I will order this special meeting with San Diego City Council.
And the session today is Friday, March 6, 2026.
Like I said, it's 9.30 AM.
Madam Clerk, will you please take the roll?
Council Member Aguilar is absent.
Council Member Bolt?
Present.
Council Member Bowen?
Present.
Council Member Simon?
Present.
Vice Mayor Viviero-Swalton is absent.
Mayor Gonzalez?
Present.
Would you please join me in the pledge of allegiance?
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God.
OK, welcome to our priority session.
I do want to welcome members of the public who
are joining us today.
I do want to pause and recognize before we
go too far, that this year has done a year of accomplishments.
Some good things have happened this year.
We've made real and concrete progress
through projects, events, and services
that matter to our community.
Improvements that people can see and feel
in decisions that have strengthened
the city's long-term health.
None of this happened by accident.
It came from discipline and focus.
focus on council priorities,
focus a staff time on our work plans,
focus on what truly serves San Leandro.
And it's that very same discipline and focus
that brings us here today.
Our mission is simple today.
To stay grounded in the truth
that we are currently living beyond our needs.
And that we remain committed as a council
to addressing that reality with courage.
There's no single action that's been a fix
with no easy solution, and every path forward
involves trade-offs, trade-offs between the services,
investments, responsibilities, and expectations
of our public.
It's all a series of trade-offs.
Our work today is to confront those trade-offs
openly, respectfully, and with the long-term well-being
of our beloved city in mind.
Having reviewed the presentation,
I must start by thanking staff.
Staff's presentation was purposefully prepared.
It's powerful and provides clear information,
provides clear analysis and clear options
for our consideration.
The staff, your professionalism,
your commitment, your dedication is appreciated
because that work is going to make
our conversations today easier.
Thank you to our facilitators
who our city manager will introduce in a bit.
And I know that your steady leadership
will help us navigate this difficult
but essential conversation.
So to each council member, thank you for your willingness to engage today in some deep,
honest, and constructive conversations.
So with that, we're going to begin with public comment on our items.
And although the agenda item said non-agendaized items, that's a typo, isn't that the time
where you come and you talk about anything that you want to talk about, and for most
people, that's going to be our discussion today. As usual, you will have two
minutes, a number of you have already submitted written questions, comments,
perspectives to us that feel free to address us.
Is that you Madam Clerk?
Thank you Mayor. Yes, the timer is coming online.
How many cards do we have?
We have received seven comic cards.
We've got a few more coming, it looks like.
The first three speakers are Bernard Ashcraft, Hilda Harris, and Cheryl Nolden.
And if the three of you could line up, so behind the lectern, please.
Good morning, everyone.
I am in our ashcraft with a mayor to do the marital table and base tent organization.
I'm here to ask you to make a top priority in developing a resolution of apology for Red Lights.
formally apologize to their residents, families, and communities of color who
were armed by red lightning and discriminatory housing practices
supported facilitated art and knowledge that these practices were morally wrong
violated the principle of equal justice and human dignity and created last in
horn that continues to affect San Angel residents. Many, many families have been horned and didn't
get a chance to have the American dream of a house and a big budget, and also suggest
that you direct city staff to work with community organizations, residents and experts to identify
concrete behavioral action, which may include, but not limited to, a formal health initiative
targeted to historic redlining areas.
Now is the time to address that heinous problem, very egregious racism, right here in San Angeles.
Now is the time to change this.
Now is the time to put together a resolution of apology.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. The next three speakers are Hilda Harris, Sharon Golden, and Deborah Acosta.
Hold on just a second. I wanted to get from that mic that's on. I just wanted to make sure you hear it.
I am asking that it is to review and as a way to policy the insane group.
The second thing I want to talk about is that many of the false walks in my area, you can
barely see them.
They need to be painted and highly visible and media needs to be designed so that the
drivers realize that they are coming up on a God's wall.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The next three speakers are Cheryl Milton, Deborah Acosta, and Douglas Squall.
I can't look at the end of the same job. The morning made a good moment by Mayor Virgil Wollton and Council members. Today I'm here to see you on the process of visiting the revised San Juan Road Mobile Home University in the neighborhood.
Hi, I'm President of the Missionary Mobile Farm in San Diego and I'm a member of the
sympathetic Business Association.
We did an actively working on a revised version of the current best set of legislation for
ordinance.
During this process, we had to collaborate with many San Diego Council members and the
president said it was a mobile home, manufactured and tiny home individuals.
Here is one of these along the path for the ordinance to be passed.
How much longer do we have to wait for what is causing the delay?
The current process of activity council meetings can make a lot of two minutes
to provide public comments on such important issues which is outdated and ineffective.
This approach does not facilitate meaningful conversations between the public and the council.
On several occasions, councilmembers have received conditions that address both the community and the landowner's design.
Yet there is no feedback of the discussions in the focus form.
Thinking outside the box, I believe it will be beneficial both now and in the future to allow for a formal presentation to the council that followed by a question and answer period.
This will enable council members to ask questions and seek clarification, ideally within a 30 minute time plan.
The issue of a mobile phone ring control is such a critical issue that at more time should be allowed for public discussion. Thank you.
Thank you. The next speakers are Deborah Acosta, Douglas Sponey, and Craig Williams.
Good morning Mayor and City Council, Governor Acosta, City Residence Association, and Public Action.
Four years ago the City committed to reviewing and updating the small town rent stabilization markets.
Following that, this amendment was written directly into the San Diego State certified housing element.
The purpose was clear.
Preserve mobile parks as affordable housing.
prevent displacement and protect housing stability procedures and lowering income homeowners.
More than 1,010 annual households depend upon that commitment.
But instead of advancing the goal of an ordinance the city had already promised to update,
the past two years were going to create the brand-new Citywide Rent Stabilization Ordinance Room.
That ordinance has now passed.
The goal of an ordinance remains unfinished.
Delaying in this context is not neutral.
The delay produces a distillation.
One of the barriers came to being visible because it was
reported into San Diego Times, but she was not the only
resident of equity.
Residents across multiple departments
continued to document and decorax it into a range of increases
and SLA charges, most physically and generally
in the nature of commerce.
While in this process at all, states rent lives
and homeowner equity in the roads.
And $100 in rent increase can reduce credit
with my $10,000 reward.
That cost compounds every year.
It is more than the changes we've finished.
Residents have already done the work.
We've provided the city with a fully
perfect planet or at a date to this ordinance.
So the next steps are straight forward.
Direct staff will be submitted in minutes.
playing to you in a minute, but also on council agenda,
the policy of discussion, and establishing a timeline
to bring the ordinance forward this year.
Now is the time to deliver the protections
to council's progress.
Thank you, your time has elapsed.
Our next three speakers are Douglas Baldwin,
Craig Williams, and Anne Caywood.
And Douglas, Sarah, we are going to give you
a new microphone to try it.
Remember, Sarah, we talked about setting it at 10 minutes.
Just for a minute.
I'll have you here a little bit.
I can hear what's going on.
Spring feels good, eh?
What are we doing here on a Friday morning?
It can't be because this is the time to work best for everyone.
I noticed councilmember Aguilar is absent,
and it's not convenient for those with families, certainly.
But we managed to maximize the number of staff in the room
while reducing the public.
Last time we were here, the public filled all this area,
so it seems like that public comment
actually is quite a priority.
To me, the top priority is you gotta make things right
on the city council, and we're not there yet.
The pain is so palpable, the anger is so palpable.
There needs to be a mediated process.
The mayor's pointed out to me a few problems
with some ways of going about,
but you gotta figure it out.
You just do.
And the acknowledgement and the apologies
that all of us really wanna hear,
they're not gonna happen until they're facilitated
and restored in crisis.
I'm glad that we're talking about fiscal sustainability.
I think there is a lot of good news in this issue.
We have a lot of great human services going for us,
the Navigation Center, the ADU, Safety Ambassadors,
lots and lots of stuff.
And with that, there should be the promise
of reducing reliance on highly paid sworn officers
to respond to calls that they're, frankly, poorly
trained to do.
We need some data to show that.
So I call Human Services to come up with a report there.
And I'm not saying you need to reduce the police budget,
but we certainly don't need to keep adding more and more
and more officers.
We've done a good job of putting in technicians.
I see there's a start here, couple things coming off.
Consult for the police who went out.
Let's not reduce the ADU by $400,000.
It's a very positive program.
Thank you for your time and your thoughts.
The next three speakers are Craig Williams, Anne Caweld,
and Kat Wellman.
Good morning.
I'd like to speak in support of the mobile home,
the speed up of the mobile home ordinance.
I think that's very important.
I think the last time we talked about this issue,
we mentioned that John Oliver, people know John Oliver
is the person who was gonna show last night tonight on HBO.
He has a very excellent segment,
15 minutes on mobile homes.
I urge that the city council members, the staff,
and other people look this up.
You Google it.
It's John Oliver late night or last week tonight,
mobile homes.
I think that would be very important.
Also, I wanna support Bernard Ashcroft's proposal
for an apology.
You know, if you see pictures of people who were working in the different factories in San Leandro in the old days,
you know, it was a multiracial staff, you know, black people could not live in San Leandro,
even though they had these good union jobs, and I think that it's really important that we have that apology.
And the second thing is I disagree with the mayor on why we have this problem.
The problem stems from the fact that the property
taxes for commercial property has gone down from 44% to 28%
since Prop 13.
So that's where the money is.
If you want to look for the money,
it's because we have a broken system in terms of how we're
collecting property taxes.
But we may need to have a parcel tax.
We need to have a regressive taxation at times because we have a broken system.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The next three speakers are Ann Kingman, Cat Wellman, and Bob Bailey.
Good morning.
A few years ago, Cat and I were told by Fire Chief Bowie that she could not do a fire drill
for the Bay of Mr. Community because it would be too extensive and would be a mess.
We saw that mess just a few months ago when the Pacific Palisades fire.
31 people were killed.
The median age was 77.
Since that conversation, we have been working diligently with our community to provide education
and fire evacuation pre-planning.
We have contracted with the Wildland Urban Interface Group, a startup from UC Berkeley
Institute of Transportation Studies to develop a timed evacuation plan for residents.
The results of this project will be available in the next few months, but we have learned
that Lake Chavoe Road is an important evacuation route in many fire scenarios and it will assist
at least 10% of our most vulnerable population to escape faster anywhere from 3 to 20 minutes.
This is a critical number as it represents a possible 500 individuals.
Lake Chavoe Road will also be valuable in reducing the projected congestion on Benedict
drive so that everyone can evacuate safely. The city's own Hazard Mitigation Plan recognizes
that these roads will be severely impacted during a wildfire. We are asking for your help now and
prioritizing the repair and reopening of Lake Chobot Road. As stated by the Alameda County Public
Works Director, we need the geotechnical report and a complete cost analysis to move forward.
Please prioritize public safety and take this request with the urgent consideration that it deserves.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The next three speakers are Cat Wellman, Bob Bailey, and Mark Jadowens.
Good morning.
I just want to remind you that Bail Vista consists of 977 homes and almost 4,000 residents who
live in the only area in San Diego that's located on the hillside of Buddy Wildlands.
There's only two exits in order to escape this fine, Desdeo and Grant.
It is the only area in San Leandro that is considered to be located in high or very high
fire danger zone.
Now Ann has told you about the evacuation study that we have contracted with.
We will be sharing that with the city, but we have to take the first steps.
We first of all have to make this a priority.
We've never asked the city to use its general funds to fix the road.
You've always said we're going to go outside and we're going to find outside funding.
