[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.

Town Council Meeting

Transcript