[10:16] The state of Washington.
[10:17] And the more I have been reading on this,
[10:19] I thought I want to bring this to you
[10:22] and see what we might be able to do here in Windsor.
[10:25] I do understand the thought behind this.
[10:29] My call for you, because I only have a minute.
[10:35] Three minutes is not a lot.
[10:36] My call to you is for the town council
[10:39] to do an audit as to how these cameras are being used,
[10:43] how the data is stored, who has access to the data, third party
[10:48] groups, the FBI and Homeland Security
[10:51] have been tunneling into these flock cameras
[10:54] without permission from the towns.
[10:56] And I thought this is not okay, especially when I saw that
[11:01] Windsor, 16 of our cameras in northern Windsor,
[11:04] most of those 16 cameras are on the west side where our Latino
[11:11] population -- the demographic is located.
[11:14] And my neighborhood there are no flock cameras.
[11:16] My call is please let's start looking at these flock cameras.
[11:19] Is it time to get them taken down?
[11:21] And in the meantime, is the data being stored --
[11:24] I am a law abiding citizen.
[11:26] I am not worried.
[11:27] But I do worry about the error rate.
[11:30] A woman in Vallejo was just thrown to the ground
[11:33] in front of her children.
[11:34] Did you read about and see that?
[11:37] Because they had gotten erroneous
[11:39] flock camera information from a different state
[11:42] for a motorcycle.
[11:44] She had the same number of.
[11:46] >> Please wrap up.
[11:49] >> This is big.
[11:50] They pulled her out of the car and threw her
[11:51] to the ground in front of kids.
[11:52] This can't happen.
[11:53] Thank you.
[11:54] >> Thank you very much.
[12:02] >> Hello.
[12:03] I know quite a few of the people here on the Council.
[12:08] My name is Rick Mosel.
[12:10] I live at 150 Espana in Windsor.
[12:15] And I am very interested in the town of Windsor,
[12:19] become more interested as I see the town having
[12:22] many issues before it.
[12:24] And I have tried to get many people
[12:27] that I know to run for office here in this town.
[12:32] And it seems like it is very difficult to get people to run.
[12:36] There are many reasons.
[12:37] But I've encouraged many of the people
[12:40] that I know, my friends and colleagues and so
[12:43] on to run for office.
[12:45] There are many people who complain.
[12:48] Not very many of them run for office.
[12:50] And they should because if they have a point of view,
[12:52] they should be debated and discussed
[12:54] and everybody should be able to have their opportunity
[12:57] to discuss things and decide in a reasonable manner what
[13:03] they do.
[13:04] Our town is a great town.
[13:06] I love Windsor.
[13:06] I've been here for over 20 years, 30 years.
[13:10] I have seen a lot of really great stuff happen here.
[13:13] And I wish that everybody can take advantage of being
[13:16] in a town like Windsor.
[13:18] But I think the town of Windsor has many obstacles
[13:21] in front of it right now.
[13:24] We want to try to make it a better place.
[13:27] For that reason, tomorrow morning I'm
[13:31] going to meet with Miss Camacho and I'm
[13:33] going to ask her to sign me up for Mayor.
[13:40] And I hope that that makes the town a better place the debate.
[13:45] I encourage many other people to run,
[13:48] district one, district four, and mayor
[13:51] are all open to the town of Windsor.
[13:53] And there is also a school board,
[13:56] which has three people who are up for reelection.
[13:59] And there should be people running there as well.
[14:02] And there are many other places you can contribute to --
[14:07] Planning Commission, etc.
[14:10] But this is the place where decisions get made.
[14:12] You get to learn a lot about the town.
[14:14] But you don't have to be an expert.
[14:16] That is the thing that I've learned.
[14:18] While I was on the school board here 20 years ago.
[14:20] And I learned that you could go to the town.
[14:25] People who run the town, our town manager,
[14:28] or in the case of school board the superintendent, you
[14:30] find out what's going on in the town.
[14:32] You go to training.
[14:33] You learn to become better versed in all of that.
[14:35] The main thing is ask questions, listen to people,
[14:40] and learn how to be tolerant of people
[14:43] who have different points of view
[14:45] because you may learn a lot from them.
[14:47] Thank you.
[14:49] >> Anyone else from the public ?
[15:04] >> Good evening, Council, staff.
[15:06] My name is Anthony Mitchell.
[15:08] We are registered energy services company
[15:12] at federal Department of Energy.
[15:13] We are here to inform the city about funds
[15:16] that are available from multiple sources.
[15:19] Water from the state.
[15:20] The others from the Public Utility Commission
[15:22] of California.
[15:23] In a climate where most municipalities we are working
[15:26] with are extremely hard strapped for program dollars,
[15:31] funding for infrastructure, EV charging,
[15:34] the rates are going up a bit of more than 14%
[15:37] over the next 12 months.
[15:40] There's a big solar push with NS with the big beautiful bill
[15:43] next year.
[15:43] We are here to educate council and town staff
[15:45] about funds that you guys pay into every month
[15:47] and that we actually have a contract with the Public Utility
[15:50] Commission to help the cities, municipalities in the area
[15:53] to spend those dollars so you don't have to actually touch
[15:56] your capital or the funds you have available.
[15:58] As long as it goes to infrastructure upgrades
[16:01] to basically make the town more efficient
[16:03] and offset the rate increases that
[16:05] are coming over the next several months.
[16:07] We work with Public Works.
[16:09] We work with parks.
[16:10] We work with water infrastructure,
[16:12] whether it's wastewater, irrigation systems, airports,
[16:17] etc..
[16:17] We are here today to let staff know, let council
[16:22] know, what staff know as far as you guys get worked on
[16:25] behind the scenes.
[16:26] But there was no money out of pockets of the city for most
[16:28] of the funds.
[16:29] There is no upfront cost for the city for most of the funds.
[16:32] These are funds that are available.
[16:34] Believe it or not you pay about 10% of your total bill
[16:37] that you pay to the utility entities.
[16:39] There's about 10% that actually fold for these programs.
[16:43] We are the builder of the programs
[16:46] and we do about 60 to 7% of the entire pipeline for Pacific Gas
[16:50] Electric Company.
[16:51] So we are not looking for any funds from the city
[16:55] because we state a utility commission gives us
[16:57] access to funds to help you guys spend
[16:59] them to upgrade your facilities to offset your maintenance
[17:02] costs.
[17:03] A lot of times it's just to pay for things
[17:09] you don't have capital for.
[17:10] Thank you for your time this evening
[17:11] and if you guys are interested, we would love to meet with staff
[17:14] and go over what is available, or schedule a time
[17:18] to come back and do a full blown presentation on an agenda item.
[17:21] Thank you so much.
[17:24] >> Anyone else from the public?
[17:26] Seeing none, I'm going to close public comment
[17:30] and bring it back to the council.
[17:31] Our next items are the consent calendar items.
[17:34] We have 11.1, the approval of minutes from July 15th town
[17:38] Council meeting.
[17:39] 11.2, amendments to the Town of Windsor Zoning
[17:42] code title 17 on the Municipal code
[17:45] by holding a second reading by title only
[17:47] and adopt an ordinance adopting amendments
[17:49] to the Town of Windsor zoning code title 17 of the Municipal
[17:53] Code to implement Housing Element programs
[17:55] and to comply with state housing law.
[17:58] 11.3, an ordinance adding chapter six to title two
[18:01] of the Windsor Municipal Code establishing a 1% general
[18:05] transaction to and use tax by holding a second reading
[18:09] by title only and it's often drawn to the town of Windsor,
[18:11] adding chapter six to title two of the Windsor Municipal Code
[18:15] establishing a 1% general transaction use tax to be
[18:18] administered by the Department of Tax and Fee Administration
[18:21] subject to the approval of a majority of qualified electors
[18:23] casting votes on November 3rd, municipal election.
[18:29] Professional Service agreement with Weldon Engineering
[18:31] for Code enforcement services.
[18:34] And does anyone want to make a motion or have any comments?
[18:42] >> I will make a motion to move the consent calendar.
[18:46] >> Second.
[18:47] >> A roll call vote please.
[18:51] [members voting]
[19:02] >> Moving on now to our regular calendar,
[19:05] there is no public hearing today so we are skipping item 12,
[19:09] going to number 13, a resolution approving the Solid Waste
[19:14] franchise agreement with Sonoma County Resource Recovery
[19:17] for garbage recyclable matters and organic waste collection
[19:20] services effective October 1st, 2027.
[19:35] >> Good evening mayor and Council.
[19:37] Christina Owens, government operations manager.
[19:40] Joining me tonight is principal with R3 consulting Group.
[19:45] The town's consultant in technical adviser on solid waste
[19:48] management.
[19:49] Tonight staff is recommending the approval of a new ten year
[19:54] exclusive solid waste franchise agreement with Sonoma County
[19:58] Resource Recovery also known as SCRR,
[20:03] effective October 1st 2027.
[20:05] The recommendation comes after a year
[20:08] long competitive bidding process with the goal
[20:11] of promoting greater transparency and rate
[20:14] setting, equality among ratepayers,
[20:17] and overall cost efficiency by providing residents
[20:20] and businesses with the appropriate level of service
[20:24] of the highest quality and of the best rates.
[20:27] The town received a total of three proposals with SCRR
[20:32] being the highest ranked by the approved evaluation criteria,
[20:36] resulting in lower rates compared to our existing 2026
[20:41] rates.
[20:42] Retention and expansion of programing and services,
[20:46] removal of a 30 year subsidy to the town of Windsor,
[20:50] Windsor Unified School District, and Sonoma County Fire District.
[20:55] The creation of new rate categories
[20:57] for government, multifamily, and mixed use properties
[21:01] for transparency and equity.
[21:03] And finally addressing the legal challenges regarding franchise
[21:07] fees and setting the annual amount
[21:09] based on reasonable costs associated with solid waste
[21:13] services.
[21:14] To begin the presentation, a copy of the Powerpoint
[21:17] has been provided to you as well as the public
[21:21] in the back of the room.
[21:22] To present the details of the RFP
[21:24] and the results of the proposal, I
[21:26] would like to turn it over to Garth.
[21:33] >> Thank you very much.
[21:34] Council members, staff, public, this
[21:36] has been a very competitive process
[21:39] with significant benefits we believe to the town's ratepayers
[21:42] regarding solid waste.
[21:44] Excellent.
[21:45] A bit of background, and Christina covered some of this
[21:50] already, your existing agreement with Sonoma County Resource
[21:55] Recovery is set to expire September 30th, 2027,
[22:00] and because of provisions in existing town code,
[22:04] there are no opportunities to extend that or any other future
[22:08] solid waste collection agreement.
[22:10] The town is required to go out to a competitive procurement
[22:14] process every time you have a ten year solid waste agreement.
[22:17] The process -- I will show another slide which details
[22:22] the last several months, nearly 11 months worth of work on this.
[22:27] The process included robust engagement
[22:28] with both an ad hoc committee of the Council,
[22:32] community committees of stakeholder interests,
[22:34] and general interest meetings of members of the public
[22:37] in order to inform the RFP process which
[22:41] resulted in the establishment of guiding principles
[22:44] and draft evaluation criteria that came to the Council.
[22:49] The Council amended those and finalized those along
[22:52] with the RFP approval and release process.
[22:55] There was lots of community engagement via an online survey
[22:59] and community meetings, and we came back to the council
[23:03] prior to the release of the RFP to make
[23:05] sure we had council's interests and directions before moving
[23:09] forward with the process.
[23:10] This is what those last many months have looked like.
[23:14] I'm going to go into great detail here,
[23:16] but just to say it's taken a lot to get
[23:18] to this point in the process and we are very
[23:20] happy to be here this evening.
[23:22] Key milestones since we have last
[23:25] presented to the Council on this matter, of course
[23:29] the council heard the recommendation
[23:30] to move forward with the RFP back in February.
[23:34] The council at the time did vote to approve the RFP
[23:38] and make adjustments to the evaluation criteria
[23:40] that we are included in the RFP and utilized by the evaluation
[23:44] panel.
[23:45] The next day the RFP was released
[23:47] and we had ample time frame for proposers
[23:49] to be able to review the requirements of the RFP,
[23:53] the attached franchise agreement draft, and other documents.
[23:57] We did receive three proposals from the incumbents Sonoma
[24:01] County Resource Recovery, Ecology and Green Waste Recovery
[24:06] on April 15th.
[24:07] We received best and final offers regarding the rate
[24:11] proposals from those companies on May 27th,
[24:13] and then negotiations were undertaken with SCR
[24:17] as the highest ranked proposer.
[24:20] Those were then concluded in June,
[24:21] bringing us to you here tonight.
[24:24] A brief reminder before I go into some
[24:27] of the key characteristics of the RFP,
[24:29] which we covered in the presentation back in February
[24:33] is that what we are talking about here with this agreement
[24:36] is the programs and services that are provided for collection
[24:41] of solid waste from residents, businesses, and government
[24:45] agencies in the town.
[24:47] So that is the trucks that drive by homes and businesses
[24:51] and pick up recycling and garbage and organics.
[24:53] The rates that the providers charge also
[24:57] cover post collection activities,
[25:00] meaning disposal of garbage and landfill,
[25:03] composting of organics, composting facilities,
[25:06] and recycling of recyclable materials.
[25:09] Put the garbage and organics component
[25:11] of that is subject to the direction and flow
[25:14] control of other agreements through the county in Zero Waste
[25:19] Sonoma.
[25:19] We are not talking about where garbage goes
[25:22] or where organic materials go.
[25:24] Proposers were asked and were and do
[25:27] provide their own means of getting recyclables
[25:29] into the marketplace.
[25:31] Christina already mentioned this.
[25:34] There was the cessation of the prior public agency subsidies.
[25:37] This came through the public engagement process.
[25:40] It was a very strongly saved interest
[25:42] from members of the RFP Committee Colorado Community
[25:49] Committee, and members of the public
[25:51] who expressed interest in wanting
[25:52] to know that rates are covering what
[25:54] residents and ratepayers and commercial businesses pay for
[25:57] and not cover costs for others.
[26:00] So that was a key tenant of this RFP process.
[26:03] Folks who provided comments during the Pre-proposal process
[26:08] also very much wanted to see that rates were transparent,
[26:12] that the rates that folks charged
[26:14] or were being charged to cover their cost of service.
[26:16] So it was clear direction in the RFP regarding that.
[26:20] And importantly with respect to --
[26:23] and this has been changing on a statewide level --
[26:25] ensuring that those that live in multifamily or mixed use
[26:28] habitations also are receiving equivalent access to the types
[26:32] of services that single family residents receive.
[26:35] And I've got a few examples cited there.
[26:38] Bulky item pickup, battery collection, and the like.
[26:42] Finally, one of the points of direction
[26:44] we received from the community committee
[26:45] from the ad hoc committee, and from the Council
[26:48] was a clear understanding of what
[26:50] the costs were some of the optional types of services
[26:54] might be.
[26:55] And that was something we put into the RFP
[26:57] and the proposers were responsive to that.
[27:00] In terms of the process, it was dictated
[27:03] how the evaluation would occur was clearly
[27:06] detailed within the RFP.
[27:08] It was a pass fail review.
[27:10] All three proposers passed that pass fail review.
[27:13] Then the evaluation panel proceeded
[27:16] into a consensus, ranking scoring process that
[27:20] included review of the proposals, review
[27:23] of the best and final rate proposal offers,
[27:26] that were informed by interviews that were conducted
[27:28] with all three proposers.