But there are designated funds that you have right now for Lake Chippewa Road that need
to be used in order to do the first steps.
You have to get a geotechnical report and you have to get the full cost for repair.
And we have been told by the city manager that the city council has never asked for
that.
So that's why we don't have it.
It has to be a priority.
We can't even get outside funding unless we have those two things.
So please make this very serious public safety issue a priority.
Make it your priority to open the road to two-way traffic, and then get these two things done
so that we can start finding funding outside.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
The next three speakers are Bob Bailey, Mark Janowitz, and Emily Granow.
Thank you.
My name is Bob Bailey.
appreciate you letting me speak from this angle. The only thing I really want to focus on is the
projected savings for cuts to the alternative response unit that was, I think, for FY29. Seems
like a long ways off but it's it seems like it very little considered cut
considering I assume other options to make some reduction to the overall very
large police budget the ARU was created to approve the response to mental health
situations in the city the city had faced a number of legal claims that they
had to pay out on because of some of those situations not being handled well.
And it was also intended to reduce the demands on the police officer's type.
So reducing the AU resources to avoid other reasonable cuts to the SLPD budget
that seems to be considered especially if it increases the liability for
mental health situations that are mishandled in the future. Please reconsider. Thank you.
Thank you. The next speakers are Mark Janowas and Emily Grado. Thank you. Good morning. Thank you to
Mayor and Council and staff for putting this together. Obviously you have these every
year and since I've been coming to them since we had the new council, of course
Councilmember Cole being newer than that. It was February of 23 and in that
meeting the overwhelming priority was for tenant protections. And you carry
through somewhat on that. The priorities that I'm going to urge you to forward are
to complete the package of tenant protections, to upgrade the mobile home
ordinance as you promised to do, and to address the history of racism and red
in the city. Three years ago, the community was overwhelming in the support of Ten Protections.
We made a good start. The package needs to be completed. The package includes the Just
Cause Ordinance, which has incorporated into your plans and that's on the agenda. We must
aggressively and vigorously pursue that as the pairing legislation with rent stabilization.
They don't work together. They don't work separately. They work together
With respect to mobile homes you promised and promised and time has gone fast. You heard that this morning and
Talk about the most vulnerable you've expressed a concern for the most vulnerable
The mobile home residents need your help, and please let's act on that immediately the history of redlining in this city is
Unfortunately known but not documented well enough when I first moved to the Bay Area over 50 years ago
I heard about this. I was living in San Francisco about this place and the end of it was kind of hard to believe
It's time to address it because by addressing it we raise the issues and the consciousness for all of us
So that it won't happen again and can and it can be addressed
It's a serious issue that history is important and then for us to decide what we want to do about it with
rent with tenant protection. A stable community is a prosperous community.
Please, let's advance.
The next speaker is Emily Gregerl.
I just want to make sure that this is the appropriate time.
Is there another time for public comment?
This is it. Okay. Sorry, I missed that one in the remarks.
So, Emily Gregerl, President and CEO of the San Leandro Chamber of Commerce.
Good morning, everybody. I just wanted to...
I wrote a few things down so that you could keep on track.
So, over the years the Chamber has advocated for a wide range of policies, programs, and
partnerships.
While they may appear to be separate issues, the reason behind them has always been economic
vitality.
Economic vitality is the foundation of fiscal stability.
When businesses are able to start and grow and invest in San Leandro, it creates jobs,
brings customers and visitors into the community, and supports a thriving, local economy that
benefits the community, and strengthens the community as a whole.
The business community understands the importance
of fiscal discipline that you guys are in right now,
particularly in challenging budget environments,
and in times like these, priorities matter.
Some initiatives may be beneficial additions
to the community, but fundamentals
that support local businesses and employers are essential,
so please keep that in mind
as you go through this process today.
Policies, investments, and partnerships
that generate economic vitality
and support a vibrant economy should remain central focus.
Economic activity multiplies.
When businesses succeed, they support jobs, suppliers,
local spending, and the broader well-being of the community.
The Chamber remains committed to working alongside all of you
to support a resilient economy.
And we really want the businesses to be here,
to invest and succeed, and we want the city
to be in a much stronger position
to achieve all of its goals.
So just keep that in mind, keep the businesses,
keep economic development top of mind
as you go through this process today.
Thank you.
Mayor, that concludes the comment cards we've received.
Okay, so this point in time,
we will close public comment,
and we'll have an opportunity perhaps
to share some thoughts on the topics that were raised
throughout the course of this meeting.
Which is happening.
So with that, I will pass it to City Manager.
City Manager, you will introduce our facilitators
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good morning, everyone. Good morning, Council members. I just want to say good morning. It's good to see everyone today. I'm excited for this retreat, our 2026 retreat. That is my second retreat, hosting as city manager.
Today we are joined by Nancy Hedgwick and Jan from Raph Telus to assist us with
retreat but I just wanted to say that this is a great opportunity for staff
to receive guidance from our council. I appreciate the guidance the council has
given us throughout the last budget process in the spring of 2025 and we're
just continuing that forward. I just want to say thank you to our council for the grace
that you gave us to allow us to take some time to work on fiscal year 27 and
beyond with our spending cuts. And I know this is going to be you know a
difficult time as we work through some of these issues but I know that when we
focused on achieving alignment around our budgeting process and reaffirming the
council five priorities and making any adjustments we will be better as a city.
Also, I just want to thank our community for your participation in this process,
staff for your work, and then ultimately council for your direction today.
So you'll hear from me a lot today, but I will pass it over to Nancy and Jan to move us forward.
All right. Okay, did everybody hear me okay? We talk this way.
All right. If any of us need to talk louder, you can let us down.
I should hold just a second because we are recording the meeting.
And what really matters for a historical record
is whether they didn't hear you in the recording.
So do we have a way of assessing that in real time?
It's probably even safer though if you just
take the microphone.
And it's kind of frustrating.
In the future, we will get you a wireless lavalier mic.
We don't have that today.
That's our option.
The handheld is not working.
OK, we're going to do this kind of a handheld one.
All right, this is the fun of being live in a workshop,
everybody.
know we roll with how we are. So first of all, I'm Nancy Hedrick. We'll do some
introductions and then take you through our expectations for our time together.
So I'm going to have Jan introduce first. We're going to do... I'll do my ex.
We'll kind of do hand offs here between them.
Okay, so I'm Jan Perkins. I'm really happy to be here with the public, with the
City Council, and with the staff. Thank you for having us today. My background is
in local government. I am a professional facilitator working for the
but I do this work because I really love local government.
I'm very committed to the government.
I was a city manager in two cities,
Fremont and Martin Carroll.
I was assistant city manager in Santa Ana
in Southern California,
and I started my career in Michigan.
So I got a vast array of experience.
Fiscal sustainability is something that is near and dear
my heart because without that we can't do anything in local government that
comes first we have to have the foundation in our cities before we can
do anything great for our communities so that's the place I come from I'm really
happy to be here with the council and with the staff and the community today.
I actually have Julie just do a quick introduction and then I'll give a little bit more.
Hi, my name is Julie Esakiano, digital facilitator with Reftelus.
So my role today is to listen deeply to your conversations and to create a nonlinear capture of that.
I will be capturing every word, but what is up here is meant to facilitate both your conversation today and after today.
So if there's something that is up here that isn't right, I think you've corrected.
And also if there's something that isn't here that you want to be sure that I'm happy to do that.
And Julie's capture, along with our additional notes, will be a part of the report that comes from our time together.
So everybody is obviously encouraged to take notes along the way.
We will be doing the same, and this will be coming back to you.
So that's part of our rapid good job.
So I'm Nancy Hedrick.
I'm also with Reptelus.
I lead our strategic planning and facilitation team at Reptelus.
Our firm is focused on supporting local government and public utilities.
So we have a deep bench and lots of experience working with elected officials as well as city organizations.
My roots also stem back to local government and service is why we are all here.
And so we appreciate the opportunity to work with all of you and we appreciate everybody joining us today for this conversation
which is not everybody's favorite topic and we can acknowledge that and say that out loud but it's critical.
It's really important, and I think that you'll see
we have lots of really helpful information
that will round our conversations in this workshop setting.
So we're not taking action today,
but we are capturing the intent
and the conversation that occurs.
This will then help to instruct staff
as the budget is developed
and the conversations with council
around this year's budget emerge.
And so we're not making budget decisions,
but we are setting ourselves up hopefully
for our long-term success.
So, all right, I have my own special clicker there.
So here are our objectives from today.
And I will point out that in the council and your table,
you should have copies of the slide deck.
So please feel free to follow along that way.
We have it available for everybody on the screen.
We also have a place for some additional notes,
a little agenda and handout.
And then there's a document we'll refer to this afternoon
that speaks to the work plan and the accomplishments
and the idea that, sorry, my words are escaping me,
the work plan items that we're gonna be reviewing
this afternoon.
And so, put that one away for now.
We'll come back to that later.
But here are our objectives, and as you can see,
it is largely focused on the budget.
That's the topic for today.
So we're gonna talk about the approach
to achieving a balanced budget
and long-term sustainability.
So we're gonna talk about some principles,
we're gonna talk about what it's gonna take
in order to achieve that result.
We have lots of great content from staff presentations
you'll hear from, and we'll walk through those.
We're gonna confirm priorities,
get consensus on the work plan,
and really spend time sharing perspectives
about what's most important.
So here are some interview themes,
and again, thank you for your time
in advance of our workshop today
to understand what's important to you
and your observations around where the city is today.
These are just some key themes that helped to inform our process today, and you can see
they're right at the top.
Concerns about the financial situation of the city, that is driving our conversations
today.
Also, we heard from each of you that the five priority areas, those broad buckets, remain
relevant and important, and so we will refer back to those this afternoon and affirm the
importance of them in moving forward with the budget.
Lots of interest around different projects,
talking about strategies to address the financial situation
and the desire for a different prioritizing process.
And guess what?
That's what we're doing today because we
are focusing on the budget.
So here's our agenda for today.
As was mentioned by the mayor in the opening comments,
a lot of successful accomplishments
have been achieved over the last year.
And so it's important to be able to take a moment
and look back and ask that question of what
have we been able to accomplish and why.
So we'll start off there.
We'd like to start off on the up note.
And then we're going to go right into the financial forecast.
And so we'll hear an update from staff relative to the city's
position and what it's going to take in order
to be sustainable going forward.
So we'll go through that.
And then we're going to get consensus around how
to approach the budget.
That includes identifying some key principles
that will inform and instruct staff
as they're developing a budget for you.
We'll take a lunch break.
And then this afternoon, we're going
about the priorities of the work plan
that will be instructed also to the budget
and then how to be successful on film.
We have some meeting norms because this is a workshop.
It's not a traditional council meeting,
so we like to get these in the room, really important.
So first of all, we'll all be listening
for areas of consensus.
And you all come with different experiences,
different backgrounds, different views.
We wanna hear where there is alignment,
when we're talking about choices
and we're talking about priorities.
And so we'll be listening for consensus
and we'll ask you to do that as well.
Respecting different perspectives,
it's a healthier process in the end
when you can bring your perspectives to the table.
But importantly, we don't wanna lose sight
of the focus on one San Diego.
This is about everybody who lives and visits the community.
Lastly, we ask that you take the long view
on our conversations.
This is not a short-term solution that is before you
with respect to your budget choices,
so keep that one with you in mind.
We like to use a time management tool
that we call Bigrack.
You can see it over here.
I'm hearing checklists because people have probably
heard about parking lot with Bigrack a little bit better.