[27:30] One thing that is important is that service rates were not
[27:34] a controlling factor with respect to the evaluation
[27:37] criteria.
[27:37] They were a very important factor.
[27:40] They were weighted at 50 out of 100 points,
[27:42] but there were other elements of consideration in the evaluation
[27:46] criteria that the council reviewed and approved
[27:48] prior to release.
[27:50] I mentioned that we requested best and final offers.
[27:53] That was both to help make sure that the evaluation panel had
[27:56] clarity of understanding around what was included
[27:58] in each proposers rates, and then also to seek clarifications
[28:04] around what they may include within the base rates
[28:07] they proposed.
[28:08] The RFP also did state that the highest ranked
[28:12] proposer would be selected to proceed in the negotiations.
[28:16] And potential award recommendation
[28:18] pending successful negotiations, which was achieved with SCRR.
[28:23] We are showing you the scoring for the two highest
[28:27] ranked proposers on this slide.
[28:29] You can see on the left hand slide
[28:31] the maximum points that the council identified back
[28:34] in February.
[28:35] The summary of the evaluation criteria category, and then
[28:40] the resulting scores for each of the two highest ranked
[28:43] proposers.
[28:43] Importantly for the town and its ratepayers,
[28:46] this was a very competitive, very tightly
[28:49] fought race, very good proposals from all three proposers
[28:53] and from the two local companies,
[28:56] or ecology and SCRR, a very close race.
[29:01] As you can see here, slight differentiation between ecology
[29:04] and SCR on the service rates, slight differentiation
[29:08] with respect to cost service and fiscal transparency,
[29:13] a little bit of an additional preference
[29:15] to the smaller focused customer service
[29:20] and reliability that SCRR demonstrated
[29:24] they were able to provide.
[29:25] Ecology scored higher on the sustainability
[29:27] and it is a core portion of their business and their ethic.
[29:32] Finally with respect to exceptions to agreement,
[29:35] SCRR took none, and orcology had a handful
[29:40] of exceptions they propose.
[29:41] After the evaluation panel completed, its consensus scoring
[29:45] process, SCRR was the highest ranked proposer
[29:48] by a margin of one.
[29:51] Following the evaluation process being concluded,
[29:55] the town's negotiation team with support from my firm
[30:00] moved into the negotiation process,
[30:02] and again, the RFP contemplated how that would proceed,
[30:09] which was to move forward with the highest ranked proposer.
[30:13] Was identified as that.
[30:14] And the award is based on the proposal providing
[30:17] the most advantageous proposal with the best
[30:20] interests of the town after all factors have been considered,
[30:23] the evaluation panel did determine
[30:26] that SCRR best met the interests of the town
[30:29] and provided the most advantageous proposal.
[30:31] And though rates were not controlling post negotiations,
[30:36] we did end up with rates with SCRR
[30:40] that were the lowest overall across all sectors.
[30:42] And that is detailed in the staff report.
[30:44] We will show the results of that on the subsequent slides.
[30:47] The take home message here for the council and the community is
[30:51] ultimately that all ratepayers across all service sectors
[30:57] and classes will see reductions in rates effective beginning
[31:02] of this new agreement, October 1st, 2027.
[31:06] In this slide and the subsequent slides com
[31:09] you can see both the current rates
[31:11] that are effective and in place today.
[31:14] Those will remain in place through March of 2027.
[31:17] There will be a final adjustment to those rates in the existing
[31:23] agreement, which does not expire until September 30th of 2027.
[31:28] So what we are showing you is current rates to the rates
[31:31] as they will be in October.
[31:33] There will be one slight adjustment.
[31:35] And I will cover the timing of that
[31:37] towards the end of this presentation.
[31:38] This slide shows the rates for single family residence
[31:43] as well as those that would be identified
[31:46] as single family residence within a multi-family dwellings.
[31:50] Or something like a mobile home park
[31:52] that has individual containers for each and every resident
[31:57] within a mobile home park.
[31:59] Picking the 32 gallon monthly bundle rate based on the garbage
[32:04] container size, you can see going from a current rate
[32:07] of $39.50 to a new rate effective in October of next
[32:11] year of 35.87 for a reduction of $3 and $0.63.
[32:18] You can see that repeated for the service
[32:22] level shown on this slide.
[32:24] The story is largely the same when
[32:26] we talk about multifamily rates, mfdc
[32:29] means multifamily commercial.
[32:31] Receiving commercial type services
[32:33] in larger centralized bins rather than
[32:36] individual services and carts to each residence.
[32:39] Here you can see rates will be lower than present come October
[32:45] 1st, 2027.
[32:46] That was for garbage.
[32:48] This is for recycling.
[32:50] Similar story.
[32:52] For organics also a similar story.
[32:54] The service levels that I'm showing
[32:56] are those service levels that have current subscriptions
[32:59] to them.
[33:00] If you look into the staff packet
[33:02] as well as into the agreement, there
[33:03] are lots of different service types
[33:07] available to multi-family dwellings
[33:10] and commercial businesses.
[33:11] We are just showing those where there are known subscribers
[33:15] today.
[33:16] So this is a snapshot.
[33:18] To put it all on one slide would make your eyes hurt.
[33:21] There are also new rates for a new rate category.
[33:25] This was something that came up through the community engagement
[33:30] process, establishing rates for existing mixed use
[33:34] dwellings, meaning both multifamily and commercial
[33:38] with shared containers and shared enclosures.
[33:41] This is a new rate category going forward.
[33:45] Currently and the current rates that are shown
[33:48] are current commercial rates.
[33:49] They are slightly different than the commercial rates
[33:51] because there's a different blend
[33:53] of solid waste materials and also credits
[33:55] that are being applied.
[33:56] So again, through this new rate category, compared to existing
[34:01] commercial rates, mixed use dwellings
[34:04] with reductions for garbage rates, same for recycling rates,
[34:09] same for organic rates.
[34:11] Finally with respect to commercial customers,
[34:14] the story is here at the same.
[34:17] You can see the change in rate from existing rate
[34:20] to the October 2027 rates with reductions
[34:23] for garbage rates for commercial businesses,
[34:26] recycling rates for commercial businesses,
[34:30] and organics rates for commercial businesses.
[34:32] The final rate category I will cover
[34:36] is a brand new rate category.
[34:38] It relates to no longer providing free services
[34:42] to government entities, the town, the school district,
[34:46] and the fire district.
[34:48] There are new rate categories stipulated within the agreement.
[34:54] The town will pay directly for solid rate services per those
[34:58] rates .
[35:03] During negotiation and element of reimbursements
[35:06] of the town for the cost of this RFP process
[35:09] as well as a placeholder for the cost of a transition
[35:14] that are actually being leveraged as a credit
[35:16] to the town so it will offset your initial solid waste costs
[35:21] rather than paying directly in the first portion
[35:24] of the new agreement year.
[35:26] If the town were to proceed with solid waste services
[35:30] at existing service levels, which
[35:32] we know are higher than necessary,
[35:34] they will be right sized.
[35:36] That would be on the order of around $660,000 a year,
[35:39] but that has been discussed with the proposer as well as with
[35:44] staff, and there will be a right sizing effort in advance
[35:47] of the town receiving charges for that service.
[35:50] And the fire station will also be subject to those same rates.
[35:54] When it comes to the school district,
[35:57] the maximum rates in the agreement
[35:58] do serve as the highest rate they would pay.
[36:02] But they are not bound to go with the rates
[36:04] in the services provided in this recommended agreement.
[36:06] The district is able to contract separately
[36:10] with either SCRR or another provider
[36:15] and to negotiate their own rates.
[36:16] So they are not bound by the rates for government that
[36:19] are included in this agreement, but they
[36:22] wanted to make sure this was disclosed.
[36:24] And this is what those rates are for the first year
[36:28] of the agreement.
[36:29] I'm not comparing them to existing rates
[36:30] because there aren't existing rates being
[36:32] paid for government entities and just to show what they are.
[36:38] In the final few slides, I wanted
[36:42] to highlight some of what you are
[36:44] getting in this new agreement.
[36:46] And it's something that we did cover
[36:48] in more detail in the February meeting
[36:50] and in the previous community engagement meetings.
[36:54] But the key terms and conditions,
[36:57] I have already hit the point of we
[36:59] are looking at rates in 2027 that are lower
[37:02] than the existing 2026 rates.
[37:05] The proposers did provide rates that
[37:08] were proportionate to the cost of providing service
[37:10] and all attested to that.
[37:12] It's a ten year agreement term that would expire in 2037, as
[37:17] per the town code.
[37:19] There were enhancements to the overall terms and conditions
[37:22] in the agreement to meet new performance, legal,
[37:26] and compliance in state law standards.
[37:28] What happens when you update these every ten year.
[37:31] Conditions change and so those have been updated.
[37:36] I that the $275,000 that were set aside for reimbursement was
[37:40] actually being leveraged now to credit and offset
[37:43] the town's initial solid waste costs.
[37:45] Importantly, and this will be positive news for many
[37:49] in the community, there will no longer be dual stream recycling
[37:55] collection.
[37:55] That was a requirement of the RFP
[37:58] that proposers move to single stream recycling collection.
[38:03] SCRR has committed to have recycling carts in place
[38:07] by October 1st of 2027 at the start of the new agreement
[38:11] if not before.
[38:12] And that is a goal they have.
[38:15] Coming up on the right side, much
[38:17] of what we heard through the community engagement process
[38:20] was around the in pricing.
[38:23] For folks to understand and know and have faith in the fact
[38:25] that they are paying for what they
[38:27] get and not for what somebody else gets.
[38:29] We did achieve through the RFP process getting
[38:35] the special access for multifamily mixed use residents
[38:39] to have equivalent services to single family residents.
[38:42] We have maintained a senior discount at 10%.
[38:46] Going forward, you have had annual adjustments
[38:49] to your service rates.
[38:51] Those have typically occurred in April of each year.
[38:55] We did shift that timing because you noted
[38:58] or I noted earlier you're going to have one more rate
[39:01] adjustment coming up in April of 2027,
[39:02] and then they're going to go down in October.
[39:04] And that is because the rate adjustment time frame was offset
[39:07] from the term of the agreement.
[39:09] We've actually aligned those.
[39:11] So next time you come through this process,
[39:13] you won't have that awkward timing difference.
[39:15] It will continue to be what is called a refuse rate index.
[39:19] I will cover that on the next slide.
[39:21] And there are good limitations in the agreement on the ways
[39:24] in which the contractor could come forward and request
[39:28] other sorts of rate adjustments for changes in cost.
[39:32] Really the main objective is to decouple your changes in rates
[39:36] to customers from their changes in cost
[39:39] and have them triggered to these exterior market indices.
[39:42] This is how your agreement has functioned to present.
[39:46] But we have made through this process simplification
[39:49] and streamlining changes that will make it easier for the town
[39:53] to administer, simpler for residents and ratepayers
[39:56] and commercial businesses to understand,
[39:58] and also will align the timing with the agreement.
[40:02] This just gives you a little bit of an overview of what an RRI
[40:07] it looks like.
[40:09] It pegs their change in compensation
[40:11] to the ways in which the Bureau of Labor Statistics
[40:13] and other market indices change for labor, fuel, vehicles,
[40:18] and it also ties to the changes that the county and Zero waste
[40:24] Sonoma have for composting and disposal
[40:26] and to changes that happen in the recyclables marketplace.
[40:29] Importantly for the council and for ratepayers going forward,
[40:33] if you recall your most recent rate adjustment
[40:37] adoption, with a little bit of a different percentage
[40:40] change to each and every customer class,
[40:43] and there was no one uniform rate adjustment.
[40:46] Going forward you'll have one uniform rate adjustment
[40:49] for all rate payer types at once,
[40:51] which will make it easier to understand for everyone.
[40:56] In terms of the programs and services included
[40:59] in the agreements, on the left side
[41:02] are all of the services that Preexisted.
[41:04] These are services that the town and its ratepayers
[41:08] receive today.
[41:09] Those will be maintained going forward
[41:10] and they are included in the base rate proposals
[41:13] that they proposers made.
[41:15] On the right side were those services
[41:17] that we sought proposers to tell us what
[41:20] the additional costs would be.
[41:22] And they all did.
[41:23] But through negotiations, we were
[41:25] able to fold those into the base rates
[41:28] with at contractor goodwill, meaning no additional charge.
[41:34] That is a strong value added benefit
[41:35] to the town and the ratepayers moving forward, including a site
[41:39] location for potential CRV drop off center,
[41:44] five cardboard locations for drop off throughout the town,
[41:47] a second week of holiday tree collection,
[41:50] a second collection of bulky waste.
[41:53] All of those were folded in at no additional charge
[41:56] above the base rates that SCRR put forward.
[42:00] In terms of next steps, two night staff
[42:04] is asking for the council consideration of the recommended
[42:08] contract with SCRR.
[42:10] I do just want to remind the Council and the community,
[42:13] we will see another final rate adjustment through the existing
[42:16] agreement with SCRR in April.
[42:19] If adopted, the new rates and the agreement would go
[42:22] into effect, lower rates effective October 1st along with
[42:26] the new single stream recycling carts being delivered
[42:29] by or before that date.
[42:31] In your future you would just see the annual rate adjustments
[42:34] through the ROI process through the end of the term
[42:37] of the agreement effective October 1st annually.
[42:40] With respect to the recommended action,
[42:44] you heard this a little bit already
[42:46] through staff's introductory remarks,
[42:48] there is a franchise fee included in the agreement.
[42:53] There has been a change in the approach to the franchise fee,
[42:57] stipulating it as an annualized dollar amount per agreement year
[43:02] that annual dollar amount would escalate by CPI
[43:05] over the course of the term.
[43:07] And it is to cover the town's costs associated
[43:10] with managing and administering this agreement.
[43:13] Other solid waste services that the town provides, supplementing
[43:16] what the contractor provides, and the use of the government
[43:21] property on the public right of way
[43:23] for the collection of those containers.
[43:24] So this is a justified amount through a study
[43:28] that is appended in your report that we did back in 2024.
[43:31] The amount has been escalated by CPI from what is in the report.
[43:37] A brief update, we did note as we were preparing for tonight
[43:41] there were two minor typographical errors
[43:43] in the exhibits.
[43:45] Exhibit five, transition plan, the header on those tables
[43:48] was incorrectly titled exhibit eight, Collection Service
[43:52] operation plan.
[43:53] The context of the exhibit are correct.
[43:55] The header was wrong.
[43:56] So we do in the council's action hope
[43:58] that we can get an amended action just
[44:01] to clarify that as well as exhibit seven, customer service
[44:06] and billing plan at a slightly incorrect title to the table.
[44:10] Just minor typographical errors and we apologize for those.
[44:14] We also want to state that the town did
[44:17] receive a protest to the award that was since rescinded.
[44:23] Staff and our three communicated with the protesting proposer
[44:28] to address their concerns and issues
[44:32] and they withdrew their protest in advance of the meeting.
[44:36] The recommended action tonight, this
[44:38] is as per what is in the staff report
[44:40] along with the amended for those two exhibit
[44:42] typographical corrections, both asking the council
[44:47] to adopt a resolution authorizing
[44:48] the execution of the new agreement and
[44:51] then separately adopt a resolution setting
[44:53] the first year franchise fee at $1.225 million
[44:58] to cover the town's costs associated with solid waste
[45:02] services.
[45:03] With that, I, stop, as well as representatives
[45:08] from SCRR in the room and on Zoom are I to take questions.
[45:15] Thank you for your time.
[45:17] >> We will go ahead and start first with any questions from
[45:19] the Council.
[45:21] Does anyone have a question?
[45:32] >> Currently we get service for the port a potty at our events.
[45:37] And I didn't see that.
[45:40] I understood it was going to be part of this contract.
[45:42] Is it part of the contract?
[45:44] >> Correct.
[45:44] It's part of the town sponsored events at goodwill.
[45:49] >> The franchise fee, $1.25 million annually,
[45:57] use of the public right of way, traditionally that has been wear
[46:03] and tear on the roads.
[46:06] We're just not saying it that way.
[46:11] They are heavy, and on residential streets
[46:15] they do over time damage the streets.
[46:19] Is that pretty much the same thing --
[46:25] a good portion of this money for maintenance of the streets?
[46:33] >> It's not.
[46:34] It's actually for the use of the street.
[46:36] California Court of Appeals decision last year
[46:41] that ruled the use of the franchise fee
[46:43] for maintenance of roads was no longer allowed.
[46:48] So that is maintenance of town streets
[46:51] is not included in this number at this time.
[46:53] >> There may be legislation that may change that?
[46:57] >> There may be, yes.
[46:59] >> How about that?
[47:02] >> The last one, the town separate fees,
[47:08] they are not equivalent to commercial,
[47:11] but there are more than residential.
[47:13] Is that pretty much -- you had a slide that showed a cross
[47:18] for a 60 gallon can.
[47:20] It looked like it was more than the residential
[47:29] but less than the commercial.
[47:34] >> They are different from the commercial and different from
[47:36] the other rate categories.
[47:38] The proposer -- and these were also negotiated to make sure
[47:42] they had the right fit for the town paranoid but ultimately
[47:48] they are not covering all of say the centralized services that
[47:54] are provided in part because there is that uncertainty
[47:57] as to what the actual final amount of need the town is going
[48:01] to have would be.
[48:02] And so they wanted to make sure that they were fully
[48:06] covering centralized costs through rates that were known
[48:09] to be stable and consistent.
[48:12] Whereas town service levels are a little
[48:15] uncertain at this point.
[48:16] >> My last question, the differences in the residential
[48:20] rates which are significantly lower than commercial,
[48:25] it appears to me based on economies of scale.
[48:28] In other words in the residential street,
[48:30] they can pick up a dozen cans in the same time
[48:34] that, may be less time they they would pick up
[48:37] one of their commercials at.
[48:38] Is that pretty much the difference because we
[48:42] can't really -- we are getting away from subsidizing
[48:45] the residential through commercial and the mixed use?
[48:52] >> The way I see it, and I'm not the operator, but yes,
[48:56] my understanding is in the residential space ultimately,
[48:59] you are collecting this home and the next home right away
[49:02] and there is very little time between those stops.
[49:05] There is more time between commercial stops.
[49:08] The operators probably the best one to help
[49:11] assert an answer to that question.
[49:13] But yes, I think there are differences
[49:15] between the conditions of service
[49:17] and the efficiencies of service in each of the sectors.
[49:22] >> Thank you.
[49:23] >> Does anyone else have a question?
[49:27] >> I have a quick question.
[49:30] Can you please clarify?
[49:31] You said in your presentation that the town and the government
[49:34] services were included last time.
[49:37] But I'm actually relative cost of those
[49:39] were lumped into and spread out across the years
[49:42] that we're paying at the time.
[49:43] So now we have separated that out.
[49:46] So the town will be paying for the cost
[49:49] of the pickup for government services
[49:51] where the ratepayers across town will
[49:54] no longer be paying for those.
[49:55] Is that correct?
[49:57] >> Correct.
[49:59] Although it may state it a little differently.
[50:02] Patel will be paying directly for services.
[50:05] Whereas for existing soon to expire contract, it does
[50:09] pay for those services.
[50:10] But we don't have complete clarity on is exactly who is
[50:15] paying for what with respect to those services --
[50:19] we know the contract for providing those services and we
[50:22] know the expenses to provide those services and that those
[50:25] expenses are most likely covered through the revenues they are
[50:28] receiving from elsewhere in their business operations.
[50:33] >> Anybody else?
[50:35] I have one question.
[50:36] I just want to go back to the rates that are going to be
[50:42] effective on 10/1/2027.
[50:44] That's a year out.
[50:47] So are you telling us that those rates that
[50:51] are on that list, those won't change?
[50:54] >> Correct, those are going to be fixed in place.
[50:56] If you authorize this agreement, those are the rates you'll see
[50:59] come October 1st, 27.
[51:04] >> And when are they able to do another rate increase?
[51:08] >> Not until October 1st, 28.
[51:13] >> Once a year they can.
[51:14] And there is a limit to how much rate increase?
[51:17] Is there a >> There was no cap included.
[51:20] It wasn't the one included in the RFP.
[51:22] There isn't one today.
[51:24] What it is is a formulaic approach
[51:26] based on market indices.
[51:28] They're going to have to pull this market data that
[51:33] is publicly available.
[51:35] Anyone else can pull it and we pull it
[51:36] in order to check their math and make
[51:38] sure they've done it correctly.
[51:41] And it spits out the outcome and it
[51:44] is meant to approximate their change in cost
[51:47] for labor, fuel, equipment, post-collection exposal and all
[51:52] of that.
[51:53] Importantly what they can't do in that regular rate adjustment
[51:56] year is say we have had these changes in cost
[51:59] and we're going to plug them into that
[52:01] and we bought a new truck or whatever.
[52:03] And he just can't say we have any changes in cost
[52:06] and automatically flow those through to the ratepayers.
[52:08] They have opportunities to kill that
[52:10] under special circumstances, but as the regular course
[52:14] of business through the regular annual rate adjustments,
[52:17] it is a formulaic approach decoupled from costs
[52:20] and informed by external market factors.
[52:26] >> All right.
[52:28] Please.
[52:28] >> A quick follow up to that, and I apologize.
[52:31] I missed my briefing on this contract.
[52:33] Maybe Meg should already know this.
[52:35] How do fluctuations -- if there's wild fluctuations
[52:40] in fuel costs between now and their ability to take
[52:44] their first rate increase, how do we handle that?
[52:48] If fuel goes to $9 a gallon, what are we doing?
[52:53] >> Between now and their first rate adjustment,
[52:55] which would be October 1st, 2028,
[52:59] the math of that refuse rate index takes into account
[53:05] the annual changes.
[53:07] It's not just pick one month and another month
[53:10] and compare those differences.
[53:11] It's looking at the prior 12 months worth of change compared
[53:14] to the 12 months prior to that.
[53:17] So there is this normalizing effect.
[53:20] If fuel is higher for a full 12 months,
[53:22] that will flow through into those calculations.
[53:25] But it is also only in proportion to the amount
[53:29] that fuel costs within the overall system.
[53:33] So this is around $10 million a year.
[53:36] I don't have it at the top of my head how much of that is fuel.
[53:39] But it's only the amount of fuel fluctuation
[53:42] that would flow through into that annual rate adjustment
[53:45] process.
[53:46] But I would flow through.
[53:48] I do think if you saw something extreme,
[53:51] you as a town would have the opportunity
[53:53] to approach the contractor and say,
[53:56] hey, this is extreme this year.
[53:58] Might we consider phasing this in or moving it out?
[54:01] I'm not saying they would commit to that,
[54:02] but they do have that opportunity
[54:04] to approach them about that.
[54:12] >> Thank you.
[54:12] I'd like to open this up to the public.
[54:14] Any member of the public wishing to make a comment
[54:16] may approach the podium and you will have three minutes.
[54:19] Good evening, Allison Johnson, SCRR.
[54:24] I wanted to thank you guys for allowing us to service you
[54:27] for the last nine years and the partnership
[54:28] that we have with the town, town staff, the residents of Windsor.
[54:34] Hope that you approve the next ten years
[54:37] and we really look forward to continuing
[54:39] to provide exemplary service to the town, the residents,
[54:43] and the community.
[54:44] We sponsor a lot of events in the town.
[54:47] We are out and about and we will continue
[54:48] to do that even though we have included some of your services
[54:52] at goodwill, but we still have a commitment
[54:55] to sponsor the summer concerts, sponsor kaboom, all
[54:59] those little things that we do extra.
[55:00] And I want to thank you guys for allowing us to be here.
[55:03] Thank you.
[55:11] >> Good evening, mayor Reynoso, council members.
[55:15] My name is Andy Fulton.
[55:16] I'm the assistant general manager there.
[55:18] And tonight I wanted to take my time to just really congratulate
[55:22] SCRR.
[55:23] It was a very competitive process that got played out.
[55:29] They have earned the recommendation.
[55:32] And we just wanted to congratulate them.
[55:34] I also wanted to thank the ad hoc committee, specifically
[55:38] Christina and Sean, being shepherded by Garth, a very
[55:46] fair and transparent process.
[55:48] Just offer our gratitude and we appreciate
[55:50] being part of the process.
[55:52] And for the future we'd love to talk about any opportunities
[55:56] that come up.
[55:57] Thank you very much.
[56:08] >> Hi.
[56:09] Betsy Mallis.
[56:10] To tag on to what Councilmember Salmon said,
[56:13] the franchise fee was set for next year at this 1,225,000.
[56:18] What was the fee or what is the fee going to be for this year?
[56:25] And what is that actual cost of the fee, not what you pay out
[56:29] but what the cost is?
[56:31] I know you said it was set to start
[56:35] and then there was a cost of CPI yearly.
[56:39] But then as Council member salmon said,
[56:43] the law could change.
[56:45] What happens if the law changes or your expenses
[56:49] on the franchise fee change or increase?
[56:57] What are the options for that to change if it need be,
[57:03] if it no longer covers the cost of the town that franchise
[57:07] fee, if something changes, whether it's a law or just
[57:10] an expense?
[57:11] What are the options?
[57:14] How locked in are you onto that fee,
[57:16] and is that fee going to cover every cost
[57:19] that the town would have or could have in the next ten
[57:23] years?
[57:24] What are the available options for it?
[57:27] Thank you.
[57:29] >> Anyone else from the public?
[57:40] >> Good evening mayor and council members.
[57:42] I'm the vice president of municipal franchises
[57:45] with Green Waste Recovery.
[57:46] I want to sincerely thank you for the opportunity
[57:48] to participate in the town's solid waste procurement process.
[57:51] We've had a very positive experience working with
[57:54] and getting to know the town staff
[57:56] throughout the entire process.
[57:57] We appreciate the effort that went into the RFP
[57:59] and we are proud of the proposal that Greenway submitted.
[58:02] Our approach was to present rates
[58:04] that honestly and transparently reflect
[58:06] the true cost of providing service as required by the RFP.
[58:09] We did so based on a cost of service methodology
[58:12] that we know with confidence was consistent with the RFP emphasis
[58:16] on fiscal transparency.
[58:18] While every company has its own business model,
[58:22] the fundamental cost of operating in our industry
[58:24] are similar.
[58:25] We respect the town's decision and congratulate SCRR
[58:29] with tonight's recommendation.
[58:30] Although we were not selected, Green Waste
[58:32] appreciates the opportunity to have participated.
[58:35] Thank you.
[58:37] >> Anyone else from the public?
[58:49] >> Good evening.
[58:50] Sorry for the dress but didn't have time between practice
[58:52] and getting here.
[58:53] And all those three people wearing those nice suits,
[58:57] I feel underdressed.
[58:59] I wanted to thank the town on behalf of the school board
[59:03] allowing us to be part of the ad hoc committee.
[59:05] I want to thank John, Christina, especially Dorothy.
[59:10] I've been involved in a lot of different groups and things.
[59:15] It was really excellent.
[59:20] Garth, probably one of the best consultants since I've
[59:24] seen in government in 30 years.
[59:25] Played it right down the middle.
[59:27] If you asked him what color it was, he told you.
[59:29] If you asked him how much it weighed, he told you.
[59:32] He didn't shade it one way or the other,
[59:33] just gave you the information it was really valuable for me.
[59:36] I was able to take it back to the rest of our board members
[59:39] to explain what this is.
[59:41] Because this is calculus at least.
[59:44] I don't know what is past that because I didn't get
[59:46] to the calculus part either.
[59:48] But there's so many things as you guys know that change how
[59:54] everything turns out.
[59:55] But I wanted to let you guys know we appreciate
[59:58] you being part of it.
[59:59] Appreciate the work that you guys all-- the town put into it.
[1:00:08] So now school board, we get to figure out now
[1:00:11] what we are doing over this next year.
[1:00:13] Thank you for doing the preliminary work.
[1:00:15] And now we have learned from that and we get to proceed on.
[1:00:19] Thank you very much.
[1:00:20] >> Thank you.
[1:00:22] One last call for public comment.
[1:00:25] Seeing no one lined up at the podium,
[1:00:27] I'm going to bring it back to the council for discussion.
[1:00:32] And I just have to start off by saying
[1:00:35] I was here ten years ago for the previous contract.
[1:00:39] I am so impressed by the positivity and the remarks
[1:00:45] from the other two agencies.
[1:00:48] It's really refreshing to see that here before the Council.
[1:00:55] Thank you to the other two contractors.
[1:00:57] Thank you very much.
[1:01:01] Anyone else like to start with the discussion?
[1:01:05] What we want to do here with this resolution?
[1:01:09] >> Could we have the question answered about the financial?
[1:01:13] >> I'm happy to answer, >> Thank you.
[1:01:20] >> The existing franchise fee and the existing agreement is
[1:01:22] not formulated as a dollar value per year.
[1:01:26] It is framed as a percentage of gross revenue per year.
[1:01:30] That is 10%.
[1:01:32] The amount of annual dollars in the 1.225 for the coming
[1:01:38] first year of this new agreement is
[1:01:40] right around the same as what the town receives now and will
[1:01:43] continue to receive for the next year
[1:01:45] under the existing agreement through that percentage based
[1:01:49] approach.
[1:01:49] I think that answers the first part of the question.
[1:01:52] There is parity amongst the amounts.
[1:01:54] There are not substantially changing.
[1:01:56] We are just changing from percentage
[1:01:58] to an annual dollar amount.
[1:01:59] Net receipts to the town should be approximately similar
[1:02:02] to your amount if the town -- for example if there were
[1:02:07] legislation that changed what the town could recover
[1:02:10] for street pavement impacts or if there were changes
[1:02:12] in the town cost-- the town doesn't programs around solid
[1:02:18] waste on its own or those changes in reductions in cost,
[1:02:22] and it's the reason that we have in the agreement
[1:02:25] the town's ability to set the franchise fee resolution.
[1:02:29] So if there were a change in cost
[1:02:32] or a change in legislation or law in the future,
[1:02:35] it meant the town wanted to change the franchise fee amount,
[1:02:39] the town wanted to engage a study on what the new franchise
[1:02:41] fee amount should be, and then you
[1:02:43] would consider authorization of a resolution resetting that fee.
[1:02:49] And then there would be a mechanism for the contractor
[1:02:51] to recover the revenues of that fee
[1:02:54] through a component of a rate adjustment.
[1:02:57] Or if it was to reduce, a credit to repairs.