But oftentimes there are ideas, there are topics,
there are issues that really warrant additional time
and energy that we have time available today to cover.
We don't want to lose those ideas.
And so if it's a follow up request or a clarifying comment,
something that requires more,
we're gonna pop it up here on the bike rack.
We will include it in our summary report
so we don't lose it.
Anybody should feel encouraged to suggest
that might be an appropriate item for the bike rack
and we'll make sure to write it down.
So that's our time management tool
because we only have so much time in a day
and we have a lot to get through.
All right, so as we get started,
we wanted, this is for Council,
wanted to just do a very light touch quick icebreaker.
So don't get scared.
This is about it.
We're not gonna ask you to come up here
and do anything fancy.
In one word, in one word, we'd like you to share
what is your greatest hope for the city
if we get this budget issue resolved effectively?
So what's your greatest hope for the city
if you do this right?
In one word.
Not totally sorry.
Yes.
That's a real plan.
Grow.
Grow.
Grow.
Next up, the mic works.
Excellent.
Thank you.
Grow.
Okay, greatest hope.
Who wants to do this?
Yes.
Togetherness.
Togetherness.
All right.
Excellent.
We're getting this right.
We're going to grow together.
One more.
One word.
We're going to get this right.
Sustainability.
Sustainability.
It's a long-term view.
That's great.
Cohesiveness.
Cohesiveness.
of this hope and hope. Hope is a good note to end on. Okay so we're going to be
intentional together as we look to the future. So really keeping that long view
in mind and making sure that we are focused, disciplined, and develop
results going forward. So those are our experiences. Okay and we can already see the results of Julie's beautiful work out there.
The mayor started out in his comments with a statement about accomplishments and clearly
Sam and Andrew has moved along over the years accomplishing a lot of great things.
This slide is intended to just capture a few accomplishments.
It's not intended to be an all inclusive list of all the great accomplishments of the city.
These are just examples that we've heard in our interviews with council members.
And there are many, many, many other accomplishments.
But what we wanted to ask of council members and of the city manager and
Michael, since you're up here on point too, what, so if you move to the next slide.
What contributed to the accomplishments?
And the mayor actually mentioned a few things, because in keeping in mind
accomplishments, as the mayor said, they don't happen by magic.
they happen because of some facts.
What contributed to those accomplishments,
those and other accomplishments?
Commitment and not giving up.
Commitment and not giving up.
Right.
Strategic vision and maintaining the course,
I think discipline on behalf of the leftists
and also some of these are really long terms.
I would say patience, a lot of patience.
commitment, discipline, all great words, concepts.
What else could you give?
Councilmember Boldt.
As much as possible, the communication between us
to understand what was important.
So that we didn't board in the way that everybody was doing.
The communication, so you can understand what's important
and then be in alignment.
Great.
I'd say an overall plan that's adaptive.
Adaptive work plan. Yes, sometimes. It's difficult in local government to have things said and done. Yes, absolutely.
It's all been covered. Disciplined focus. That's how you accomplish.
Same answer.
I agree. I think that the council members have definitely covered it and just continuing to work together.
So, we can keep those things in mind as we move forward in the rest of the day.
That commitment, communication, strategic vision and discipline in patients.
All of which will be needed to solve any kind of a fiscal problem that we have in any city.
So, we're now going to move into discussion of the financial outlook.
And this slide is really an introductory slide to say that you can see at the bottom
A fiscally sustainable budget is required to fund your core services and must have a fiscally sustainable budget.
Relates to your council priorities, can't fund those without a fiscally sustainable budget.
And then it gets to your long term vision for standing on them.
It's all tied together.
But in the end it requires that financial stability.
And that in any budget, and family under it's
really different than most cities,
at least 90% of the budget and the operations
are about core services.
It's kind of what makes the trains run on time.
It's the basic services that people expect
when they dial 911 or they drive on the city streets,
those basic services.
That's what the budget funds primarily.
And then the council priorities are best implemented
when you're focused on those core services first
to make sure that those are actually implemented well.
So that's part of what the conversation
is going to be about today.
And as the mayor said in his introductory comments,
we're living in the armies as a city.
And so this today is a way to begin to move that needle
so that you're not living in an other need,
so that you really can provide those core services
in a way that is sustainable.
So with that, Mr. Janelle, I think we'll turn it to Janelle.
Thank you so much, Jan.
We can move on to the next slide.
So, what does this tell us?
I appreciate the government-owned sustainability
because what we're doing right now is not sustainable.
And what we've seen over the past few years,
I go back to our assistant city manager, Michael Ewan, who used to be our finance director
for somebody that may not know, and in our council retreat of 23 and 24, he presented
on the fact that we do have a structural deficit and we have a spending problem and it's something
that we need to fix.
And we took the time, the council took the time last year to really try to make a fit
staff direction. But there's a lot of work we still need to do. We do not have
enough revenue to support the services that we are currently providing and
spinning the way we are. And that's what we mean when we say we're living above the
our means. We started this process in 25 and what we need to focus now on first
things first. On really those priorities to make sure that as a government agency
that we are giving the services and providing the services that we must.
There's basics. We really need to focus on those basics to critical services. We
also today will look at a way of focusing on our critical failure. For
example we'll be discussing some of the service like our 911 services on the
community dials 911. They do expect the number two work and they do expect
someone to answer all in the other line and that's what we mean by focusing on
basics. We need to continue cutting. We need to continue focusing on not just
cutting into our reserves but making sure that we are building our reserves
to make sure that we have a sustainable future. Right now Stanley Andrew is in a
great position and I actually am not worried because I know we can do this. I
know we can achieve what we are set out to achieve today and into the future. We
We can go to our next slide, please.
So starting in high level before I pass it off
to our finance director, Nicole Gonzalez,
in the spring of 2025,
the council gave staff very clear direction.
And what that direction was
is to make sure that starting in fiscal year 27,
26 actually, we met that goal for 26,
but we were not able to meet that goal for 27.
So that's what we've been working on
over the last eight months.
But what we needed to do is make sure
that for fiscal year 27
is that our revenue, less our expenditures
and transfers, equaled.
And so, and then also starting in fiscal year 28
and fiscal year 29, council gives direction
that all revenue and all expenditures,
including transfers, equaled.
So we would not be spending more
than we were making in a year.
And in June of 2025, to meet that goal,
we would have to cut $9.4 million
over the next three years.
fiscal year 27 which starts in July fiscal year 28 and fiscal year 29. But
since that time and these numbers are from February as we had to prepare so
they're not as of March that number has grown and that's grown due to things as
reduction in revenue based on sales tax and also in new spending items that have
happened over that time and so what was 9.4 million in June is now grown to
11.6 million. I will share that the 11.6 million they see daunting and larger
than 9.4, but we had a trajectory in January where the 11.6 was larger than
that. The council they made a very smart decision to not make the situation worse
and I appreciate you for that. And so we today we will discuss what our
suggestions are for working towards that 11.6 million. Go to our next slide. And so
I understand this is not easy. These reductions are going to be hard. I
remember in the spring as the council was adopting the budget there were some
public comments about how the cuts at that time that were hard and I
appreciate the vice mayor, Ferris Wilson, for making a cut saying we're not done. We
have more to go and it will be deeper as we go through the future.
Any year we are today. Most of our dollars pay for people, buildings, and
and equipment, the things that we need to run a city.
I've already talked about the course of services,
but this is not a short-term problem.
This is a long-term problem,
and we need strategic long-term planning,
and that's why we're here today to get that done.
Okay, Nancy, I'll pass it back to you.
Yep.
All right, before we have Nicole bring us through
the budget update, the outlook,
and some preliminary ideas from staff.
Wanted to kind of tee up what we're gonna be asking
all of you on council. We'll talk about this after we go through Nicole's presentation.
I just took out a foreshadow so you're thinking along these ways. First of all, we will be
talking about some potential principles that can be used to help inform how the budget
is developed. So we've got some ideas that we will bring forward and we'll have some
reflection on that. So we'll be looking at those after the presentation. Also, the focus
on core services first and really see if there is consensus and agreement that that's what's
most important before anything else.
Importantly, what I want to highlight before I call this her piece is number three.
As we're going through some of the preliminary ideas, and these are only a portion of what
will ultimately come before you, we really, it's important for staff to hear if there
are any items that are like absolutely no, can't do that.
And so we'll be facilitating that conversation
after Nicole's presentation.
So as she's going through things,
keep that question in mind.
And we can always go back and look, too.
And then we have some other questions afterwards,
pausing on adding any other non-required cost to the budget.
And so some principles that will be important so that we
can have some conversation around.
But number three in particular, as we're
hearing Nicole go through, we want you to be thinking about,
is there anything that's just a non-negotiable
from your perspective?
Make sense?
All right.
All right, Nicole.
Mayor, members of the City Council, our community members,
and Nicole Gonzales, one of the city's finance director.
While this is not a traditional budget meeting,
we will be providing a high-level overview
of a variety of reductions, all of which
will have a direct impact on the community.
This is meant to provide magnitude and context
while setting a table for additional in depth budget conversations over the next few months.
So since you have all received this information in your packet, I won't be going through each
individual item but wanted to provide an opportunity for those in the room to see the items of
a high level as we discuss and consider adjustments to close the city's structural deficit.
So the first area is the library and recreation has five reductions.
for a cumulative total of $906,000 by fiscal year 2029.
The next area is public works and infrastructure.
It includes two proposed reductions
for a cumulative total of just over $500,000
by fiscal year 2029.
Community support, excuse me, and human services
has seven proposed reductions for a cumulative total
approximately 375,000 by fiscal year 2021.
Police and Fire has three proposed reductions for
consideration of approximately 660,000 by fiscal year 2029.
Community Economic Development has nine reductions for
consideration, they are spread across several slides.
So I will quickly go through those.
three additional reductions. And on the last slide, we have a total of over 750,000
in cumulative reductions proposed through fiscal year 2029. So moving to
transfer to capital funds, there is a consideration to reduce the general
funds transfer or subsidy to capital infrastructure or capital funds until
the City can stabilize its operating budget. The reduction is a cumulative of
three million by fiscal year 2029. So this is a summary of the proposed
reduction. As I stated at the beginning of the presentation, what is being
presented today is specifically related to reductions that have direct impact on
the City's community. We will have several other budget conversations
throughout the next few months which will discuss internal operation
reduction. If you look at the smaller chart on the bottom, you will see the cumulative
total impact to the community. The proposed reduction was about 6.2 million dollars. Cumulative
internal operating reductions total 5.8, 5.9. For a total over, beginning of fiscal year
2029 of about 12.1 million. Additional options to consider. Again, as we move through the
budget process there could be additional options for consideration as shown on
this slide. I want to be clear that adding new expenses can't guarantee
further impact to the community or to staffing. This is the city's ten-year
forecast which includes the reductions which requires a minimum of 11.6 million as discussed by our city
manager. I do want to call focus to line 19. That represents the city's general
fund reserve policy which is 20% of expenditures set aside for economic
uncertainties. And so as you can see we are essentially meeting or growing that
policy above 20% until about fiscal year 2033 where we dip slightly below and
then recover again beginning in 2034. So this is a snapshot of what the 10-year
forecast looks like without reductions. Again focusing on line 15, we are not
meeting the City Council reserve policy even in the beginning of fiscal year 27 and it's significantly reducing that available funding for economic uncertainties until we are seeing a negative by fiscal
year 2030 and then when you look at line 13 which is the ending balance in 2034
the city is in the area of negative cash and in the position of having to file for
bankruptcy. So what is causing some of these increases that we're seeing in our
city's operating budget? There are key factors driving there. There's really two
areas of focus. There's the external influences so we see things like how the
uncertainty in the economy and how that's impacting consumer behavior. The
city's largest revenue stream is sales tax and so we are seeing a significant
impact in that area as consumers continue to change their behavior and how
they choose to spend their dollars currently. There's also the geopolitical
climate and how that impacts the city's abilities to secure materials as there
disruptions and supply chains. And then the significant cost to the city
related to pension costs which is a very volatile cost to the city as the cost is
truly dependent on the performance of helpers and really how that impacts the
city's costs each year. The other is policy influences and how that impacts
our operating budget. So implementation of new programs without dedicated funding
continuing to fund capital infrastructure with the use of general fund or operating
dollars to offset those costs, and then the rising cost of employment and employee costs.