[1:03:04] >> So any discussion?
[1:03:06] Anyone have any comments they want to share, thoughts,
[1:03:09] or are we ready for a motion?
[1:03:13] >> Just a little comment I'd like to make.
[1:03:16] I did participate in the ad hoc committee in the beginning that
[1:03:19] set some of the numbers there.
[1:03:21] And I just want to say it was sometimes contentious.
[1:03:25] It was honest.
[1:03:27] It was fun.
[1:03:30] And they managed to get to the end of negotiating
[1:03:33] various numbers, all sorts of different people
[1:03:37] from the community, the businesses, the school
[1:03:40] district all working on the main weighting of the values
[1:03:50] that were coming through.
[1:03:51] It was a very open and honest process.
[1:03:56] And it was working with Garth and Christina and everybody.
[1:04:02] It's been a fantastic process to watch
[1:04:05] happen and watch it happen in a very straightforward manner.
[1:04:11] I'm very happy with the way -- not so much specifically who won
[1:04:16] the contract, but just the way it turned out in terms of its
[1:04:19] process.
[1:04:19] So good job, Christina really, very well done.
[1:04:24] Thank you.
[1:04:29] >> This was the fourth contract I had been involved in.
[1:04:36] And I have to say I don't think we have ever
[1:04:42] had competitive entities, the winner and the losers,
[1:04:49] be so respectful.
[1:04:53] Pretty amazing.
[1:04:55] Thank you, Orcology, and thank you, greenways.
[1:05:00] The big thanks goes to Christina and the consultants
[1:05:03] because people really believed in the process and believed --
[1:05:06] in so close.
[1:05:09] That's when it gets really dicey.
[1:05:11] One point out of 100 or-- yeah.
[1:05:16] That's one it can be a lot of arguing and hard feelings.
[1:05:20] Pretty amazing.
[1:05:23] The other comment I will have is that even
[1:05:27] though the rates are lower, this is for the general public--
[1:05:32] there's some other costs to the town, school district,
[1:05:36] and fire department.
[1:05:38] Those costs we will pay one way or another because they are not
[1:05:42] discretionary.
[1:05:43] The town is not going to say we will just
[1:05:49] have to give up our garbage pickup
[1:05:50] and that'll be-- we're just not going to do that,
[1:05:54] save that money.
[1:05:55] It is also a reflection on what we
[1:05:58] were dealing with in terms of public budgets, higher
[1:06:03] costs, less revenue.
[1:06:07] Thank you, Christina, and everyone.
[1:06:10] I think we have got a good ten year contract.
[1:06:14] Windsor was the leader in having competitive bids for garbage.
[1:06:20] And I don't know, there's some communities
[1:06:24] that will extend their contracts because it is not
[1:06:27] voter mandated.
[1:06:28] But we were the ones that put it on the map
[1:06:31] and we should be very proud of it.
[1:06:35] >> Vice mayor.
[1:06:38] >> Thank you so much.
[1:06:39] I want to say again as well as Councilmember Leap said
[1:06:42] is to thank you to everyone who was on the ad hoc committee
[1:06:45] and on the committee for the town staff
[1:06:48] as well for the selection committee.
[1:06:50] It was a lot of work.
[1:06:52] It was a lot of time.
[1:06:53] And so many good conversations, and really truly
[1:06:59] centered around transparency and how the rates are decided
[1:07:04] and how we would be able to separate
[1:07:09] each layer in the town of Windsor
[1:07:13] so we could get an idea of how each group is paying the rates,
[1:07:19] whether it be single family home.
[1:07:20] We added in a multi use section this year or this contract.
[1:07:28] Where we didn't have our multi use areas of town broken out
[1:07:34] into a different payment section,
[1:07:36] we do have that now for more transparency.
[1:07:39] And I want to thank the school district for being part of that
[1:07:43] as well even though knowing that they were going to be separated
[1:07:45] out of the contract and they were going
[1:07:50] to have to pay their rates going forward,
[1:07:52] it was nice to have them present and have their information
[1:07:54] and input into that group.
[1:07:57] Ultimately I was happy to see that the rates are reduced.
[1:08:02] That is what I was hoping to see, especially
[1:08:05] having the government entities pulled out of it.
[1:08:07] That makes me happy for the community members
[1:08:10] to be able to have something in our lives go down.
[1:08:15] Because it just continues to go up and up and up.
[1:08:18] It was really nice to see that while not drastic it still
[1:08:22] is a reduction in something.
[1:08:23] And I'm happy for that.
[1:08:25] And I want to thank the Council for trusting Council Member Leap
[1:08:28] and myself on the ad hoc committee.
[1:08:31] I hope we were able to produce what you guys were looking for.
[1:08:33] And I think we did with this contract coming forward
[1:08:36] and the RFP process.
[1:08:38] Thank you so much.
[1:08:40] >> And before someone makes a motion,
[1:08:43] I just want to add that through this process,
[1:08:47] the committee definitely heard the public and one
[1:08:49] of the biggest items was a split cams.
[1:08:54] I knew they were genuine in the beginning
[1:08:59] and the state mandates in separating recycling.
[1:09:01] It was definitely something we continued
[1:09:06] to hear throughout the past year is that residents did not
[1:09:10] like the split cans.
[1:09:12] Hopefully beside the lower rates,
[1:09:13] I think we're going to have a lot of very happy residents
[1:09:19] come 2027.
[1:09:20] Thank you everybody again for participating and your time.
[1:09:24] So I would like to entertain someone to make a motion on two
[1:09:30] items separately or --
[1:09:33] separate?.
[1:09:34] Would someone like to make a >> I'll go for it.
[1:09:41] >> Go for it.
[1:09:42] >> So I move to adopt a resolution authorizing
[1:09:46] the execution of the Solid Waste Management Franchise agreement
[1:09:50] with Sonoma County Resource Recovery LLC, for residential,
[1:09:56] multifamily, and commercial garbage recycling materials,
[1:10:00] recyclable materials, and organic waste collection
[1:10:03] services for the period of October 1st, 2027,
[1:10:07] through September 30th, 2037.
[1:10:10] And authorize the Town Manager to execute it
[1:10:12] on behalf of the town as amended.
[1:10:16] >> Second.
[1:10:20] >> Roll call vote please.
[1:10:23] [members voting]
[1:10:28] >> Thank you.
[1:10:30] >> And now someone make a motion on the second one.
[1:10:32] >> I can make the second motion, adopt a resolution setting
[1:10:35] the franchise fee at $1,225,000 for October 1st , 2027,
[1:10:44] 3rd September 30th, 2028, with a cost of living escalator
[1:10:48] for year two in consecutive years following the term
[1:10:51] of the franchise agreement to recover the cost of solid waste
[1:10:54] related to the services in the town of Windsor.
[1:10:56] >> Is there a second?
[1:10:59] >> Second.
[1:11:01] >> Roll call vote, please.
[1:11:04] [members voting]
[1:11:09] >> Thank you.
[1:11:11] >> Thank you so much.
[1:11:12] >> If I could briefly call Mayor,
[1:11:15] I would echo coach Carnation's comments about our three, Garth.
[1:11:23] Consultants are only as good to the town as the project manager
[1:11:27] is that leads the project.
[1:11:28] This has been a three year project.
[1:11:30] Christina came to us in 2023, February 23rd I believe.
[1:11:34] Has been working on that since the day she got back.
[1:11:37] I appreciate Council's support.
[1:11:39] Christina, thank you.
[1:11:42] You've done a great job.
[1:11:49] >> Perfect.
[1:11:50] Thank you, everybody.
[1:11:52] We are going to shuffle around a little bit
[1:11:56] and move on to item 13.2.
[1:12:00] This is consideration of amendments to the gas station
[1:12:04] and ordinance.
[1:12:15] >> Ready?
[1:12:16] >>Yes.
[1:12:17] >> Thank you, mayor, members.
[1:12:19] I'm Kim Vogue a planner with the community development
[1:12:21] department.
[1:12:21] I'm joined by Tim Card, development manager.
[1:12:25] This presentation is intended to give the council an overview
[1:12:29] of the policy landscape surrounding the town's gas
[1:12:32] station ban ordinance.
[1:12:33] And to identify whether there is any additional analysis
[1:12:37] needed from here on.
[1:12:38] So there is no action being taken in tonight's meeting.
[1:12:46] Let's see here.
[1:12:47] The gas station ban ties back to previous town
[1:12:52] regional and state policies, including climate emergency
[1:12:56] resolutions and the town's general plan.
[1:12:58] The governor signed an executive order
[1:13:00] to phase out new gas powered vehicle sales by 2035.
[1:13:04] I mentioned that because it was a specific topic of conversation
[1:13:07] at the council's previous discussion.
[1:13:11] I'll come back to that in the next slide.
[1:13:13] In 2021 the City of Palma adopted a gas station ban
[1:13:18] ordinance.
[1:13:19] Following Petaluma's lead, our CA
[1:13:25] spearheaded an effort to get all local jurisdictions to enact
[1:13:28] a similar ordinance.
[1:13:30] Our CPA is a regional climate protection authority
[1:13:32] of which the town is a member.
[1:13:34] And in 2022, Windsor's gas station ban ordinance
[1:13:38] was adopted.
[1:13:41] This goes into a little bit more detail.
[1:13:44] The California Air Resources Board or CARB
[1:13:50] approved a rule called Advance Clean Cars two, which
[1:13:53] was intended to implement the governor's executive order.
[1:13:57] That was effective November 30th, 2022.
[1:13:59] And then in May of 2025, that order
[1:14:04] was suspended by federal government, which
[1:14:08] rescinded the Clean Air Act waiver
[1:14:09] for the state of California.
[1:14:11] So that is now in litigation.
[1:14:16] I wanted to confirm that because it was also a discussion
[1:14:19] item at the last meeting and put that
[1:14:20] in the record for the Council.
[1:14:23] And then to continue on at this timeline,
[1:14:26] I added the General Plan amendment in February, 2020,
[1:14:30] to the GHG policies to catch up with state policy
[1:14:36] and the adoption of the checklist, which
[1:14:39] was a streamlined mechanism for development projects
[1:14:42] that were subject to sequa analysis.
[1:14:51] In April, the Council asked staff
[1:14:56] to revisit the gas station ban ordinance,
[1:14:59] not to make a specific change at this time
[1:15:01] but to evaluate whether the ordinance still
[1:15:03] fits the current conditions.
[1:15:04] There is interest in exploring whether potentially large scale
[1:15:08] retail could help stabilize the town's revenue issues.
[1:15:13] So large-scale retailers have been mentioned,
[1:15:17] which typically include or require gas stations
[1:15:20] as an accessory use.
[1:15:28] Did I skip a page here?
[1:15:31] The governor's executive order on gas powered vehicles
[1:15:34] is suspended along with federal Rescissions.
[1:15:37] And there is uncertainty to the long term regulatory landscape.
[1:15:41] These changes don't dictate local policies,
[1:15:43] but they do change the backdrop against which
[1:15:46] the ordinance was adopted.
[1:15:47] To support the discussion, we've outlined potential pathways
[1:15:51] that Council may want to consider.
[1:15:55] To maintain the existing ordinance com
[1:15:59] maintain Winsor's current climate action trajectory,
[1:16:03] which would provide certainty going forward.
[1:16:08] The second is to just look into a full repeal, allowing
[1:16:15] applications for new standalone gas stations in zoning districts
[1:16:22] as they were before.
[1:16:23] Subject to Sequa review.
[1:16:26] This would address the request from fuel industry stakeholders.
[1:16:31] The third one would be to look into target elements
[1:16:35] for large scale retail users with accessory gas
[1:16:43] stations in selected zoning districts potentially.
[1:16:47] Again, this evening is not about a decision.
[1:16:49] It is about what pathways mean and what
[1:16:52] the implications would be.
[1:16:54] We could also look into particular performance standards
[1:16:58] and possible mitigation measures.
[1:17:02] This would need more analysis moving forward.
[1:17:07] We did an initial screen of where something like this
[1:17:10] could be located.
[1:17:11] There were a few candidate sites.
[1:17:14] It looks like the sites would need to be at least 15 acres.
[1:17:17] There are not very many in Windsor.
[1:17:19] We found two, one at the very north end of town
[1:17:23] on one of the south end of town column up both of which
[1:17:25] have significant environmental constraints, including
[1:17:27] access constraints.
[1:17:30] These slides not suggesting any particular retail risk coming
[1:17:35] forward at this time or any particular project is feasible.
[1:17:37] It is just an initial screening of potential or theoretical
[1:17:45] project could go.
[1:17:49] So large scale retail could potentially
[1:17:53] contribute to long term revenue stability for the town
[1:17:56] through its sales taxes and related economic activities.
[1:17:59] We are just operating with very limited information right now.
[1:18:03] We are limited the number of parcels that are suitable.
[1:18:08] The feasibility would depend on retailers interests.
[1:18:11] We haven't had anyone come forward.
[1:18:13] There is no application or commitment
[1:18:16] from potential retailers at this time.
[1:18:17] We don't know what the regional competitiveness would be right
[1:18:23] now, or the actual feasibility.
[1:18:26] We just don't have that information.
[1:18:29] So we have received some written comments in response
[1:18:32] to tonight's item.
[1:18:33] The first one should have been attached to your staff report.
[1:18:37] That was from an industry group called California Fuels
[1:18:39] and Convenience Alliance.
[1:18:40] They're requesting consideration of a full repeal
[1:18:43] on the basis of economic development
[1:18:45] and equal opportunity.
[1:18:46] There was one written comment in support of that request
[1:18:50] for a full repeal.
[1:18:53] Then there were four other comments
[1:18:59] I think I got in time for this meeting that
[1:19:03] were all in support of the continuing
[1:19:05] as the ordinance was written.
[1:19:08] And then additionally, Dan Forge sent a letter.
[1:19:13] I don't know if it was on your dais,
[1:19:15] and then a couple more emails in support as that letter came in.
[1:19:18] These are the comps that came in.
[1:19:21] I just wanted to say this is a summary of public comments.
[1:19:23] It's not necessarily a representative of the broader
[1:19:25] community sentiment.
[1:19:26] We expect more input and a broader community
[1:19:28] outreach if we went forward with some kind of amendment.
[1:19:31] We would incorporate that feedback
[1:19:34] as the Council provides direction.
[1:19:38] Some potential options for tonight, no action
[1:19:41] would be happening tonight.
[1:19:43] One would just be to accept the staff presentation.
[1:19:46] Two would be to identify preferred pathway going forward.
[1:19:52] And three to identify any particular information
[1:19:54] or analysis they would like to see in the future.
[1:19:58] So that wraps up my report.
[1:20:04] I'm happy to answer questions.
[1:20:05] And Tim is here also to answer questions.
[1:20:08] >> Thank you very much.
[1:20:09] This is a time for questions, but I
[1:20:12] want to throw out for the public again what
[1:20:14] I heard you say was that there is no interest right now
[1:20:18] for anyone to come to Windsor and build gas stations.
[1:20:24] Right?
[1:20:25] >> I have not had any interest come across my desk as far
[1:20:28] as a standalone gas station.
[1:20:32] No.
[1:20:34] >> Can you --
[1:20:37] I'm sorry.
[1:20:38] I have to ask.
[1:20:39] Have you had an interest for any retail stores that come in?
[1:20:44] >> No large format retailer has directly reached out to me.
[1:20:48] However, I have heard of interest
[1:20:50] through second hand real estate brokers and intermediaries,
[1:20:54] that type of thing.
[1:20:56] >> So yes, again, and I'm sorry.
[1:21:01] I'm breaking my own rule here.
[1:21:03] But just like someone during public comment mentioned,
[1:21:06] the flock camera, we have brought the flock camera
[1:21:10] discussion to the council because that is what we do here.
[1:21:12] We listen to the public.
[1:21:14] We listen to concerns or requests.
[1:21:16] And so we are having staff bring this item before us
[1:21:20] because we want to be able to have
[1:21:23] this forum for this information to get out.
[1:21:26] I just wanted to add that before.
[1:21:28] So any questions for staff, please?
[1:21:34] Anyone?
[1:21:36] Go ahead.
[1:21:38] >> What we are considering is the possibility of direction
[1:21:41] to amend an ordinance.
[1:21:46] An ordinance can be amended at any time by this Council
[1:21:49] or future Council.
[1:21:51] That's pretty much the state of the nature of the animal?
[1:21:56] >> Correct.
[1:22:00] >> Any other questions?
[1:22:02] Go ahead.
[1:22:08] >> Tim, do you have any -- for either a big box retail store
[1:22:14] or a standalone gas station, what would be the financial
[1:22:16] implications before the town?
[1:22:18] >> I have much better data on standalone gas stations.
[1:22:21] We have 14 standalone gas stations in town.
[1:22:24] I can't tell you what the individual sales tax
[1:22:26] representation of each one of them are.
[1:22:28] But that aggregate it is about $400,000 a year or about 7.7%
[1:22:33] of our sales tax revenue from those four gas stations.
[1:22:39] >> And if you had to guess, how are the big box retail?
[1:22:46] >> It's difficult to speculate.
[1:22:47] But if you were to say a big box retail with a gas station,
[1:22:50] I would have to assume that would
[1:22:52] be in excess of $1 million.
[1:22:54] But that would be pure speculation.
[1:22:56] I haven't looked into those numbers.
[1:22:58] Thank you.
[1:23:04] >> Any other questions?
[1:23:05] >> I have a question.
[1:23:07] In doing -- first off, thank you for the presentation.
[1:23:11] And doing the research for this ask
[1:23:13] that we have had you come back before council,
[1:23:16] have you seen any other towns with a specific amendments
[1:23:18] to the gas station bans that say anything like, hey,
[1:23:22] if this specific sort of business
[1:23:24] were to come in that required a gas
[1:23:26] station, or any other caveats to gas station bans?
[1:23:35] >> I have not seen it.
[1:23:36] >> I have a question.
[1:23:38] I actually thought in bringing this up
[1:23:43] that we would have more information than other areas.
[1:23:47] For example an analysis of the effect of such a gas station
[1:23:54] or a change in the rules would have
[1:23:56] on greenhouse gases and other environmental aspects of things.
[1:24:01] And we don't have any information yet for that one.
[1:24:08] Was that omitted on purpose or just
[1:24:12] that message didn't come across or what?
[1:24:15] >> I think we need a more defined project to know what
[1:24:20] where we are assessing first.
[1:24:21] >> Thank you.
[1:24:22] And
[1:24:23] >> I'm going to go ahead and open to public.
[1:24:24] Anyone from the public wishing to make comment,
[1:24:26] they can approach the podium please.
[1:24:28] If you don't mind, line up so I can
[1:24:29] have an idea how many speakers we have.
[1:24:31] If you wish to state your name and just
[1:24:35] either street address or town you live in, that is optional.
[1:24:40] It's a great way for us to reach back
[1:24:42] to you, but optional for me.
[1:24:44] You have three minutes, and there's
[1:24:46] a timer right behind you.
[1:24:47] Thank you so much.
[1:24:49] >> Mayor and council members, my name is Dave Heidel.
[1:24:52] I live in Santa Rosa.
[1:24:53] I am a member of Sonoma County Climate Activist Network
[1:24:56] and also return Peace Corps Volunteers
[1:24:59] for Environmental Action.
[1:25:01] I urge you to reject any proposal
[1:25:03] to amend your gas station ban.
[1:25:07] You have stated a strategic plan element and a goal statement
[1:25:12] here to that, which refers to the fiscal benefits
[1:25:15] to attract new businesses that expand your tax base.
[1:25:18] So of course this is important.
[1:25:21] You need to balance your fiscal responsibility,
[1:25:25] but not at the extent of threatening the sustainability
[1:25:27] of the people who live here.
[1:25:30] And while your goal states that the purpose of amending the gas
[1:25:34] ban is to create opportunities that enhance the quality of life
[1:25:38] for all, adding new gas stations does not do this.
[1:25:44] You already know about the dangers of global warming caused
[1:25:47] by greenhouse gas emissions because you
[1:25:49] have an extensive policy to reduce greenhouse gases.
[1:25:52] And this past February you adopted a greenhouse gas
[1:25:56] checklist to support your policy of greenhouse gas reductions.
[1:26:00] So in that, section LU-6.1 states that the town's shall
[1:26:07] strive to provide an overall pattern on land use that
[1:26:11] encourages sustainable development.
[1:26:13] Adding another gas station does not do that.
[1:26:16] The policy requires that land use, quote, enhances
[1:26:21] livability and public health.
[1:26:22] Adding another gas station does not do that.
[1:26:26] Your policy seeks to reduce air pollution, greenhouse gas
[1:26:31] emissions, and then consumption.
[1:26:33] I another gas station does not do that.
[1:26:36] Section PHS7.2 states that the town shall support plans,
[1:26:43] standards, regulations, incentives,
[1:26:45] and investments to reduce the impacts of climate change
[1:26:48] on those populations most vulnerable to the impacts
[1:26:52] of climate change.
[1:26:54] Those populations are all of us.
[1:26:58] All living beings on land and in the oceans
[1:27:01] are being severely threatened by global warming.
[1:27:04] You know this.
[1:27:05] It would be immoral for you to forsake your well thought out
[1:27:09] policies just for the money.
[1:27:11] And nothing else.
[1:27:13] So a gas station ban says to the oil industry and to the entire
[1:27:18] population of our region that our future cannot be continued
[1:27:22] to use fossil fuels for our energy needs period money is not
[1:27:27] the issue here.
[1:27:28] Doing the right thing to sustain life is what this is about.
[1:27:33] So please vote to reject amending your gas station ban.
[1:27:43] >> Good evening.
[1:27:44] My name is Jenny Blake.
[1:27:45] I was a founding member of the coalition opposing new gas
[1:27:49] stations.
[1:27:49] I would urge you to go for option one
[1:27:52] a, which is to leave the ordinance in place as it is now.
[1:27:57] I submitted a letter yesterday, which I hope you've received.
[1:28:00] It seems this is not fronted by anyone
[1:28:03] thinking that we need new gas stations in Windsor, or even
[1:28:09] new stores, but that it is about the city's budget.
[1:28:13] There may possibly be some interest from a large store,
[1:28:16] but this is all very speculative at the moment.
[1:28:19] The 2022 ordinance is just as valid
[1:28:24] now as it was when it was created.
[1:28:28] The climate crisis is just getting worse and more urgent.
[1:28:30] The urgency is to bring down the greenhouse gas emissions
[1:28:34] and not to build new gas stations
[1:28:37] to prolong dependency on fossil fuels into the future.
[1:28:42] There are also huge air pollution impacts
[1:28:45] from gas stations with a lot of toxic emissions, which
[1:28:49] can cause cancer, lung disease, asthma,
[1:28:54] heart diseases, and many other illnesses,
[1:28:56] especially for particularly vulnerable children,
[1:28:59] seniors, children, and also people in frontline communities.
[1:29:04] There are always leaks and spills
[1:29:08] from gas pumps and underground storage tanks
[1:29:11] impacting soil, surface, and groundwater.
[1:29:14] Ten gallons of petroleum can produce 12 million gallons
[1:29:18] of water per minute so think about the impacts
[1:29:20] to the drinking water supply.
[1:29:22] And there are leaking underground storage tanks
[1:29:25] all over Sonoma County, including in Windsor.
[1:29:29] There are environmental justice issues
[1:29:31] in the whole production of petroleum all the way
[1:29:35] from drilling or pumping in Nigeria
[1:29:37] or wherever it comes from, transportation, refining, and at
[1:29:43] the pump and the emissions from cars.
[1:29:45] Meanwhile the sales of gasoline are falling.
[1:29:48] They peaked in 2005, according to the California Energy
[1:29:52] Commission.
[1:29:52] And the sales of electric vehicles are rising,
[1:29:56] including because prices are going down,
[1:29:59] more used cars are becoming available
[1:30:01] and subsidies are still available.
[1:30:04] Anyway we need more bikes, less cars.
[1:30:08] And the cost of cleaning up toxic abandoned states
[1:30:12] is huge and often falls on the municipalities or the taxpayers.
[1:30:17] It can cost over $1 million to clean up an abandoned gas
[1:30:23] station or toxic site.
[1:30:24] And there are many of those around the county.
[1:30:29] Some abandoned gas station sites in other places
[1:30:31] are being repurposed now in creative ways.
[1:30:35] Why go through that process?
[1:30:37] Just don't build a new gas station.
[1:30:39] The other thing is a lot of people
[1:30:41] don't realize that cost business policy is
[1:30:44] based on selling cheaper gas so that they
[1:30:47] will get more memberships.
[1:30:49] Because it is member only gas, and their whole business
[1:30:53] strategy is built around selling cheaper gas to get more members
[1:30:58] and retain those members.
[1:31:01] >> Thank you very much.
[1:31:02] Your time is up.
[1:31:04] >> Thank you.
[1:31:06] >> Good evening, mayor vice mayor Potter and council
[1:31:10] members.
[1:31:10] Thanks for the opportunity to speak.
[1:31:12] My name is Woody Hastings.
[1:31:14] I'm the coordinator of the coalition opposing new gas
[1:31:18] stations.
[1:31:19] I'm here tonight to urge you to choose
[1:31:21] option one to retain the ordinance as it
[1:31:25] was adopted in 2022.
[1:31:30] Congress -- we sent a letter just yesterday.
[1:31:33] I hope you received it.
[1:31:34] Hope you can take the time to read it.
[1:31:36] And if you could take the time to look
[1:31:38] at some of those footnotes because that
[1:31:40] is where the substantiation and a lot of the deep information
[1:31:43] is about some of the things that we touched on there.
[1:31:47] We believe you did the right thing in 2022
[1:31:50] in adopting the ordinance.
[1:31:52] All of the reasons as Jenny Blake just said are --
[1:31:57] those theorists have validated and become more deepened
[1:32:01] and become more worrisome in many cases we touched on.
[1:32:06] And weakening it in 26 would be a mistake.
[1:32:11] There are things we touched on in the letter.
[1:32:13] The local impacts, toxic impacts,
[1:32:15] and other local impacts.
[1:32:18] The climate crisis, and market dynamics that
[1:32:21] have emerged over the last four years in particular.
[1:32:24] And so something that I would say to the gas station
[1:32:29] developers, the business case is really falling apart
[1:32:33] for new gas stations in 2026.
[1:32:35] It was 1926, things were looking bright and rosy.
[1:32:39] But it's 2026.
[1:32:41] As Jenny just said, gasoline sales are down.
[1:32:48] That 7.7 figure of your percentage of your tax base
[1:32:52] is not static.
[1:32:53] That is going to be going down.
[1:32:56] Because gasoline sales are going down.
[1:32:59] 16% between 2005 and 2025.
[1:33:03] And the projections from the California Energy Commission
[1:33:07] are that that decline in gasoline sales
[1:33:09] is only going to accelerate.
[1:33:10] If for no other reason, just because you
[1:33:13] see the writing on the wall, installing
[1:33:16] these underground tanks that are problematic,
[1:33:19] that leak, and that cost a lot of money to remove
[1:33:23] might be needing to remove them long before their shelf life.
[1:33:29] And a lot of times, some of that cost, that burden
[1:33:35] falls to the municipality.
[1:33:36] It's something to be concerned about.
[1:33:38] And once again, strongly urge you to keep the ordinance
[1:33:41] as it was adopted in 2022.
[1:33:44] Option one.
[1:33:44] Thank you.
[1:33:48] >> Thank you.
[1:33:49] >> Hello.
[1:33:50] My name is Matt Callaway.
[1:33:51] I'm a member of Sonoma County Conservation Action.
[1:33:54] I am urging you all to choose option one
[1:33:58] and leave the ordinance in place.
[1:34:00] The strongest terms, gas stations
[1:34:04] are not benign infrastructure.
[1:34:06] They emit carcinogenic and pollutants like benzene,
[1:34:09] threaten public health.
[1:34:11] They have problematic underground storage.
[1:34:14] This 2022 ordinance was smart.
[1:34:17] It balanced policy.
[1:34:19] And we don't need more gas stations in the city.
[1:34:23] I understand the need for fiscal solvency
[1:34:25] and bringing in large scale retailers.
[1:34:27] But the people of California and Sonoma County and Windsor
[1:34:31] have very little influence over how
[1:34:36] retailers see the economic need to come into the area as.
[1:34:46] The way that we can exert this influence over them
[1:34:48] is by having good policy that tells them
[1:34:50] that these gas stations are not wanted
[1:34:53] by the residents of those cities that come in.
[1:34:59] And the way we can really influence
[1:35:02] is making smart legislation like this.
[1:35:06] They still want to do business in our areas,
[1:35:08] but we don't need to fully capitulate
[1:35:12] to these economic models that, as we have heard, are crumbling.
[1:35:17] Thank you very much.
[1:35:18] We urge you to keep the ordinance as it is.
[1:35:24] >> Hello, good evening, mayor, Council members, city staff.
[1:35:28] My name is Brian.
[1:35:29] I'm with the California Fuels Alliance.
[1:35:31] I represent independent gas stations across the state
[1:35:33] including here in the town of Windsor.
[1:35:35] I am here just to urge you to consider a repeal
[1:35:39] of the ordinance 2022-366 as a remedy to the budgetary
[1:35:46] constraints that the town is facing.
[1:35:49] I just want to say that we understand that Windsor
[1:35:52] is facing a pretty big crisis.
[1:35:55] But if you go with option number three,
[1:35:57] it's an affront to the local businesses and the community
[1:36:01] members who have chosen to make Windsor their home.
[1:36:05] I just want to call attention to the fact that, as was mentioned,
[1:36:11] four gas stations alone in Windsor account for nearly 8%
[1:36:14] of total sales tax.
[1:36:15] And the ban just closes the door to any possibility
[1:36:17] of increasing those contributions, which
[1:36:20] would be helpful right now.
[1:36:21] Not to mention the band's role in reducing local employment
[1:36:24] and small business ownership opportunities,
[1:36:26] limiting consumer choice and also leaving Windsor's gas
[1:36:30] vehicle dependent population to people who can't afford --
[1:36:33] I think it is fantastic that we have all these grants
[1:36:36] and it's great if you can afford an electric powered vehicle.
[1:36:40] But unfortunately, not everyone can at this point in time.
[1:36:45] We are advocates for letting local businesses
[1:36:47] and local market response to market demand.
[1:36:50] By doing so by exempting big box retailers, like I said,
[1:36:56] it is an affront to the local businesses that
[1:36:59] have chosen to stay in Windsor.