With that, I will pause in my presentation and pass it back to City Manager Cara.
Thank you so much Director Gonzalez. So again, focusing on core services, these are the
things that the city must do that we are mandated by law. Law enforcement again
when our residents and our business partners contacts law enforcement when
they contact fire protection is expected because the city has said we will
provide the service that there is someone that they can call to come and
rescue them. The same is for emergency medical services. We have said that this
is something that we will provide so that is on us to make sure that we are
funding it in a way that those services are available for the community. Road
maintenance if there's ever a sinkhole if there's ever a road that is so
dilapidated or there is a sidewalk that is slippet or a street light comes down
it is our responsibility to fix those items. There's no one else who is coming
to fix the items when it comes to road maintenance traffic that our citizens
should be able to move through the city of San Leandro,
unobstructed safely.
And that is a requirement by law that we must maintain.
And also lastly, utilities such as water, sewer,
and garbage, the city of San Leandro says
we will provide those services
and as long as we are doing so,
we must make sure that they are funded in the way
so they are available for our community.
Next slide, please.
Thank you. So you've seen this slide. I won't spend too much time on it, but just this is just to reiterate that our intention for today is to make sure that we are strategically in line, align and closing that financial gap and looking at the long term picture of our future next slide please.
fees. Okay, so financial stability, that is where we are going and there are three
key areas to get us there. First, we're starting with a reduction of 11.6,
which we've gone over and the council will get some time to ask some questions
and give direction on those areas that are directly facing the community.
Overall, managing costs, adding expenses, much-matched revenue. If we're going to
add new dollars to spend, you must make sure that we have the revenue, whether
that's grants, donations, new taxes, that we have the revenue to support that
because continuing to use our reserves as a stopgap, as Nicole has shown, we will
run out of money and cities finances are not very much different than our own
finances. And then we continue to explore new revenue as the council's
instructed staff. We are currently working on our polling for revenue options
and we're bringing that back to council in the next few months and so really
focusing all of those areas to align for financial stability.
All right, so on that slide, Janelle really talked about the necessary components to that
long-term sustainability, which in the beginning of our time together, you all agreed that's
where we need to go, right?
And so if we look here now, our charge today is to get agreement on that path, first of
all to understand and acknowledge what is going to be required to move forward.
Funding the city's core services, so getting agreement on focusing on his
essential core services first. That's the foundational component to our long term
success. And that last part is really agreeing to put off and avoid new
programs or projects until the city's finances are stabilized and only then
adding new initiatives, projects, programs, when there is a source of revenue identified to fund it.
So looking at that long term. I want to now introduce some ideas around key budget principles
that can help to inform and serve as a touchstone as you navigate your budget conversation.
We want to start up on the balcony with principles and then we are going to go back to those proposed
reductions and get council members' feedback on those. So we just wanted to preview the path beyond at
this point. So we're proposing for the council's feedback and consideration seven principles. These
are pretty core for local government. Prioritized for services, but even so, no department is still
community reductions. So within any department, there can be an opportunity for efficiencies
and for savings. That's one. Two is retain the city's reserves at 20 percent. Do not
go below that. So that does require cuts in order to do that for 20 percent for economic
uncertainty and five million for major emergencies. To increase it though, the lawyers are trying
to solve this problem, but don't decrease it.
Three, you've heard this before,
referring them to any new projects or programs,
so that's the next one.
Ensure that you do fund those core services first.
Four, attempt to minimize service reductions
that impact the community and employee layoffs.
There will be some impact on the community,
we've already seen those in the slides,
we'll go back to those,
but that principal attempt to minimize the service reductions
and avoid layoffs.
You still need to have a good base of employees
in order to provide your core services.
Five, preserve the health and safety of city employees.
You still have that obligation, so still preserve
a safe work environment for your state employees.
Six, you also have to train your state employees.
That doesn't go away.
So retain the ability to train employees
and maintain a positive work environment.
Still need to be able to recruit and retain
quality employees.
And then seven,
focus management and administrative staff time
on the core service delivery
and our approved legal projects
as the city manager has said first things first.
So that really means avoiding having smaller projects
or new things coming your way
that will distract their time from those core services.
So now I'd like to ask council members for your comments.
And ideally, we'd like to get consensus
on those more modifications to those
that council members would like to have.
Jan, if I can add also, as you see,
your executive team is here.
And so there's any specific questions you have
on any of the reduction slides.
They will be coming to answer any of those questions.
So we'll come back to those that specifically.
I want to be clear.
I have no problem starting.
But are you asking us to go back into each one
of these categories and discuss whether we agree with something
like this, ask questions about it,
or are you asking us for the no-bills?
I don't know if you have council members on this one.
I'm just on this slide.
We're just on this slide right now.
agree with these as principals, then it's just the slide right now.
We'll provide that instruction. Just on this slide right now.
A hundred percent. I'm going to say that I remember our
conversation around today, and I really appreciate everything that staff has done
in this direction because when we talk about priority settings,
a lot of times it's about bringing something new. I even bring something new when you get any
pay for what you got or for some of the key things that we were discussing the
last couple of years so I'm actually excited about today because we're gonna
be able to discuss that in ways that we're not gonna propose things are gonna
cost us more money and then in a year look at staff and go why do we do this
right like and I think that is a hurdle that we kind of go through and it's not
Not just Santa Ana, it's a lot of other cities that do that, and I'm not throwing any shade
at any council member up here, but a lot of times council members will come with the effect
of a vital show that I'm proposing something that I'm not really doing anything and the
community thinks, you know, maybe I'm not doing my job, but this job here to figure
out how we have enough money to pay for what we need is more important than coming up with
new solutions, the problems that we have.
And this is the priority is what are we going to fund that we can afford,
as opposed to a list of new things, right?
Yeah, one thing I would add if it's not already in here is efficiencies.
I don't know if that's here, but I think we should focus on ways we could be more
efficient on tasks that we do now to save money.
I don't think that could be added to number one, is no department of immune to reductions
and can find ways to be even more efficient, certainly could be.
Okay.
If we add pursue efficiencies, that might address that.
Yeah, pursue efficiencies, I think it's really important because I think not just core
services but regular everyday services, whether it's the parks or wherever, there's ways,
I think staff probably has ideas too from the higher low even to the working staff that see this every day
Like why are we doing this? This can save
Whatever can 15% and the the other element
Maybe ties into efficiencies or not, but would be volunteers
I think we really should consider the public helping this out where they want to and I'm sure there's folks
That would love to be at the park
helping out with litter removal, or maybe the library,
or maybe we're lots of different places.
And I think we do have a volunteer coordinator,
but I think bumping that up and talking more about getting
our 85,000 plus residents involved.
And I know it's effort and work to train them
and to make sure that they are fulfilling their obligations
and reliable, because I know that can be an issue, too.
but I think getting more input from the community
to do work to help our city.
One is you made difficult choices
on where you need to make reductions.
As you're implementing going forward,
then how do you balance that?
That might be the opportunity then
to think about how to leverage community support
and community interest to deliver specific services to.
Thank you and I think in the spirit of not adding things to the list and really working
with what we have, there is, I do have a couple of comments.
On number two, I think we've teased this out in Finance Committee, but I do want to highlight
that we do need a policy to trigger the 20%
for economic uncertainty so that we have a joint understanding
both as a council body and in the community as to what
that actually needs and how that gets triggered, right?
Because I'll just set the example of when you're
in hot water, you're in it.
and then next thing you know, you're up against the cliff
or you're boiling, and so I do wanna be clear
about what triggers that, that kind of spending.
And the caveat there is that this kind of reserve
means better bond rating, our credit,
I mean, I understand that complexity,
but I do wanna be clear that I have no issue
spending that money if we are faced in a situation
where we're gonna cut something, a critical service
that impacts vulnerable populations.
So I just wanted to kind of elevate that,
that we've been working on that at Finance Committee
and I appreciate the work of the staff there.
Number three, I think that I don't know about refrain,
but I do think that if there is a project or a program
a council member wants to put before us and the community to consider that we
actually look up for a revenue source for that, right? Whether it's a cut or
whether it's a funding source, but anyway. On number four, I think the word
attempt is very soft. I think we should commit to minimize service reductions
that impact community layoffs and then to add on to that I think that when we
are talking about cutting eleven million over three years I think we need to be
we need to commit to be clear and transparent about impact and communicate
it you know it's going to be a really tough three years and we need to be we
need to, one, own the decisions that we're going to make, but also understand and be
clear about impact. Finally, I think, you know, this is my personal approach just
to kind of my where I'm kind of grounded in my values and my, you know, kind of how
I carry this work. I think I will be using an equity screen in terms of
of looking at principles for balancing the budget,
I think, and that kind of connects
to being clear about impact of cuts and that.
So I'll just leave that there.
Thank you.
I'll just add on to what's already been said.
For number three, I think what I would add to it,
I think this summarizes a little bit
of what our vice mayor of aerosol was just mentioning.
But referring from that unfunded, right?
So if,
or I think,
whether it's,
so obviously needing funding for it,
or at least being able to come with an acknowledgement
and analysis of what those funding needs would be,
because there are things that we could do
within the city that are not extremely expensive,
but kind of huge impacts.
And so it's not that there's not room for new ideas
or new projects, it's that it will,
if it impacts the budget in a way
that is going to create an imbalance,
then we need to acknowledge that,
so we have to find that balance for it.
So basically we need to pay for it.
The other thing about the proposed principles is,
to me this is great, but how,
Maybe the second part of it is,
what does that look like in practice?
So are we actually going to have this practical checklist
that says, I don't know, it doesn't do one, two,
and three, so I don't think we can make this decision.
And for number six, the one thing I would add to that,
in terms of retaining ability to train employees
and maintain a positive work environment,
is the need for organizational effectiveness and efficiency,
which does take some investment,
but would at the whole balance it out,
and that's incredibly important.
And I don't know if it would be on here,
but in terms of balancing the budget,
so much of that too is about communication
and how to communicate the impacts and the trade-offs,
because every single one of these trade-offs
does impact people in different ways.