[1:37:01] So today I'm just asking the council
[1:37:05] to seriously consider repealing the ordinance that bans new gas
[1:37:09] stations as a remedy to the challenges
[1:37:12] that the town faces tonight.
[1:37:15] Thank you.
[1:37:18] >> Good evening, everybody.
[1:37:22] I am Lionel enchanté.
[1:37:26] I represent the local gas station known
[1:37:28] as Redwood Oil or Aztec Grill.
[1:37:31] We have been here locally for decades.
[1:37:34] The area has been working with you
[1:37:36] to get the compilation of the expansion for the store
[1:37:42] every kitchen done.
[1:37:44] Started the business over 50 years ago.
[1:37:48] Peter retired, sold the company to a family, not a chain.
[1:37:56] The construction manager has been with us for over 40 years.
[1:38:00] The district manager with local list for over 26 years.
[1:38:05] The store manager has been with the company for 24 years.
[1:38:08] It is very local.
[1:38:10] We carry a lot of local product.
[1:38:13] We sell local jerky.
[1:38:16] # We are the #3 company nationally and revenue for --
[1:38:24] we purchase local brands.
[1:38:25] We are expanding our store.
[1:38:27] And we're going to have state of the art kitchen.
[1:38:29] What I'm trying to say here is --
[1:38:35] in my French accent might not be the best person to convey that.
[1:38:41] We have people who live here who are very committed
[1:38:45] to this community because they live here.
[1:38:47] They come at 3:30 a.m.
[1:38:49] To cook from scratch those burritos.
[1:38:52] They come to purchase them.
[1:38:55] And to see a major international retailer, say Costco,
[1:39:00] which is number three in the world with $270 billion,
[1:39:03] it is hard to compete with those people.
[1:39:05] We are happy to compete if we can,
[1:39:08] but if they are the only one who can,
[1:39:13] it doesn't seem fair competition to us.
[1:39:17] We do our best to be the best member of the community
[1:39:21] and how we employ, how we pay, how we support our customers.
[1:39:26] So we would like you to take that into account.
[1:39:29] We're investing a high single digit number of millions
[1:39:34] to improve our service and our products beyond the gas
[1:39:39] into the food and the retail piece.
[1:39:42] So thank you for opening your door to everybody.
[1:39:46] And I have confidence you'll be very wise.
[1:39:50] Thank you.
[1:39:52] >> Thank you.
[1:39:55] >> Hello, Council, mayor.
[1:39:57] My name is Jesse Laughlin.
[1:39:59] I have been a resident of Windsor for about 30 years.
[1:40:02] I am a former underground storage tank inspector
[1:40:05] for the State of California.
[1:40:06] I am returning to speak to you tonight
[1:40:09] to urge you to maintain the gas station ban
[1:40:11] ordinance with the amendments.
[1:40:13] I was encouraged when I read the agenda report
[1:40:15] and saw the actions the town has taken in the past ten years
[1:40:18] to protect and prioritize environmental resources,
[1:40:21] reduce greenhouse gases, and promote energy efficiency.
[1:40:25] It's also part of the reason I am so perplexed to be here
[1:40:28] before you tonight.
[1:40:29] Just down the road, where Windsor Road runs into Redwood
[1:40:35] Highway, there's a substantial parcel
[1:40:36] that is set mostly abandoned for as long as I can remember.
[1:40:39] I was not surprised to find that the site hasn't
[1:40:42] opened underground storage tank cleanup case.
[1:40:45] The state database Geo tracker shows the lake was first
[1:40:48] discovered in June of 1987.
[1:40:49] It is still being monitored for things like benzene toluene,
[1:40:54] ethylbenzene, and xylene.
[1:40:56] This is not uncommon.
[1:40:58] This is the legacy of underground storage tanks.
[1:41:01] There is an underground storage tank Inspector.
[1:41:03] My primary goal was to protect our precious brown from threats
[1:41:07] exactly like this.
[1:41:09] IN 2012, monitoring on the Windsor Road site
[1:41:13] comment we are still having detections
[1:41:15] of diesel 25 years later.
[1:41:16] Makes me concerned for neighboring domestic wells.
[1:41:19] I didn't have to look very far for an extreme case of a U.S. T
[1:41:23] got wrong.
[1:41:24] You have to look down the road from where we sit tonight.
[1:41:26] We don't need more of this in Windsor.
[1:41:28] We should be investing in infrastructure
[1:41:30] that supports more sustainable and healthier future,
[1:41:34] not infrastructure that has been proven time and time again
[1:41:36] to be harmful to our health and our environment.
[1:41:39] Change starts with the local jurisdictions.
[1:41:42] Change can be very hard.
[1:41:44] But Windsor already made that hard decision.
[1:41:46] And we do not need corporate big box stores in Windsor.
[1:41:49] Small local businesses, business owners
[1:41:52] are who we need to invest in and support.
[1:41:54] The town of Windsor should continue
[1:41:56] to lead the way to a healthier future.
[1:41:58] And please continue to look forward and maintain
[1:42:01] this ordinance.
[1:42:02] Thanks for letting me speak.
[1:42:03] I appreciate your time.
[1:42:11] >> Good evening.
[1:42:11] Rich Carnation.
[1:42:12] I'm speaking on behalf of myself.
[1:42:15] >> I'm going to ask that.
[1:42:16] >> And on behalf of my company.
[1:42:18] I'm going to do my best not to speak any French,
[1:42:22] but this is an irritating subject for me.
[1:42:25] People talk about environmental stuff.
[1:42:28] Just so you guys know, I am all for affordable advantages. ---
[1:42:36] alternative energies.
[1:42:37] I've got two patents that are alternative energy stuff.
[1:42:39] I understand that.
[1:42:40] But we don't have it here yet.
[1:42:42] People talk about if we have a gas station,
[1:42:44] we're going to increase or whatever.
[1:42:47] We already are.
[1:42:48] We're just buying our product in another town.
[1:42:52] We're not buying it here.
[1:42:54] So whatever we are doing, we are doing it here,
[1:42:57] we are buying it there.
[1:43:00] So conformal count.
[1:43:03] I count of one person from Windsor who spoke tonight.
[1:43:05] I am number two.
[1:43:06] Everyone else is from somewhere else.
[1:43:09] One of the gentlemen talked about riding a bike.
[1:43:13] I'm curious if anybody rode a bike to the meeting
[1:43:17] here from Santa Rosa.
[1:43:20] I don't think so.
[1:43:23] I have 80, 90 trucks that we drive.
[1:43:27] We don't buy any of our fuel in Windsor.
[1:43:29] We did for a short period of time
[1:43:31] after we had our meeting a couple of months ago.
[1:43:33] The shell station dropped their price a lot.
[1:43:39] Hey, I went in and I bought fuel there.
[1:43:42] I told the gal, do me a favor.
[1:43:45] Let your management know that I'm
[1:43:46] buying my fuel here because you guys dropped your price.
[1:43:49] And they did.
[1:43:50] And we started buying our fuel there.
[1:43:52] And then about three weeks went by,
[1:43:55] and none of the other stations dropped.
[1:43:57] They raised their price back up.
[1:43:59] So we don't buy it anymore.
[1:44:01] We are like 50,000, 60,000 bucks a month of fuel we don't buy
[1:44:12] in our town.
[1:44:13] I get more in trouble because I cheated about Windsor
[1:44:15] than I do about almost anything else paramedic
[1:44:17] but it's not about Costco either.
[1:44:19] Costco is just a company that said that they
[1:44:24] might want to be here.
[1:44:26] If they were going to come here, fuel had to be part of it.
[1:44:30] Somebody mentioned about their business model.
[1:44:32] That is true.
[1:44:34] I don't know if somebody asked a question earlier about
[1:44:37] if there's a gas station, has anybody expressed interest?
[1:44:42] I'm letting you know right now, if you lift the ban,
[1:44:45] I know at least one person who would put in a station.
[1:44:50] And it is me.
[1:44:51] Because right now I can make the money off my own company
[1:44:55] that we're not losing.
[1:45:00] You have somebody who would put a gas station in Windsor.
[1:45:03] I haven't ran one before, but I know I could figure it out.
[1:45:08] Wouldn't be a problem for me so I still have a minute left over
[1:45:12] from the other --
[1:45:13] I'm just kidding.
[1:45:14] Bottom line is the people in our town,
[1:45:19] are the ones who actually buy or could buy the fuel are not
[1:45:23] because the prices are so high.
[1:45:25] Economics is what will drive this.
[1:45:36] >> Hi, Betsy Mallis.
[1:45:37] I live here in Windsor so I am person number three.
[1:45:41] Much to my chagrin, I have to agree
[1:45:45] with my friend Mr. Carnation.
[1:45:48] People are still going to drive cars in Windsor.
[1:45:52] People right now are driving out of Windsor to buy their gas.
[1:45:57] Our gas right now is $0.50 higher in Windsor.
[1:46:00] Is that because we have four stations
[1:46:02] and those four stations have a monopoly?
[1:46:04] I don't know if we have I know that Healdsburg and Santa Rosa
[1:46:09] has gas that's usually between 30 and $0.50 less than Windsor.
[1:46:15] Nobody is driving less than Windsor
[1:46:19] because there is no more gas stations.
[1:46:21] A couple of unrelated points to think
[1:46:24] about, both Safeway and Walmart, two big stores in Windsor
[1:46:29] already operate gas stations in other parts of California.
[1:46:32] It is a model that works for them in other places.
[1:46:37] No reason it couldn't work for us here in Windsor.
[1:46:40] If we develop the north of Arata area
[1:46:44] and we get our long awaited extra on ramp from the freeway,
[1:46:49] there is going to need to be a gas station.
[1:46:53] People need to fill up their cars.
[1:46:55] In emergencies, our four centrally located gas stations
[1:47:00] are not going to you for all the additional development
[1:47:05] that is going into Windsor.
[1:47:08] I understand in 1987 the rules in place
[1:47:11] to put gas and oil into tanks and into the town calling it
[1:47:16] into the ground was much different than it
[1:47:18] is today in 2026.
[1:47:22] I just urge you to consider removing this ban
[1:47:27] and seeing what additional gas stations could come
[1:47:33] to Windsor, not only to bring additional tax
[1:47:36] dollars to Windsor, which we know need,
[1:47:39] but to really service the people of Windsor.
[1:47:45] This is a regressive ban.
[1:47:46] The people who are going to be moving
[1:47:47] into the northern part of Windsor
[1:47:48] will not have a place to get gas.
[1:47:50] Their only option will be to go up to the Healdsburg
[1:47:53] and purchase a necessity they need in a town other
[1:47:57] than Windsor.
[1:47:58] So I know this is a touchy subject
[1:48:01] and I would love to say if we don't put any more gas
[1:48:04] stations in, people aren't going to drive cars anymore.
[1:48:07] It is just not a reality here in Windsor.
[1:48:11] And maybe in some other places, but it is not here.
[1:48:14] So I really encourage you to continue
[1:48:16] to look into repealing this ban and seeing
[1:48:22] what it means to Windsor.
[1:48:24] Thank you.
[1:48:35] >> Good evening, Council.
[1:48:39] Do you remember the Kincade Fire?
[1:48:45] Do you remember when the mandatory evacuation order came
[1:48:48] out and the huge lines of vehicles
[1:48:50] lined up to get gas in order to leave town?
[1:48:57] That is why we can use another gas station or two in town.
[1:49:02] Just common sense and safety.
[1:49:06] Even if we had an extra station or two
[1:49:10] does it mean we'd be pumping any additional gasoline or diesel
[1:49:14] fuel.
[1:49:17] It just would mean we would have more here.
[1:49:25] So I urge you to reverse the ban.
[1:49:28] Thank you thank you
[1:49:30] >> Thank you.
[1:49:31] Anyone else from the public?
[1:49:33] I'm going to bring it back to the Council.
[1:49:36] Can you put the slide on the three options that we had?
[1:49:47] Yes, please, thank you.
[1:49:49] So again, I just want to add that we brought this back
[1:49:54] because of a hearsay, something we heard from someone who
[1:50:00] heard something from someone, and there is no real evidence
[1:50:04] that someone is interested.
[1:50:06] And so we are here to talk about what do we see for Windsor?
[1:50:13] What is the future of?
[1:50:17] I just lost my train of thought and I
[1:50:21] so anyway, I will let someone else start the conversation
[1:50:26] and I will add my thoughts later.
[1:50:34] >> Sure.
[1:50:35] So back in April, when we talked about this,
[1:50:39] I was one of the ones who said yeah,
[1:50:41] I'd like to have a little bit of research done on this,
[1:50:44] and let's talk about it for a while.
[1:50:50] I used to post something here.
[1:50:52] I have been getting it wrong.
[1:50:54] I want to correct my record here.
[1:50:56] This was something said in the movie 1776
[1:51:01] by Stephen Hopkins, the delegate from Rhode Island.
[1:51:05] In all my years, I ain't never heard, seen,
[1:51:10] nor smelled an issue that was so dangerous it
[1:51:12] couldn't be talked about.
[1:51:14] And so that is where I came tonight to hear these.
[1:51:21] And I have heard some -- both sides of the story.
[1:51:26] I was surprised.
[1:51:27] I ran for my seat here as the environmental candidate
[1:51:33] in which I still am.
[1:51:35] You can believe that.
[1:51:36] I am here gathering information.
[1:51:39] I thought it was especially enjoyable to have
[1:51:41] Betsy Malice tell a couple jokes that I
[1:51:44] don't hear that happen a lot.
[1:51:46] Thank you very much, Betsy.
[1:51:49] There was an option on the original sheet.
[1:51:52] It was number four, which was something akin to do nothing,
[1:51:59] which is --
[1:52:01] >>Number one.
[1:52:03] >> Pardon me?
[1:52:04] Which is very close to number one.
[1:52:06] But it was number four on the original sheet of paper.
[1:52:14] I am really happy to have had this discussion,
[1:52:18] to hear various aspects, to get some more information out
[1:52:22] as we did, which was what we asked for in the first place.
[1:52:25] In my opinion is that we should do nothing and think about it
[1:52:30] for a while .
[1:52:35] >> So yeah, who wants to go next?
[1:52:36] I don't have to go last, but -- fine.
[1:52:43] I'll go.
[1:52:45] Yeah, no, I can't decide.
[1:52:49] Please.
[1:52:50] >> I just want to say, I 100% appreciate the emphasis
[1:52:55] on sustainability and protecting the environment.
[1:52:59] But I think we need to understand
[1:53:03] that gas station bans do not significantly
[1:53:06] impact consumption of fuel.
[1:53:09] They impact where you purchase fuel.
[1:53:11] If we ban gas stations, we're not driving --
[1:53:15] no is going to say we have a gas station down here I'm not going
[1:53:19] to drive.
[1:53:19] That's just not how it works.
[1:53:21] I was doing a little research before this meeting.
[1:53:23] There is no data that says that Petaluma's ban has any impact
[1:53:27] whatsoever on fuel consumption.
[1:53:29] I think we need to understand that this ban is not
[1:53:33] pushing people out of their cars and into EVs or bicycles.
[1:53:37] I think that is important to set as a standard to start with.
[1:53:44] But then also, we hear some talk in this conversation
[1:53:48] about demand or how much utilization is down.
[1:53:54] If we are trending away from fossil fuels,
[1:53:58] nobody's going to build a gas station.
[1:54:00] We don't need a ban.