Okay, so I agree with pretty much everything
that the council has said.
you a couple of extra thoughts. First, I do believe that these are principles. They're
not absolutes, they're just the guiding principles. So in the grand scheme of life, I'm playing
with these principles. I do think that I am sensitive to this concept of referring from
adding new projects or programs. But, here's the big but, it's not just the cost of the
program. You can probably put 2x on any program. This is the inefficiencies that
are created because now you're jumping between more programs. It really should
be something like No New Net programs because we have limited staff. In my
experience, this council, not anyone in particular, other agencies where I serve
on boards, I find that people are ready to add programs and no one's ready to add
revenues and it's really easy to give stuff away it's hard to pay for it and
again not throwing any past council under the bus but we've been really good
at doing that in the City of San Diego. So as a principal is it a good
principle for the next few years and as we're making these decisions right now I
think it is a good principle and so I encourage my council members to think
about in this window you know one year two years three years is it a good
starting point as a principle and I think the answer is yes the other place
that I'd go because I agree with council member Simon that efficiency is really
important. And for better or for worse, technology keeps changing. We find ways
to do things much more effectively than we did in the past and that will enable
us to do more with less. It has, as long as I've been alive and there are plenty of
examples, venomous lives like they did in the 1850s. Things are just a lot more
more efficient today. So I think that that will naturally occur, but it is an operating
principle that we need to keep in mind. I'm viewing these as principles for balancing
the budget. I'm a little bit less stressed about that for this purpose of adding it to
this list, but as an operating principle, absolutely. So when we think about technology,
no matter where we're going to get to the CAD RMS and some other stuff later,
it's absolutely critical that we think about efficiently.
Okay, so those are my thoughts.
That's great, very helpful.
So what we can do is, we'll take a short break in a moment,
so we're kind of saying everything's fresh, and we'll do an update.
To try to capture and reflect the intent behind the conversation you just had.
So you can put fresh eyes on it.
I think that the observations by the mayor,
these are guidelines, particularly in this horizon, right?
As you are building and making decisions on the budget,
these will all be instructive to both how it's developed
and how to evaluate the options that are coming before you
and how you have the discipline to hold to it
as you're navigating forward.
So if that's comfortable with everybody on council,
we'll do that update on our short break
so that you can put fresh eyes on it
and tell us if you're feeling comfortable with where they are.
They can always be modified later,
at least to make sure that we're reflecting the intent
behind your discussion this morning.
Does that sound good?
OK.
Great.
OK.
So we're going to be next talking
about the initial proposals with community impact,
really focusing, Councilmember Bult, on the no, the go-no.
No-go?
Not the go-no.
The no-go.
Compete components.
But before we do that, because I think
probably have some robust conversation. Can we take 10? So it's right now 10,
we'll call it 10, we'll start top of the hour. We'll give you 12 minutes, come back at 11 o'clock,
talk about the no-go, so we'll capture those and then we will move ourselves forward.
Okay, everybody get the blood flowing again, move it a little bit, a little bit, a little more, alright, we'll wait for the slides to come up.
During the break, we updated this slide we were just looking at, here we go.
So those areas that are typed in and read are an attempt to reflect the suggestions
that were made during the conversation, so I want to just go quickly through this and
then if we have touched on the essence, then we can do a thumbs up and we can move forward
to the next day.
If we misrepresented something, then let us know.
First of all, I added up at the top there that these are really, as the Mayor had indicated,
guidelines to help develop and then evaluate your budget choices.
And so, this is the framework that you would then be applying as you are looking
at the funding investments.
We added it as a new number two to pursue efficiencies, and
that's probably going to weave into a number of other things, but
to not lose sight of the importance of that.
We added it in for number three, recognizing the need to provide better
definition around what triggers the use of the $5 billion for major emergencies.
we added just a note to define what triggers that.
So that would mean to come back as a separate topic.
But we made a note of that in there.
For number four, which there was a lots of conversation
around, we added in the word net.
So net new projects and programs
unless there is an identifying revenue source.
And so recognizing that sometimes you may have
a new initiative or project, but you also have a grant
or you have some other source that will fund that,
but that is part of the consideration.
Modify number five brought the attempt to minimize,
to commit to minimize the reductions
that impact the community directly.
And then we added in there at the bottom
the important principle of communicating the impacts
and being transparent about the reductions
so that there is full awareness on the decisions
that are being made and the impacts
that will be resulting from that.
And so the only thing that is not explicitly on here
because it's part of the, how do we do this afterwards
is Council Member Simon, the focus on using volunteers.
And so that can be a part of how the city
pursues offsetting the impacts with budget choices.
And so if you're comfortable with these changes,
we'll put these into our report
and you'll have an opportunity to put fresh eyes
onto them as you're moving forward.
But for today, how are we feeling about that set of principles?
Thumbs up there, thumbs up, thumbs up, and a nod.
So we're going to take all of those as thumbs.
Perfect.
So what we want to do next then is take us back,
remind us of the questions we're adding.
So we just talked about the principles.
We're going to jump to number three.
And keep in mind that we have staff here to answer questions.
That was a lot.
I imagine, to walk through.
And so what we're going to do is we'll
go back through each of those slides
with a question around, is there a reduction area that
is off the table for you?
We'll be listening to see if there are four.
It's off the tables for me in the form of consensus.
So that that informs, of course, the city manager and staff.
They will no longer be looking at that.
And that will be instructive.
And so as we go, are you taking this back to that?
Yeah, 21.
Oh, that's wonderful.
Here I can do it this way, too.
21 my way.
Yeah, there we go.
There it is.
There we go.
All right, so there's our first one.
And so first of all, were there questions
that you had for staff relative to these areas?
And then the question, of course,
is there anything in here that is fundamentally off the table?
And if so, we'll have a conversation about that.
So comments or questions?
Yeah, come from the back of the room.
We have a question on the library hours.
Moltford increase from 12 to 28, that's not a cut.
It's an increase.
It's distancing out from the other libraries.
Thank you, yes.
I can speak to that.
So it's 12 to 28 because we are reducing
main and manor hours on Mondays,
or eliminating main and manor hours.
So we could keep main and manor open on the Mondays,
but that would then result in the 12 hours for Mulford.
And we were trying to find a balance of saying,
well, if we're building a brand new facility
that's about $10 million,
it's not a great look, but we opened it,
well, we had it open before, which was 12 hours a week.
We'd like to open it more, 28 hours a week,
but the offset of that is having to lose some hours
elsewhere in the week at other facilities.
I evaluate your focus.
Okay, I understand, I support it, thank you.
Can I ask a follow-up question to that, Ryan,
before you sit down?
Yeah.
I'm not sure where the costs are,
for example, if for example if we were able
to keep the main library open for a shorter period of time,
that be as expensive as it would be to open longer looking, you're going to open it just to keep it open for longer hours.
But I just think even just like a few hours after school, for example, when a lot of folks would be going to the library
because having it closer to Sunday and Monday is, you know, it's significant in terms of real impact, like practice,
like the practical impact of it, you know, it doesn't feel like a lot, but, you know, it's when people go into the library.
Yeah so we looked at a lot of different options and scenarios and really looked
at when were we most busy and Mondays were still even after we made the
changes from last year. Mondays were still very much the least used. We
We have less people come on Mondays, even after school.
We have no library, relatively no library, initiated programming.
And the rooms that we have for the public to use,
very, very few, if almost ever, Monday, the public does not use them.
So that seemed to still be the right day to make those reductions.
to answer your question more directly, even to open a few hours, what that does, and I
know that this may be getting a little too in the weeds, but to effectively manage the
staffing level becomes really a big challenge to be moving different hours around and people
around, and that's where it becomes untenable just to have a little bit here and a little
less there, it really doesn't make a lot of sense and winds up costing us more
because we would either have to do something like overtime to really make it
right or we're pulling people around and the opportunity cost there becomes
really large because we're spending a lot of administrative time and
supervisory time, even just the regular staff time, making that a combination.
Thank you. I actually appreciate that answer, because even though it feels like it's in the weeds,
I feel like when we talk about implementation, that's actually what it means.
So for us to say just open four hours, it's actually much more complicated,
and that's important for us to recognize, too.
And I am supportive of the net hours, especially at Mulford,
because then it's possible to a different community that is maybe obviously a lot closer to the library now.
So thank you.
You're welcome.
And if I can just add, I do appreciate the library team because though we are, this is on the slide where we're doing reductions and there are reductions to be clear of approximately 650,000.
There are technically an additional two hours opening in the library system. So though there's cuts, there's 14 hours of cuts, if you look at Manor and Main, but there's 16 hours of increases at, so that's an additional two hours to the library system,
Even though there's a savings of $650,000, so thank you.
Could I speak to that?
So one of the reasons we're able to do that is,
as Council Member Simon pointed out, efficiencies.
This past year, we worked really hard
on consolidating our public service desks.
So instead of having three service desks in the main
library, we still have the one in the Children's Department
because it's a whole separate wing.
But we consolidated our reference and our circulation desk
into one single point of service.
That allows us to have less staff on desk at a time,
where before we would have to have two to three people
on the circulation desk and two people on the reference desk.
We now can get by with three people total.
So with the staffing reduction,
we're actually, because of this efficiency,
able to make that work in a way
that we're able to gain more hours elsewhere.
When we're looking at this and we see it's a reduction to the cost of nearby 27, but
then you go down to five and you see there's a reduction three years in a row, what does
it look like for our budget?
I don't know if anybody wants to hear this, but if we're able to go into 28, right, let's
say number two we make the same reduction or is that based on contracts and things like
So, what this table represents is when the reduction will start and it will be considered
ongoing.
And so, if we are proposing a reduction of fiscal year 27, it's consistent, exactly
through.
So, it's really where does this start.
So, if you're looking at line item five, there's a reduction of 35,000 and then plus
40,000 in 2028 and then another 14,000 for this cumulative.
So that first year is the first year of ongoing reduction.
Thank you.
My money is being captured.
I will say thank you to the other council members.
I do agree with that that increase is more than important
for the new library in health care,
because 12 hours a week at a library open, it wasn't right.
So this is awesome to see.
Not only did we reduce some costs,
but we made an increase to the actual services
that we're putting out there
that we can use, so thank you for that.
It's a big commitment.
Well, I will, these are great questions,
and I will remind you all that this is,
you know, you'll hear more, right?
This is just the beginning, kind of the tip of the iceberg
for me, which is, essentially,
as you're going through the budget process
to understand and ask more questions
and there'll be more to consider.
So this is, you know, really an opportunity
to ask the question, is it fundamentally not okay,
but the clarifying questions are instructive,
so thank you for all that.
Any other comments related to the library and recreation?
Yes, please.
Thank you.
I think just in terms of communicating this,
I think it'd be...
It wasn't clear to me that it was the same cuts
through the next three fiscal years,
so I think that, just in terms of overall feedback
of that, and then also what would be useful,
I think to obviously both have the percentage and the amount, so the percentage of what cut.
And I know that these are some of these are kind of different pots of money, but just
understanding percentage change and the amount having both together. I did want to
untangle a little bit on recreation and park contract services.
Oh sorry, I may do, I'll wait for a second, sorry about that.
I just wanted to unpack that a little bit.
What are the type of large events and rentals?
And I'm particularly thinking also, I wanted to untangle the eliminate coverage at pools.
So those kinds are related to a third party contractor that we use for security services.
services, so security guards. This past summer we activated three goals. We were
able to be efficient in utilizing staff and classifications to increase staffing,
lower the ratio between participants or active users and staff, and we saw a huge
decrease in incidents at the goal. So this was a really low ending fruit and
opportunity to really reduce the cost associated with having a third-party
security guard at those locations so it's not like security guards like
perimeter security yes and what are the large events so for every single rental
that we have at our facilities community centers there's always two guards that
historically haven't scheduled for there so it's we're doing our rules
application process, review, and really identifying which facility rentals or
private rentals require security guards. And in analysis, through our analysis and
looking at other neighboring cities, other rules and regulations, we see that
they prioritize larger events where there is alcohol permits allowed, where
security guards are. Currently we have security guards at every single event. And so we're
working on strategies of modifying staffing schedules
and staffing levels so that we don't have to contract out
for security guards.
Thank you.
I just have one other one.
On the line four, recreation events and supplies,
I think that the field trip transportation,
is that all for just the youth advisory commission?
The field trip is for specifically to our Camp Oodhiu, but again, recreation plans,
nine months, nine, twelve months in advance, and so this past summer we were able to be
very strategic and develop a partnership with East Bay Regional, so we were able to—and
we continued with a new agreement this summer—so we were able to reduce the field trip transportation,
but we have this new agreement where we get buses from East Bay Regional to transport
with the participants to these gravitational parts.
And what are the type of,
so let me just preface this by saying that
if I have a young person who wants to serve
on the Youth Advisory Commission,
I think that builds civic ownership, civic duty.
I think for me, like the YAC events would be,
I'm just really hesitant on that just because it's deeply,
like we have we have talked about as a council just how little programming we
have for young adults and teenagers and I would hate to see a group of about
identified involved young people so I just would like to kind of tease that
out to see what that like what are the yak events because I think overall as a
city we don't have I mean y'all have a lot of teenage programming but just
So a lot of that were individual events that were part of the Youth Commission, it was part of their plan of developing, planning and executing with support from recreation staff for events.
With those cuts we've started to lightly implement that and having them have active roles in some of our ongoing citywide events.
So, for our MLK event, the Youth Commissioners were responsible for all the arts and craft projects,
making sure that we put all the beverages and refreshments for now, assisting with setup,
likely being involved in some of the budgeting meetings, discussing what vendors and performance perhaps.
So, they're also getting training as well, too, how the event went.
So, we're trying to include a representative from the Youth Commission with all of our city programs planning as well.
I understand. Okay. Those are all my comments for this one. Thank you.
Okay, as we go on... Oh, sorry, Mary. Sorry, sorry, sorry.
I was going last. I was just going to add to just a couple of questions around the field trips.
You mentioned Camp preview and then I was thinking also of Camp triple, but are
these the field trips that the kids were signed up for? Summer programming we
did not be able to take and is there opportunity for cost recovery when the
family-specific camps. So we have a legacy camp. Chabot Day Camp is one of our legacy camps and
a lot of neighboring cities have the legacy camps. That's one of ours. There are spill trips and
there's and those those costs are built in until the cost recovery of the program. We also have
another camp that's a little different at different locations as well too but we were trying to be
more strategic and efficient with some partnerships with East Bay Regional for the busing and also
really advertising our existing assets.
And so I'll give you a really simple example.
Instead of going to Fremont, to Aqua Ventures,
we go to one of our three pools.
So our participants have access to our pool.
There's a lower cost.
There's a lower cost for transportation.
And they'll just be able to enjoy themselves
and still get access to water safety classes
and swimming pools in San Angeles.
I get just, my kids walked from Kudiho to the Quiet Center
and loved it, so I commend your effort to that day.
So just, since you're there already.
So I just help you understand,
it's not a reduction in service,
as in there will still be field trips.
It just won't be a lay-ho, it'll be to our pool.
Exactly, and depending on where you're more strategic on our locations where we are scheduling these plans.
So Camp Booty Hill, their walk is literally 20 feet now.
That location, one of those locations is actually Washington Manor Park now.
So it's out of private buses, East Bay Regionals is funding the cost for those buses and transportation to our cultures.
Okay, and the Yak events, so for instance, one of the Yak events, I think it was the Yak event,
your movies in the park so will the movies in the park disappear those will
not disappear we have some ongoing moving parts are scheduled the jacket
just more involved in planning for additional they don't have their
specific this is a Jack event they're still participating in the planning and
staffing and exposure and still tabling at events but there won't be a specific
this is a 100% Yak event.
So the principle of principle number nine,
what is the impact?
How will residents see it?
Residents will see it with additional activation
of youth being engaged,
youth facilitating in-ly in activities at these locations,
youth coming from after.
I'm sorry, how will it be worse off?
How will the city be worse off, not what will they be doing?
It will not be, the amount of events will not be reduced.
It's just be more efficient.
And instead of having one-off and separate events,
including them in existing events that we currently have.
Perfect, okay.
So then I was worried about the report,
I'm not worried about reporting.
I do want to focus on number three.
So the way I'm interpreting this is there will be
no more hearts correct, period.
Yes, that is correct.
Unless there were some non-city dollars that were found.
So perhaps that would be a more private donation.
Grants are one thing, but if grants to then become
another grant is unlikely, most grantors
do not want to get money for that.
But if there were private funds, the arts grants
could continue.
Now that said, there still would be
public art in the community going on. There's maybe community development,
electoral boxes, there's some murals I believe community development can still be
overseeing, but this specific art grant money would disappear until funding would return.
So I'll just be clear, I am a serious no-go on that one. In particular, if I had the $850,000, $900,000,
I'm a serious no-go on that 50K.
Everything else?
So a question from the rest of the council is here.
Do you share that no-go with the mayor?
Thumbs up or just a quick question?
Yeah, I got a question.
I agree with that.
I do not want to eliminate the arts program.
However, I am open to eliminating the comedy festival.
I think the arts program is a long-lasting something
That will be there to enjoy for a long time to come.
So that is no go, I agree with that.
I'm a winner, it's a short event, you see.
And I will conclude with that, with me
at private planning for the Calvary Festival.
The time is now.
All right.
Others on the great arts program adult,
as they are to stop no go?
Don't need to go together.
Just to clarify with the arts grants, the money for the grants has been reducing over the past three years. In part because just be around applications we see becomes a little less of us annually. So this here is our grants portion of the 50,000, 30,000 dollars.
so it hasn't been reduced in all those years just to give you enough confidence and to give you some context when I was
in Washington talking the National Endowment for the Arts. They loved that we're doing this.
I think that if we said double that money and maybe that means we've cut it to 25 so we get 20 by the end.
And I know federal money for that amount can be a pain but that's why if they really feel strongly we need to at least hold it for a little bit.
And maybe if we can't work it all out and can't get private funding, then later, but for right now, that would really bother me.
Thank you.
Can I ask a follow-up question? Because, again, this is like the first slide of the money that we have, and there's going to be a significant amount of money.
And so if I'm going to start saying no go on class, because I wouldn't want to know,
going back to our original principle question, what offsets that, because we're still going
to remove that from somewhere else.
Right.
And so I want to remind everybody that we're not making budget decisions today, this is
just some guidance.
Go ahead.
Alright.
I have to do something.
Alright.
And I have to check.
So yes.
In the interest of time, we have a lot that we want to get through and I want to make sure that we don't shortchange some of the content and the information we want to share this afternoon because to your point, we go through, I think that there are eight, ten slides, we could easily go to three on these topics.
And so a couple questions, first of all, what we really need to understand today is are there areas like the grants program that there are four people that are like, no, please, no, thank you, that will be instructive.
You're going to get a lot more information on the details behind this, but what I also want to highlight that I'm hearing, and I hope you're hearing it too, is that in these preliminary ideas,
The work that has gone into that really speaks to some of the principles you've already talked about.
How can we do this differently? How can we really minimize the impact on the community?
How can we be more efficient?
And so I would anticipate that you would hear more about that analysis as you're hearing budget proposals.
These aren't budget proposals just yet. These are budget ideas.
So with that, yes, to the trade-offs. There need to be trade-offs.
That's a principle. We're probably not going to get into the specifics of those today,
But we need to name them and understand that if we are removing something as a majority,
that there's going to need to be an offset someplace else, right?
You're going to have to find other resources.
So that means going back to the drawing board potentially, coming up with new ideas to bring forward.
Okay.
So, is your question?
I'm trying to understand where we need to go for the arts.
So let's close that one out.
So on the Eliminate the Art Grants program, the Mayor and I think all you
agree, Councilmember Simon, are no on those.
But we need to hear if there are four people that agree with that.
You're saying that it's fine to say no or it's fine to continue.
Just to keep it in the no cut for now to discuss.
We're not making a decision today, it's just the bank of things that we want to dig
deeper into and get more questions on. yeah okay. I'm okay cutting you. Okay. Is it off
the table? That's the question. Right, but off the table is different than are we
only talking about it later which is what was just a firm vice mayor. Right. If it's
still here then it comes back to you as a conversation later. Okay that's not
what I understood. If it's there it's presumptive that it's part of the cuts.
if we're pulling it off we're being purposeful and saying I don't know about
this one we'll get another patient I don't know about this one I'm gonna put
those separately though we're gonna add them up and say wow 1.5 million dollars
of presenting might say okay we'll take half of those and we'll do something
else but I think that as I understood what was laid out, if I'm wrong
correctly, but it's these are presumptively going to be cuts unless we
say let's pull something off for further discussion in the future and it may
come it may be cut in the future but at least there's some things that are
bothering us we're not gonna resolve that bother today but we're trying to
pull stuff to the side am I understand thank you so much and thank you for
I sent that question to Mr. Mayor.
So everything that you see on the list
that is on there right now will be coming back to you
in the Finance Committee, future council meetings,
where you did, like I said earlier,
it's an iterative process.
So even if it's on the table today
and you leave it on the table,
it doesn't mean tomorrow, you can't change it.
But today, if you say absolutely not,
we cannot cut this thing, you will not see it again.
So for example, there are four council members who say,
limiting the grants program is that no, then that means we have to find that 50,000 also
and you will never see it again from us that it's a cut so it works two ways so that's
why she's asking for four people for it to disappear from the cut category.
And it's not 50,000 it's less.
Well I said portion.
Do you know approximately what is that?
Do we know approximately?
the grants first is the economy 30,000 this year for the grants version and
20,000 was for comedy however it is just one big like item for art for public art
so that could be moved in any way you want. So 30,000. So does that make sense? Does that help to clarify
verify it for work, and I know it's a lot of information
and it's a lot to process, and so I recognize that.
But the idea here is, is there a consensus?
Is there a fore good rate?
We don't want to say that again.
No, thank you.
That's the question.
On the 30K.
On the 30K, for me, exactly right.
That's right.
I think we have three right now.
Yeah, all right.
So you want to leave this still on?
Yes.
Okay.
All right, so then you'll have further discussion on it
going forward, it just stays on the list for the moment.
All right, and so I'm going to take us to our next slide
and I'm gonna just remind us of our time constraints
and I wanna make sure that we can address the things
that we need to.
And if we need to, we will pivot
and we have these items on those different ones.
We'll go through them.
Okay, so Public Works and Infrastructure.
There are two proposals that are up on the screen here.
And the question is, is anything eligible to not come back?
Or if you have questions.
I have a question about number six.
I just had two great jobs by our city in two areas.
Actually, three now, because of last week yesterday,
were a wonderful job around answering the call
to clean these situations up and I really, really appreciate it.
So now I'm looking at $290,000 cut in that.
Does that mean we're not going to be cleaning up anyone?
I know it doesn't mean that.
I want to hear what this means.
Good morning, Sheila Murkeese's Public Works Director.
What you're looking at is a cut to the budget.
So take, for example, fiscal year 2027,
we're reducing our budget by $219,000,
but we still have about 293,000 remaining.
So we will continue,
and this is for using outside vendors.
We still have an inside and outside staff to do the work.
It's just the previous years.
The encampments were larger as we streamlined the process,
but slowly in time, our need for outside vendors
is reduced.
if I can just add and direct to my cases please correct me if I'm wrong. So I want to make it very
clear for counsel and I'm thanking Counselor Bo for bringing up the hard work that Sheila
Steen has done on encampment claims. They've been responding extremely well. My understanding is that
these cuts will slow the response. So for example as Counselor Bo brought up some encampments to me
it may take an additional 30 days to get them. They sit there longer. Eventually we'll clean it
But it could be a longer time that you see encampments with these cuts.