[1:54:02] If the business model is moving away from that,
[1:54:05] no one is going to open a gas station.
[1:54:06] If there is demand, someone will open one.
[1:54:09] I think we should let the markets
[1:54:12] and the free enterprise dictate whether or not
[1:54:14] they want to build one and not say we're
[1:54:17] going to put rules and regulations in place because we
[1:54:20] know the trends better.
[1:54:21] We don't know the trends better than the entrepreneurs
[1:54:23] in the free market.
[1:54:25] Those are my thoughts.
[1:54:27] I just don't think this is going to accomplish what
[1:54:29] people want it to accomplish.
[1:54:31] >> Councilmember Salmon.
[1:54:38] >> Interesting.
[1:54:39] A gas station ban is based on -- our current ones based
[1:54:46] on a policy to support climate action.
[1:54:48] Simple as that.
[1:54:49] You have all testified at.
[1:54:50] Not all of you, but a number of you testified.
[1:54:54] And that is really what it is.
[1:55:00] If there is a hell, we might be seeing it
[1:55:04] with what is going on on the earth right
[1:55:05] now provide like to live in Spokane?
[1:55:09] Want to relive coffee bar?
[1:55:14] The experts say it's somewhat the blame is global warming.
[1:55:22] So I think it's really important that the gas station ban
[1:55:27] as a policy is very important.
[1:55:29] For me this item came up not based on gas.
[1:55:36] It came up on retail leakage.
[1:55:40] And what council are you doing to increase revenues
[1:55:42] in this town?
[1:55:43] And I say that with kind of a sarcasm
[1:55:47] because that is what we have heard loud and clear.
[1:55:50] And our retail leakage is a real fact.
[1:55:55] I can ask you.
[1:55:58] And how can we address it?
[1:55:59] We're not going to get a MacY's.
[1:56:01] We're not going to get any of those stores, in my opinion.
[1:56:08] We might be able to get a Costco.
[1:56:11] Not because Costco wants to come here or has an interest.
[1:56:14] We may be able to reach out to them
[1:56:16] and say I think we have one location.
[1:56:20] Only one.
[1:56:22] And we might be able to reach out and say we're interested.
[1:56:27] And we know what Costco is going to say
[1:56:29] if they are interested in.
[1:56:30] They're going to say, you know our model.
[1:56:33] They have actually even changed their model
[1:56:36] if you read the paper.
[1:56:37] They have gone to standalone gas stations now in places.
[1:56:42] It is very interesting because someone testified
[1:56:45] the reason Costco gas is so cheap is
[1:56:47] because they want membership.
[1:56:49] But if you put a gas station only,
[1:56:52] then it doesn't really follow the membership, the shopping.
[1:56:58] But that was what I'm interested in is
[1:57:01] if we have that opportunity, at the time it comes, we address it
[1:57:10] and it'll be a decision at that time.
[1:57:11] I'm pretty much solid on number one based on the testimony.
[1:57:14] And where we are at.
[1:57:17] We get a new gas station, but there
[1:57:21] is nothing to be said that the gas is going
[1:57:23] to be any cheaper than the three gas
[1:57:27] stations we have now, which their prices have always
[1:57:30] been the same.
[1:57:33] We have four.
[1:57:35] Two down in Shiloh and two in central.
[1:57:41] So if this was a discussion I felt we needed to have,
[1:57:47] and I also think it is a discussion
[1:57:49] to know that at a time in the future, we might return to it.
[1:57:58] But for me, it will be specifically
[1:58:01] for a certain big box store that can guarantee us
[1:58:05] that we will address some of our retail leakage.
[1:58:11] And it's dramatic.
[1:58:14] We see that in what we spend in Windsor on sales tax.
[1:58:21] We are spending it in the other towns.
[1:58:25] I think that is really what I wanted to say.
[1:58:30] But another gas station doesn't necessarily
[1:58:33] mean that we're going to see lower prices.
[1:58:36] It doesn't mean that we will really see more sales tax.
[1:58:43] But I think a big-box retailers such as Costco,
[1:58:51] definitely we would see retail sales tax increased dramatically
[1:58:55] $1 million a year.
[1:58:57] And I think we're in the right location.
[1:58:59] And I don't think it would really
[1:59:02] compete with our other commercial big box
[1:59:04] stores The Walmart Center.
[1:59:06] I think we need to really be cognizant of that comparison.
[1:59:11] There was testimony about how the big box will
[1:59:14] hurt local businesses purely I think we need to look at that.
[1:59:19] I think the people that shop at Costco
[1:59:23] they will shop at the local businesses about the same.
[1:59:26] With a different market.
[1:59:29] You don't have clothing stores in my estimation
[1:59:33] for-- enough clothing stores to draw people to shop retail.
[1:59:41] They retail in Santa Rosa.
[1:59:46] >> I want to thank everybody for giving comments.
[1:59:48] I appreciated this discussion and wanted
[1:59:50] to bring this back so we could discuss it
[1:59:53] and that we can hear from everyone.
[1:59:54] I think that after hearing all the sides tonight and also
[2:00:00] hearing from Council, I do support number three, which
[2:00:08] is further analysis.
[2:00:09] And that is because I absolutely believe
[2:00:12] that we need to be environmentally
[2:00:15] responsible and very aware of what our own policies are.
[2:00:20] But also I want to explore -- so I don't want it to be that
[2:00:26] it's possible that this council might be interested in a big box
[2:00:30] store that could bring in a gas station.
[2:00:32] But then there's not a policy ready to go
[2:00:34] for something like that.
[2:00:36] And that we haven't done any vetting on it ahead of time.
[2:00:38] Because I think if we can do some of that vetting now
[2:00:41] and we can look through some of the different policy options,
[2:00:46] while keeping the ban in place right now
[2:00:48] but looking to the future and the possibility that,
[2:00:51] then we are ready and we really know
[2:00:54] and are informed as to what this council wants to look at.
[2:00:57] And if we would consider an amendments
[2:01:01] to the current policy.
[2:01:06] We know -- I've heard it here tonight.
[2:01:07] $60,000 a month in retail leakage just from one company
[2:01:10] because of the fuel.
[2:01:11] That's a significant amount of money that the town of Windsor
[2:01:14] is not receiving.
[2:01:15] And it is not -- that company is not purchasing gas.
[2:01:24] They're not polluting the air.
[2:01:25] They're still doing that.
[2:01:26] They're just doing it in a different town,
[2:01:30] than driving here and driving all the way up there.
[2:01:32] That's still happening common with the town of Windsor
[2:01:34] is losing out on all that.
[2:01:38] We have said we want to be open to revenue sources for the town.
[2:01:44] We have a $4 million structural deficit.
[2:01:46] To have bans in place that limit our revenue sources
[2:01:50] and limit our employee employment abilities in town,
[2:01:54] those are opposing things.
[2:01:58] So we can't say we're open to any sort of revenue
[2:02:00] and trying to build our budget when we were saying
[2:02:02] we're going to ban types of businesses
[2:02:04] from coming into town, once we know we can potentially
[2:02:08] bring in tax dollars.
[2:02:09] And that doesn't mean we're saying throw everything out
[2:02:13] and the environment doesn't matter.
[2:02:15] It's does a company that's coming in that potentially
[2:02:22] requires a gas station comment what kind of mitigations
[2:02:24] do they have?
[2:02:25] What technology do they have in 2026 that's
[2:02:27] going to limit fuel leakage and it's
[2:02:28] going to limit the environmental impacts?
[2:02:30] Because we know the environmental impacts
[2:02:32] from a gas station are not the same today in 2026
[2:02:34] as they were when I started driving in 1996, 95.
[2:02:44] What I'm saying, I'm not trying to make a joke about.
[2:02:48] I'm trying to be serious that we know the technology gets
[2:02:50] better and better every year.
[2:02:52] Let me know that the impacts to our environment
[2:02:55] are very significant.
[2:02:56] They are significant to this council.
[2:02:59] Their to the residents of the town of Windsor.
[2:03:01] But we know they get better.
[2:03:03] So are we going to be completely closed down to that or are
[2:03:05] we going to keep going forward and trying
[2:03:07] to see if there is a policy that is potentially just
[2:03:09] right for the town of Windsor that allows us to maybe have
[2:03:12] these revenue options in the future that also allows us
[2:03:16] to keep our strict environmental policies that we currently have.
[2:03:22] Thank you.
[2:03:25] >> So with that discussion conversation that the vice mayor
[2:03:30] just mentioned, can you explain the difference between three
[2:03:34] and two?
[2:03:36] Because I want to be mindful of our staff time and what
[2:03:42] each of those would look like.
[2:03:45] Could the items that you brought up right now, vice mayor,
[2:03:48] could that be taken care of by choosing item number two instead
[2:03:52] of three?
[2:03:57] Is it just a less -- >> If I could,
[2:04:05] I believe that the purpose behind or the thought behind
[2:04:09] option number two would be to look at rescinding the ban,
[2:04:13] whether it be for large retail, which also has an association
[2:04:18] gas station, as well as a standalone gas station.
[2:04:21] Really rescinding the bank of.
[2:04:24] >> Number two.
[2:04:27] >>, but for number three, that was more of that concept of did
[2:04:30] we want to look at the potential of a zoning ordinance,
[2:04:33] zoning amendments that would only entertain the thought
[2:04:37] of a gas station if it was associated with a large retail
[2:04:40] in the gateway zoning district.
[2:04:43] Does that help?
[2:04:46] >> It does help.
[2:04:47] Thank you.
[2:04:48] I wanted to start off by saying as someone who had given up
[2:04:51] driving their gas car 80% of the time,
[2:04:54] because I'm taking public transportation,
[2:05:00] I wasn't doing it for environmental reasons.
[2:05:03] I was doing it because I started thinking train
[2:05:06] and I'm like, wow, this is amazing.
[2:05:13] The education, it's unfortunate that we still need it out there
[2:05:18] for people to get out of their -- fuel their car.
[2:05:24] But then I did buy a new vehicle and it's gas.
[2:05:27] So it is not as easy as we think to transfer to EV,
[2:05:35] to transfer your lifestyle.
[2:05:37] It took me over a year to get on the train.
[2:05:40] So we still need to do more work in Sonoma County.
[2:05:49] But another perspective I wanted to bring
[2:05:51] is that in Windsor, I always heard live, work, and play.
[2:05:57] If we live here, we don't work here.
[2:05:59] The majority work outside of the town of Windsor.
[2:06:02] I go all the way to Nevada for work.
[2:06:06] But I am also hearing so many people,
[2:06:09] they literally drive to Costco only to get gas.
[2:06:15] And I know that.
[2:06:16] I know a lot of people who do that.
[2:06:18] I'm not making it up for the sake of making it up.
[2:06:22] And so I was leaning towards number one
[2:06:28] because we don't have any interested parties.
[2:06:31] I want to trust our staff.
[2:06:34] I want to trust that we can connect with these companies.
[2:06:38] And at a later point we can come back and discuss this.
[2:06:41] But then I heard comments from the building
[2:06:45] over 300 homes and that on and off ramp
[2:06:49] and whereas the gas station going to go?
[2:06:51] So I'm still open to any of these options tonight.
[2:06:59] Like council member salmon said, we do.
[2:07:03] Our job here is to look at a bigger picture, bigger window,
[2:07:08] and not just one, even though it is in our sustainability
[2:07:13] language about protecting our environment.
[2:07:19] I understand that.
[2:07:21] But we have so many different things that we are looking at.
[2:07:24] So I'm not even sure what I'm going to do here tonight.
[2:07:26] Did you want to share something?
[2:07:28] >> Patrick Stewart, community director, again,
[2:07:32] this is not an action item.
[2:07:34] I'm not going to be looking for a motion or amendments
[2:07:36] or anything like that.
[2:07:37] We're really just looking for direction from the staff,
[2:07:40] taking a temperatur of what direction you'd like to go.
[2:07:45] With that said, number one is pretty clear.
[2:07:48] If we feel overwhelmingly from the council
[2:07:50] that we should dictate no further action at this time,
[2:07:53] that is clear to staff.
[2:07:55] But two and three don't have to be mutually exclusive.
[2:07:58] Two this does the Council generally
[2:08:00] feel that we should be exploring a certain policy?
[2:08:03] Be that full repeal, should we be
[2:08:05] looking at a policy that would just
[2:08:06] have a carve out for certain types of retailers?
[2:08:08] And number three is are there certain factors
[2:08:11] that the council would like more information about?
[2:08:13] So more information about the economic impact of a new gas
[2:08:17] station standalone, economic impact of a large retailer
[2:08:21] and where that would go.
[2:08:23] So we could combine two and three
[2:08:26] if there's general interest in developing a draft ordinance
[2:08:29] that would have a carve out.
[2:08:31] What kind of information would be helpful for the council
[2:08:34] to decide whether to adopt that ordinance for instance?
[2:08:37] That's the information that we are looking for.
[2:08:39] Does the Council just want to table this until a future date
[2:08:44] or should staff be committing staff
[2:08:46] time to coming up with draft ordinances or doing research?
[2:08:50] >> That was my point is what kind of staff time are we
[2:08:54] talking about when there's really nothing on the table.
[2:08:59] So that's where I want to talk with you.
[2:09:02] >> Can I make a comment?
[2:09:05] You might remember that I'm going
[2:09:07] to guess it was six months ago.
[2:09:08] It may have been longer than that where
[2:09:10] we had the discussion of poems home owners Association having
[2:09:15] to deal with Castaneda's store.
[2:09:19] And we got in this tizzy like this.
[2:09:22] I think it might have been me.
[2:09:26] I made the suggestion.
[2:09:27] I don't think we'd have enough answers.
[2:09:30] Not only to make a decision but to even
[2:09:32] know what we are deciding on.
[2:09:33] And so I suggest that we just back off for a second tier.
[2:09:39] We all have plenty of time.
[2:09:41] This is not happening tomorrow or the next months.
[2:09:45] And we all talk to town manager Davis frequently.
[2:09:52] And he can judge where we are heading
[2:09:57] and maybe value some things we might want to ask.
[2:10:00] And then sometime at a later date
[2:10:02] we will come back and address it again.
[2:10:04] This is not happening tonight.
[2:10:06] A decision is not happening tonight.
[2:10:09] Direction is not even happening tonight.
[2:10:11] That is my opinion.
[2:10:13] We just back off a little bit.
[2:10:16] We will talk to John for a while.
[2:10:18] And maybe come back for more
[2:10:20] >> Thank you for your direction.
[2:10:21] Anyone else?
[2:10:23] >> If I could, thank you, JB.
[2:10:28] I think we need to understand we will hold off providing
[2:10:32] direction on the zoning change.
[2:10:34] But I think we go forward on a economic development platform.
[2:10:43] Tim, I think that is direction I would like to give
[2:10:48] is that now we've had a public hearing where the council has
[2:10:53] talked about a big box retail.
[2:10:56] And we believe there requirements of a gas station.
[2:11:01] So we have that card to go out and to at least
[2:11:07] talk to a Costco or a store like that.
[2:11:10] So they know we have an interest.
[2:11:12] But they also know we have a bad.
[2:11:14] And they would be able to ask us, well, how are you
[2:11:20] going to deal with your band?
[2:11:22] And then I think we can come up with these other questions.
[2:11:25] What site are you talking to about?
[2:11:28] That is the bigger one.
[2:11:29] There was only one site.