Okay, see I had not from director Marcus.
My response to that is boo, but I mean, what are we gonna do, right?
We gotta do something for them.
Uh, my, uh, question on, um, thank you, Councilmember Bolton, for bringing that up because I also have questions about that.
I think the, um, concern that I have is, um, does this include all encampment cleanup on city property and non-city property?
So I know there's a lot of cleanups happening on a right of way that does not belong to us.
yet we are cleaning it up. To answer your question, this funding is
focused on our rent away. We work with the railroad for example for cleanups in
their areas but we do coordinate any response. Thank you and I just wanted to
elevate the state the state of California's priority and actually tying
some rent funds to not doing this work and so I'm worried that the impact might
actually be larger then delayed response that there might be some a risk of either
future money or existing money if the state continues on their current path
their current kind of policy priority of cleaning up the state. So I just I think
if that does happen and just want to be flexible right that if it cutting this
and increasing response time to clean ups puts in jeopardy either existing
state money or future grants, I would want to have that conversation because I
know the state has been, the governor has been very local and very public about
this particular issue. I just want to add on to that. I wonder if there's a way,
I think that's a really good point in terms of what impact that would have
because of state-wide policies and I imagine that this would not be the only
being for example and so maybe how do we work that into the decision making or
balancing the budget. So if there for example is a point where like this is
our plan and that something comes down from the state that says if you don't do
this or if you don't provide this then this is at risk then it triggers
something for us to look at again and say you know we have to then move things
around but from the beginning this is our plan to reduce fees from these
buckets, but if in the end it will cost us more to reduce it, then actually keep
it, then we have to reevaluate that.
I seem to know.
And that might be something that as you're looking at your budget principles, you
want to keep your fresh eyes to also, like, if there is going to be a net loss in terms of your
ability to respond because of lost revenue. So that's, you know, it's called, this is far
more complicated than just looking at something and being like, yes, okay.
So it's definitely an involved and analytical exercise to look at these choices.
Okay, Council Member Lander.
Yeah, I have concerns with the third party cleaner as well.
First is the question, do you confirm where are these cleanups?
Is this just sitting properly or is this not above the correct protocol?
By the way, the second question or comment is,
I understand it could take longer to clean up,
But is it like graffiti where if you don't clean up graffiti, it grows and grows and grows and grows, so if you don't clean up a good counter right away, if you let it sit, this is going to grow and grow and grow and grow, so our problem is going to be even bigger than we started.
To answer your last question, yes, there is a possibility for the campaign to grow, if left unattended.
The cleanups are focused on city property and the public right away.
Okay, yeah I have concerns about this. I mean I know we want to save, but I am worried that if we eliminate it, then it's going to grow beyond what we can keep up with.
We'll have more wrong.
Okay, so this one's a logo. I just do not support it, but I think anyone ever supports it.
I see it. I see it.
I'm very concerned because I think what you said was that the $219,000 to $220,000 is approximately half.
So what you're really proposing is to eliminate 95% of the budget.
So it reduces throughout each year, so we do have remaining in 2027, 219,000, and in the following year it does get reduced to 124,000 and eventually down 41,000.
Which is approximately 90% reduction, 90 plus percent reduction.
So we're removing, this plan says eliminate third party
encampment cleanup is what it really says.
Okay, so I do not think you'll have the support
for that from this group, but please survey.
Yeah, do we agree?
This comes off to a no-go.
No-go?
No-go.
No-go.
I'm not saying I agree, it's not.
But it is a no-go only because I feel like we have
cut and I'm really nervous that we're going to get to the end of this and it's going to be like you said a minute ago, like, oh, you really didn't do anything.
So I'm willing to let it sit right now up there, especially with the answer that the amount of money we've been spending in this area has continually gone down.
I feel like maybe there's an off-ramp from this path if all of a sudden we see us start picking back up and we need it.
I'm sure we would hear that from city staff, but at this point I'm okay to let it
Let this be cut I hate to say I don't want any cuts, but yes
And I will just you know again for my counsel if it stays on the list today
You will see it again and always undo it later today. It's just
Making sure that you you're like no you won't see the never again
or not because today is kind of like a preference revelation. Today if we were to say this comes
off we're saying we want to keep doing this, period. What I'm hearing is that some people
would be potentially fine with we no longer do cleanups. I'm sorry can you confirm that that's
while we're staying. I don't know if the by not taking, eliminate third party
can't make cleanup off the table means we don't support cleanups in the city
and we don't want them. Can you repeat what you just said?
What I'm saying is this specifically plans to remove
over 90 percent of the funding that is currently spent
addressing encampment cleanup. Okay so that's why I had asked about what
proportion of the budget and it was double this but you're saying that it's
not double this it's actually much bigger than this then double this. What
Let me rephrase the question. What is the budget for an cabinet cleanup?
A third party.
No, no, no. That's not my question. My question is, what's the budget for an cabinet cleanup?
The dollar amount, I don't have it for editing, but I can rephrase that.
Outside vendors do 28 cleanups. How many total cleanups do we do?
and I know that the total clean-up is minus 28, right?
I know you're asking about, no I get that, but like,
she does know that that would work.
And I do think in the future, just for clarity,
again this is third party, but also the other part
is done by staff, so we're getting an hourly rate
to clean up, you know, just the street
because it needs to be clean, and then they're
getting to, they can't, so we don't have staff
that their only job is in can't make clean-ups.
So I think that the core question, what the residents will care about is is our service
level going down by 50%, by 10%, by 90%, that's what I'm trying to get to, because I think
that's what people will care about.
Am I going to see encampments growing bigger?
Am I going to see twice as many encampments?
So this is an abstract number that it's unclear to me what it will look like in the city of
Santa Barbara, to me right now.
But what we can do, and that's the feedback narrative,
but what we can do is through the budget process,
there's questions to address this later.
If it stays on the list, we'll bring it back
and address it later.
And that type of question,
when we come to Finance Committee in March,
we can have them better picture up
the number of things we've done,
less 28 minutes left.
We answered those types of questions.
So since it's preference for elation,
let me be clear about my preference.
My preference is that we do not diminish
the work that we are doing.
Because I fear that it will exacerbate
just like whether it's graffiti, or the like.
So I want to keep doing,
whether we do it internally, externally.
If you're saying, we can get rid of these people
because we can handle it without them,
you can deliver the same service level.
We can talk about that at finance,
we can talk about, but those are discussions
that we need to have.
And I'm willing to keep having those discussions.
I do not want to avoid those discussions.
and I'll get right at this topic now.
No, no, no, it's very helpful.
And so it's instructive.
So as these items are coming back before you,
it's helpful for staff to hear how to frame it
in terms of impacts and what the absolute impact is
to the community in terms of services.
Also, remember, we have our tool, the bindfract.
And so where there is specific interest for understanding
order of magnitude or specific data elements,
we can put that one on there.
There may be others that arise as well.
I just want to add, and just to clarify, Mayor,
one thing you said that made me question
how I was approaching this was you mentioned
this is our preference revelation.
And I had a difficult time with the idea
that this, by saying no, though, it means we only,
this is the thing I care most about,
because I cannot go through this list
and say this matters more, no matter what.
especially not knowing all the information.
And so I just want to share that by not saying I'm taking this off.
It doesn't mean I don't care about art.
So I don't care about, you know, in Canada.
Or I don't want the quality that you mentioned.
So maybe that helps our conversation a little bit smoother.
Because if I'm not, you know, if I'm not saying logo,
it's not because I don't support the work that you've done.
So that's, thank you, that's helpful.
Well, I said on this because although he is not here for us number, I did share some feedback with me based on what I have heard thus far.
I'm not going to introduce something that he had pointed out because no one else has brought it up. So we're going to move on.
All right. And so just to restate, what I'm hearing is that we need more information, we need better context, but we're not striking it as a doggo.
Is that accurate? Do we feel comfortable with that?
All right, that's all I've got.
All right, so I'm going to take us then to our next slide.
So if anyone can help us over to the next.
So we have community support and human services.
So there are a number of items on here.
And of course, we, again, have staff here
to answer questions that you may have as well.
So the same kind of threshold question.
Maybe that's how we imagine it, right?
It's a threshold question of like,
don't show that to me ever again.
But that's after we had any questions
that we might need to ask, to clarify, understand.
Yeah, how's it going to sound?
Can you just clarify the total amounts, for example,
number 10, security services reduction.
The 33, the first year, 20, the next year, and then blanking 29?
Does that mean there's something in 29 or nothing?
So my interest is that would be cumulative, right?
So it would be 53,000 ongoing, no additional reduction
in the third year, outside of what is ongoing, right?
Go ahead.
We are starting this funding with about 65,000 and so we'll continue to have a small portion
of funding beginning in fiscal year 29 so we're making some reductions but not completely
eliminating security services.
Okay.
Can I make a comment or is there a question?
My comment is I'm concerned about this cut from a safety standpoint for our seniors.
And I want to know, is there any, do you have any information on security incidents there?
That letting us believe that it's okay to reduce this?
We do have some information on the security incidents at the Senior Center.
It is a utilized service.
However, it's most often utilized during larger events
and our food distribution days.
And so, what we have budgeted for
is ongoing security services for those larger events
and for food distribution days.
Just not a 40 hour per week security service.
Okay, so during normal operating hours
with senior activities, is there security?
Will there continue to be security here?
In fiscal year 29, that will not be a service that we provide with this proposal.
Even not an event, just a regular, say it's a bingo event, a bingo class,
does someone at the facility, does nobody want to be no security?
No, it would only be for the food distribution days for
the Mercy Brown Bag program, which happens twice a month.
And then for larger events such as the Thanksgiving luncheon or
other events where you're seeing a lot of more people coming into the senior center.
Is there security now, all the time?
There is.
Yeah, I have concerns.
I just really want to make sure our seniors are safe.
A lot of times they can be victimized and I don't want that to happen.
So I have concerns about that. Thank you.
Can you speak to number 11,
to eliminate the investigation of violence case management?
Sure, so our partners at Family Violence Block Center,
currently offer a 24-7 mobile crisis team.
The City of San Leandro funds additionally services
for ongoing case management.
So what this funding would eliminate
is that ongoing case management.
Members of our community would still have access
to call the crisis line.
They just wouldn't receive the ongoing
dedicated case management services
to connect individuals to other services in the community.
After they had reached out.
Correct.
I will share that when we discussed this option
with Family Lydler's Law Center,
they were unsure if our funding cuts
would eliminate the program.
So they did share it's very important to them
continue offering this service, and so they may seek funding elsewhere. That's why it's a potential impact.
That was a pretty tough one for me. And then the other one was just a few things that are such right in front of me.
Sorry Michael, you've got to give it back.
I'm sorry, it's 11 and 12, it seems like, that everybody wants to give it back.
I just wanted to elevate that in terms of security services, there is still staffing levels, right?
There's staff, like city staff, that are walking around, providing services, so I just again to...
I think that having a security guard, you know, might help in terms of the sense of safety.
safety but I'm just wondering if like how many incidents do they actually
respond to. So I'm not opposed to it just because I know staff is present
staffing the facility. The item 12 on the shelter subsidy to building futures is
that is it to eliminate it completely or is that a percentage of a current like
larger subsidy. This is to eliminate the city's general fund contribution to
building futures however the city does allocate 100% of our homelessness
housing assistance prevention state funding to building futures for shelter
funding for both sister me home and family shelter typically in the amount
of $200,000 again moving. So that is still on the that is not correct so this is
general fund money is correct and then the actually I'm just leave out there
that's it. I have a question around the city support for school crossing crime
program. You go and ask what he walks up to. In municipalities is it common for the
city to pay those funds, SLUSC will need to identify funding. Is that something that they had done in the past?