[2:11:31] As far as we know, they don't want to sell.
[2:11:34] So it's kind of an easy question.
[2:11:39] That's my understanding.
[2:11:40] I know of the site.
[2:11:42] I don't think there's any others in my estimation.
[2:11:44] They don't want to sell, but they are not,
[2:11:47] from what we can guess, they are not
[2:11:49] going to go forward with their planned development.
[2:11:52] And so the land is there apparently
[2:11:55] so that is what I would say is we go forward.
[2:11:59] We look at it as an economic development issue
[2:12:01] and try our best to do our best to really address
[2:12:05] this retail leakage.
[2:12:08] It's the one area we can make some progress in where
[2:12:15] I don't see us making progress in tourism.
[2:12:18] What a sad thing and hotels in bankruptcy,
[2:12:27] hotels unable to be built.
[2:12:31] >> Thank you.
[2:12:31] I want to say one of the ways that we
[2:12:35] signal businesses to be interested in Windsor
[2:12:39] is through our policies.
[2:12:40] So if we have a policy that says we have a ban on gas stations
[2:12:45] and there is no carve out in our policy,
[2:12:50] that signals to them that we are not interested in doing business
[2:12:52] with them.
[2:12:53] And that is how policies work.
[2:12:56] That is the whole reason for policies is really a policy out,
[2:13:00] and then that tells developers where they can build housing,
[2:13:05] where they can build retail, where
[2:13:07] they can build all the things.
[2:13:08] If they are not working towards letting businesses
[2:13:11] know that that is something that we might consider in the future,
[2:13:16] they look at our policy and go, if they
[2:13:20] didn't watch this town council meeting, they don't know.
[2:13:23] They look at our policy and go, they have a ban on gas stations
[2:13:28] and we can't build in Windsor.
[2:13:29] They are not interested.
[2:13:31] And that is what policy is.
[2:13:33] I know that you know that, Council member Sam.
[2:13:36] And I appreciate that you are interested in stopping
[2:13:39] retail leakage because it really is a significant thing that we
[2:13:42] saw in our presentations.
[2:13:44] >> What I'm saying is we need to be proactive.
[2:13:47] The cardboard is not necessarily proactive.
[2:13:50] We go to the specific entity that we
[2:13:54] are looking at, which is different than what we normally
[2:13:56] do.
[2:13:57] We have a general plan called General Plan
[2:14:00] it is not specific to.
[2:14:02] It is called General.
[2:14:03] That's when you have carve outs and zoning.
[2:14:06] But I think in this position, we're able to go out
[2:14:10] and say we are interested.
[2:14:11] Here is what we think we can do.
[2:14:15] If you're interested-- I've talked to Patrick
[2:14:19] about the costs of environmental workup.
[2:14:21] It could be half $1 million on the town.
[2:14:27] But that is why this has to be a sign of a development agreement.
[2:14:34] Has to be proactive.
[2:14:37] >> For the mayor, if I may, we are not taking a vote.
[2:14:40] We don't even need to do a straw poll.
[2:14:42] All comments made by council members,
[2:14:44] and it seems like you're in agreement on some things,
[2:14:47] there's different thoughts on other things.
[2:14:49] That is all being heard by staff and ultimately
[2:14:51] how we use the staff resources is going to be a town manager
[2:14:55] decision, and then as a department head
[2:14:57] I will allocate staff time to doing research and drafting up
[2:15:00] reports on everything.
[2:15:01] When we get requests from the council to bring something
[2:15:04] forward, that's when --
[2:15:07] whether or not we are prepared for during that,
[2:15:10] that's going to be the timeline we're looking at.
[2:15:12] So regular meetings with the town manager
[2:15:14] are going to face how we do this research.
[2:15:16] In the interest of--
[2:15:17] I'm sure we could debate this all night, but at this time
[2:15:21] I think staff has heard enough.
[2:15:23] >> If I could step in, thank you, director, mayor,
[2:15:26] just briefly.
[2:15:27] I see the council struggling with this.
[2:15:29] I believe right now we've had interest in tabling the issue
[2:15:33] and not continuing to discuss it.
[2:15:35] At that point we can always keep our ears open
[2:15:39] and we can always do further outreach
[2:15:41] and try to make connectivity with some
[2:15:43] of these potential retailers.
[2:15:45] I have also heard that there is a interest in either repealing
[2:15:50] or doing further research on a carve out.
[2:15:56] And so we are split there.
[2:16:02] If we don't come to consensus tonight,
[2:16:04] we do need consensus in that area.
[2:16:08] In order to know if we should do what directors Twitter is saying
[2:16:11] and allocate more staff time, we can always also let this go
[2:16:15] tonight and come back at a time in the future and discuss it
[2:16:19] again for now but I think I am looking at you, may --
[2:16:29] Mayor Reynoza.
[2:16:31] >> What was your decision, one, two, or three?
[2:16:34] I didn't hear which one you had.
[2:16:37] >> I prefer the two, three hybrid.
[2:16:42] >> Me?
[2:16:45] >> If you would, mayor, and I don't mean to put you
[2:16:48] on the spot, but we do need to have some direction to staff
[2:16:51] tonight.
[2:16:54] >> I would like to make another comment.
[2:16:56] That is that we have not discussed
[2:16:58] the environmental impacts and having a strong evaluation
[2:17:02] of the environmental impacts of a gas station,
[2:17:05] whether it is rooted in the ground, how many people drive
[2:17:09] here, don't drive here.
[2:17:11] All those variables.
[2:17:13] And whether or not they are-- if you
[2:17:17] listen to the environmental folks talk, it is all negative.
[2:17:20] But we really need to go back and have a look at it ourselves.
[2:17:25] In addition to the information we are getting from hearsay.
[2:17:29] So this is why I asked the question a few minutes ago
[2:17:33] where I said we need to have to look into that.
[2:17:38] We have looked into is leakage, where it's going to go,
[2:17:42] where it might go.
[2:17:43] What we took that way.
[2:17:44] What we may come back and say, no, environmental risks
[2:17:47] are too high?
[2:17:48] And we have not had that analysis.
[2:17:51] >> The only way we're going to have that analysis is if the --
[2:17:54] >> Is by asking for that analysis.
[2:17:57] >> 2 or 3.
[2:17:57] Are you asking you a hybrid of 2 and 3?
[2:18:05] # >> #2 talks about how to make the amendment.
[2:18:08] I am not at all saying that.
[2:18:10] What I am saying is we don't have enough information
[2:18:13] on environmental impact to determine
[2:18:18] whether we should do any kind of amendment or anything like that.
[2:18:21] We may come out of this after looking at it and saying
[2:18:24] the environment -- which is what they did over the past few years
[2:18:28] is to come up with a solution, which was to ban gas stations
[2:18:34] because of the environmental impact, essentially.
[2:18:36] So I expect that we will have conversations on that.
[2:18:40] I certainly will be bringing it up again.
[2:18:43] I don't have enough information from the town's point of view
[2:18:45] to make a recommendation that is not
[2:18:49] fact based on climate impacts.
[2:18:56] >> I was just trying to read out my vote being the final one.
[2:19:00] Back when this motion happened, you and I were on the council.
[2:19:04] I remember specifically one of us asked, can this be rescinded?
[2:19:10] The environmental is so important.
[2:19:13] It hard what's happening with all the fires.
[2:19:16] Climate action is so important to them
[2:19:19] that but I remember specifically saying
[2:19:21] this can be rescinded later because we never
[2:19:24] know what's going to-- who is going to approach us,
[2:19:27] the reason.
[2:19:28] For that reason and the fiscal responsibility where we are at,
[2:19:34] unfortunately retail is important?
[2:19:36] Our sales tax staying in Windsor, the type of employment
[2:19:42] you can have so people don't have to drive out of Windsor
[2:19:44] to work would be amazing for a big place like this.
[2:19:50] I will go ahead and say number three.
[2:19:55] >> If I could, mayor, to put a bow on this a little bit,
[2:19:59] I have read that different varying interests in council.
[2:20:03] Two directly Streeter's point is we could do research
[2:20:06] on the amendment to a ban that could include discussion points,
[2:20:13] whether it be for gas stations in general or gas stations
[2:20:18] only associated with big box retail.
[2:20:20] I think what we'd be asking staff
[2:20:22] to do is bring back additional information on what the zoning
[2:20:26] code amendment might look like to allow gas station only
[2:20:32] when an accessory to a large retail establishment and also
[2:20:37] including some of the impacts that a gas station that
[2:20:39] is sustainable might have.
[2:20:40] We are not making a decision at this time to ban or peel back.
[2:20:44] We're just asking for more information for consideration.
[2:20:49] Also as Council Member Lee asked for,
[2:20:51] we can bring back some general more high level environmental.
[2:20:54] But until we have a decision made by council
[2:20:57] where we want to go, we don't want to dive
[2:21:00] into the expenses of the environmental.
[2:21:01] But we can certainly pull down some information
[2:21:03] that is enough to help this conversation for now
[2:21:08] bring back more information >> Yes thank you
[2:21:17] >> I'm just looking for nodding heads for discussion.
[2:21:23] >> Looking at this gas station affiliated with a certain big
[2:21:25] box home and also in my estimation a certain parcel I .
[2:21:33] Because that certain parcel may not cancel out.
[2:21:38] It may not be constrained just for gas stations
[2:21:40] but for the use.
[2:21:41] That's it.
[2:21:42] It's game over.
[2:21:43] I just need to make sure that that is my position.
[2:21:48] >> So with that said, Council salmon,
[2:21:51] you would be more interested in staff spending their time
[2:21:54] on a more focused associated with a big box.
[2:22:01] >> Look at if we even have a place to accommodate a big box
[2:22:07] and with the necessity of a gas station.
[2:22:09] We don't know that.
[2:22:10] I see a parcel out there, but it has a creek running through it.
[2:22:17] >> So I think we have three then that are looking at potentially
[2:22:21] that focus.
[2:22:22] We can also bring down other information.
[2:22:25] But that is where we will spend some of staff time.
[2:22:30] >> You have direction on?
[2:22:32] Thank you.
[2:22:34] >> Thank you.
[2:22:36] Thank you, everybody.
[2:22:38] Okay, we are moving on to 15.1, individual council member
[2:22:44] reports or comments.
[2:22:45] I don't have any tonight.
[2:22:46] Who would like to start?
[2:22:49] >> I will go ahead and start.
[2:22:52] I attended National Night Out last night, which was great.
[2:22:55] I appreciate the chief and the Windsor Police Department
[2:23:01] for putting that together and having that event for us.
[2:23:03] I thought it was super cute that our town movie last night was
[2:23:06] also Zootopia, which had cute little police officer
[2:23:09] Bunny to go in conjunction with our National Night Out.
[2:23:15] Also this morning I attended the Business Alliance meeting,
[2:23:19] talking to the businesses about our tax measure
[2:23:23] and what that means in our budget and the way
[2:23:27] that our structural deficit looks like right now.
[2:23:29] So we talk a lot about it was hosted by Santa Rosa.
[2:23:32] So I was there with Santa Rosa and Wrotham Park
[2:23:35] was there also talking about their tax measures.
[2:23:37] Also attended the strategic Transit Plan workshop
[2:23:43] that was here at the visitors center talking about ways
[2:23:47] that we can try to help Sonoma County Transit be more efficient
[2:23:52] and to be better here in the town of Windsor.
[2:23:56] It wasn't just for town of Windsor.
[2:23:57] It was the entire transit.
[2:23:59] It was a really good workshop.
[2:24:01] I know they are still taking public comment on their plan
[2:24:03] and how they are working it for the future.
[2:24:06] I did attend the community meeting in district four,
[2:24:10] talking about the potential Windsor School site plan.
[2:24:15] I went there to make sure there was information provided on some
[2:24:19] of our arena numbers and different things
[2:24:21] that we have currently, and just to listen to the community
[2:24:25] and what they have to say over there.
[2:24:26] Also attended the last concert where we did the Pass the Hat.
[2:24:32] That was super fun.
[2:24:33] There were council members there that
[2:24:34] did pass the hat to try to help us fund our Thursday night
[2:24:37] concerts.
[2:24:38] That is all I have.
[2:24:40] Thank you.
[2:24:41] >> Busy, busy.
[2:24:42] Next, who would like to go?
[2:24:44] >> I will go.
[2:24:46] I am participating as the ad hoc liaison to the committee
[2:24:51] to plan for the Resilience Center
[2:24:53] at the Kaiser Park over the next few years.
[2:24:55] It's a very interesting subject, perhaps
[2:24:58] going to take as long as 5 or 10 years,
[2:25:01] providing services like evacuation,
[2:25:04] cooling, warming, emergency services, and response.
[2:25:08] A community center for arts, culture, and recreation.
[2:25:12] That is quite a mouthful going on out there at the Resilience
[2:25:15] Center at Kaiser.
[2:25:16] So the purpose of the planning that they are working on right
[2:25:20] now is to secure an additional grant of 500 000 to get started
[2:25:27] on the actual design and drawings in preparation
[2:25:33] of grants in the future.
[2:25:36] So that's what they are doing is planning.
[2:25:39] That's what they are doing under Director layman's direction
[2:25:42] is to plan for a grant just to get started on being
[2:25:45] able to plan for future grants.
[2:25:48] The actual design and drawings for such a thing be prepared
[2:25:52] over the next couple of years will eventually
[2:25:55] lead to 1 million to $10 million to actually develop
[2:25:58] the Resiliency center.
[2:26:01] So that is a pretty exciting program,
[2:26:04] and we are moving forward on the various phases of the grant
[2:26:10] process.
[2:26:10] I also attended the Sonoma County Transit meeting that Vice
[2:26:17] Mayor Tanya --
[2:26:21] I'll just use Tanya.
[2:26:23] I am actually a direct contact with Manager Betts of Sonoma
[2:26:27] County Transit and the busses.
[2:26:29] And I am still trying to get her to come meet with me.
[2:26:33] And let's go redesign where route 66 goes.
[2:26:36] So we are going to try and put that together so that it
[2:26:39] makes better use of the train.
[2:26:41] That is what I've been doing.
[2:26:43] Thank you.
[2:26:44] >> Council members salmon or Welch?
[2:26:48] On your appointee to the Water Advisory Commission
[2:26:52] which oversees Sonoma Water and the TAC.
[2:26:55] We met.
[2:26:57] Water at Lake Sonoma is going to be fine this year.
[2:27:02] The Corps will give up the control of the creek flow
[2:27:11] because it is at a point.
[2:27:14] Lake Mendocino is a little different.
[2:27:15] The big question that's always there is the Carter Valley issue
[2:27:21] with --
[2:27:22] I think it is called ARISI, the group that
[2:27:27] is in charge of looking at removal of the dams the two
[2:27:32] dams, and the construction of a diversion type facility
[2:27:38] where the second dam is.
[2:27:42] So that would still funnel water through the tunnel
[2:27:45] into Lake Mendocino.
[2:27:46] But I think it is something that we probably need
[2:27:51] to talk about at some point.
[2:27:54] Cloverdale has had quite a discussion about it.
[2:27:58] Is the state of California going to get rid of Lake Pillsbury?
[2:28:06] >> Okay.
[2:28:07] Item 15.2, Council members request for future agenda items.
[2:28:11] Seeing none, I will go ahead and adjourn the meeting.
[2:28:16] Thank you everybody.
[2:28:18] >> Thank you, mayor.