I just want to make sure that we still have cross regards because we, you know,
it's like vision zero and I really do care a lot about whether the kids can safely get to and from school.
Sure, thank you council member. Eric Anglard, that makes me mad, you're happy to address your question.
In general, I would say there are a variety of funding models that exist in different municipalities.
The current structure that we have had in place here in San Diego for a number of years now,
likely going back to around the, certainly going back to the Great Recession era,
is it's a split cost right now. We share those costs 50-50.
So that number up there represents the city's like half, 50% share of what's going on here.
And does that number go up and down for example they had the school district has actually I
Don't know who's paying for it, but there are more crossing guards now
Because of a need for them and so does that mean that the city that incurs like additional costs or that was just what we were putting in
Correct. So what I would say is this as part of the biennial budget
Process baseline development process every two years we connect with the assistant superintendent for business services at the school district
and we check in with them, what is their forecast for the upcoming biennium?
And if one looks at the trend line over years, those costs will certainly
increase every cycle, and it's not only
necessarily a factor. I think I want to acknowledge we don't directly control those
costs, because ultimately the contract for the crossing guards is housed
and managed by the school district, and they hire out a third party vendor
to provide who actually employs the crossing guards. And so we
to control the scope of services and which specific schools and allocation and
how many crossing guards are allocated. So we can't control that views at the
city level. Moreover, there's also just increases, just elevators associated with
the costs of those staff who work for that third-party vendor that we also
can't control. So for example, just general, broader macro-economic costs that have
increased, cost of labor, cost of wages, cost of benefits, etc., have also increased
overtime and so as a result those costs you will see if you look over time they
continue to go up like many other costs in the macro economy none of which we can
directly control because the school district administers that contract and
hires that vendor etcetera and so in some ways we really are just depending on
whatever costs allocation methodology the school district arrives we have to
absorb that by virtue of our 50% share as currently structured.
Interesting that you had some hope.
OK, so for me, the Connery of Winter shelter, I was told repeatedly that it's not for lack
of funding, it's for lack of a qualified vendor.
I think that we'd have some sort of shelter facility in San Leandro over the winter for
at least a few months, the coldest, rainiest months out of the year.
How we do that, I'm not quite sure.
But that, to me, is personally very important.
We get people out of the rain, not to say forever,
but when they are absolutely most vulnerable.
Number two, on the domestic violence case management funding,
I think that the type of insight that you provided
is really important on all of these cuts.
Because what I hear you saying is,
this is our way of contributing to support them.
But it doesn't necessarily drive the outcome, i.e.,
they may still provide the service
because they can get funding
from another foundation or the like.
Obviously, through our, just as our support
for this type of thing is really important,
but what I really care about is the service.
And so the service remains, and I don't have to pay for it
because some individual is supporting the foundation
and less concerned.
So I've got greater flexibility there,
and it's one of the three that I flagged.
And the third one, eliminating the shelter
substitute building features.
Again, being able to see a holistic picture
is fundamental to this discussion.
So this is 100%, but it's 100% of the general fund,
as opposed to how is the city at the big picture choosing
to allocate funding that it receives.
to the HABP funding.
Do we write a grant that's specific to building futures?
Like, what is the mechanism by which that money is going?
$200,000, I think you said, going to building futures.
We receive money, state funding, which
is administered through Alameda County.
And we direct 100% of that funding to building futures.
we have for, I would say, the last four or five years,
then so far nothing has changed
in terms of that strategy.
So I'm just saying that when we have these discussions
at finance, as a council's whole,
we really have to understand the context,
because this would be a 20% decrease
of the money that the city finds the way
to get to building the futures,
as opposed to here, it looks like it might be
100% decrease just at face value. Same thing for the security guards. I was unclear, are we eliminating security guards or are we just cutting back the security guards at the senior center?
Cutting back.
Okay so that 10% 20% 50% etc. Not to be resolved right now, but I just think that's the impact, the proportion impact.
And then lastly on the crossing guards, is this only for SLUSD, or is this also coming similar in some schools within the city?
So by launch I would share, we did the partnership and the 50% cost sharing arrangement is currently set up with both districts.
districts, but by virtue of the fact that there's such a relatively smaller amount of school districts,
or schools from the SLUS, San Lorenzo, that are in arms that are proposed under those.
We're factoring in both school districts, but it's a much smaller, I forget the percentage,
but it's a very low percentage of that school that represents the San Lorenzo districts.
Thank you.
OK, so these are, have you ever made sure?
I just want to say I'm not going to bring that.
For 11.
OK, so let's do, so let's take the temperature, then.
So on number 11, eliminate domestic violence case
management funding.
There are about four agreements that we
want to take this off the list, not see it again.
Move forward.
OK, I'm not seeing any additional,
so we'll come back, but it's noted.
And I just want to say that hearing the questions
and the conversation is really helpful.
Even if there's something that you feel uncomfortable with
that's coming back, the information
and the questions you're asking will be instructive to you
how they become presented back to you.
And so this is a really productive time.
I'd like to suggest, it's new, but that we
get through the balance of these if everybody
is comfortable proceeding.
And then we will take a break for our lunch.
Does that work for everybody?
OK, we have four more pages to go.
So I want to point that out.
So we're going to move on then to our next one, which
Jen, you want to flip this over to police and fire.
So we're talking about public safety options.
So starting off with questions and comments
for a police and fire.
So number 17.
So they'll go for me, and I want to see that cut.
But I do want to understand some of the questions.
How many times, because they break it down on the right,
this is reduction of the beds from four to two.
How many nights do we eat four compared to when
you get away with two?
And then we just, you know, I'm just going to say this.
We just approved for five police capabilities, and it was roughly this price, so I feel like
we can go back and say, okay, you know, we're only going to have two vehicles or one vehicle,
we need to keep this and we can find the funding somewhere else.
But, yeah.
But, yeah.
Good afternoon.
Page movie division, 2000, canning fire.
To answer your question on the beds,
the beds that we have are full, 100% of the time.
I would say that the data shows we want to offer a bed
to a client and 90% of the time a bed is taken.
So they fill up as soon as they're open.
The demand there is huge.
I just want to clarify the answer.
You're not running beds.
Which beds?
These are the emergency respite shelter beds that our partner provider, Carteta Health, offers.
So, these are, it's called Eddie's Place.
The facility is located in Oakland.
They take substance use abuse, mental health, clients are provided by the kid, yeah.
I would agree with Council Member Dole.
I'm a strong no-go on item 17.
reduction of the alternate response unit.
I see us going backwards and creating more problems.
This is the big reason why I joined City Council was killing Stephen Taylor.
And this is one of the reasons, this is one of the options for
the solutions that we have to prevent future issues from occurring.
I'm really strong on this.
I think we're going backwards big time.
is going to hurt the city in the future.
This is probably as strong as one of this whole meeting today.
Thank you.
Yeah, I just would like to also add my thumbs up
to Anoka on this, particularly because the folks being
supportive, which that case has already been stated,
but I think the partnership with SLEA and the businesses,
The business community really sees this as a good response
to the situation.
And so I would add my voice to that.
I'm just staring at all of it.
I mean, I align with all the other, the counsel
that the importance of the ARU and the advocacy of it.
And obviously, wanting to build a fully funded.
So the thing that is hard for me to wrap my mind around right now is such a significant
cost.
So we have been going through the last three pages and all the logos that we even considered
would even add up to this one FY2029 in cost.
So that's just something to kind of grapple with in terms of balancing.
And I could make arguments for some of the other programming even to do with like parks
in rec and library services that we're talking about
trying to address causes or ensure
that we're really addressing mental health services
like the Community Services Cup that we have before,
like that's what makes it really difficult
for me with this one.
I think I would want to at least have
more of a conversation around it in finance
and to the council around different types of funding for it
or if we can finagle some changes around that.
I just, I obviously, we're not removing
the ARU program, we're simply reducing some of the services.
It's trying to address some of our budget right now.
And so that's, I didn't demonstrate yes or no, but
those are the things that I'm trying to weigh right now.
I think it comes in place as Council Member Bowen.
I think everything's on the table to some degree, it's about tweaking.
And so, you know, just getting some feedback from Councilmember Aguilar.
It's not about eliminating the program.
I don't think you'll get any interest up here to eliminate the program.
But can the program be modified?
Can we shave some cost?
We're going to get at least, in the big picture right now, three Councilmembers that will
say we need to at least be open to thinking about that.
So I don't think we're going to get four thumbs on, except it's absolutely protected.
All right, the voices of the room are helpful to hear, and that's on year three also.
So, I'll just point that out.
So there's also some lead time, councilman Simon.
Just one more clarifying question on the ARU.
I wanted to know what the impacts are to our police department if we reduce this.
Is this going to strain our police officers even more than they already are?
And what is the cost implications of that?
Is that factored in?
good afternoon, international police chief.
I'm not going to speak about the financial aspect of it,
but what I will say is that ARU has
been an incredible resource for our police officers.
Our police officers waste a lot of frustration
with not having the ability to get people
to beds or other resources that they need in that time of need.
And so ARU, not only are they a great partner,
but they're a valuable resource that
will absolutely impact the police department
because it will mean that our officers will have
to spend additional time dealing with the population
that Eric deals with.
So it will have a significant impact.
Okay, with any other questions or comments
at this point on this one that your comments have noted.
All right, on the movements to the next one.
So community economic development.
Now we're gonna have a couple, three slides.
they have a number of suggested proposals here.
So starting on the 18 through 21 questions
related to those that are on the screen.
General comments, okay, that's really cool.
I know some people are gonna hear this,
but what does it do if we start cutting even sooner?
Like, you know, 2027 for 18 and 19.
as far as the contractual stuff that we're doing.
No, it's a good question and it's open for discussion.
Our department, you can see we have several slides,
our budget targets for the three-year period were very high
and so we've met about $1.6 million in reductions
over the three years.
And then we try to be very intentional about phasing them
so that we give our partners time and our staff time
to adapt to the very severe reductions
that we're putting forward.
So if we pull them forward,
there would just be less time for us to adapt
and to come up to seat.
So it's essentially like the first one.
We do third-party plan-tracking for building permits.
We're gonna be training up our team
to handle more of those permits in-house.
And we would like that time to train
and get them up to come to seat.
Yeah, number 19, I'm really concerned about reducing the downtown ambassadors.
This, I see increased calls for PD service.
Our PD is also strained as it is, very similar to the ARU we just talked about.
And we're in the process of going up with our downtown, and
I see this taking us back down.
I'm really strong on this.
I've seen these ambassadors how important they are, how they help with even house,
how they just help people who need assistance.
And I see this as a really important growth opportunity
for our downtown and our city.
And I do not support eliminating the investor program.
Understood.
I'll just say everything on this list.
Most things are very difficult.
Cuts are reductions to recommend.
We worked with our partners,
you know, and all of the service providers
that we've entered community development
to find the way to keep the programs going.
Try not to do full elimination,
but scale back services across the board
to meet the budget reductions.
But we agree it's a vital program.
It's just over 3,000 deescalation in a class a year.
Yeah, I see this back to the core.
I see this as safety,
because there's a lot of sketchy things
that happen downtown,
and I've seen them stop looking at it.
So I'm concerned about safety impacts
some of these cuts we're looking at. Yes I agree with number 19 with Councilmember Simon. I think
that the return on investment of the safety ambassadors is significant. We just heard a
presentation from the Duncan Association and in 2020-18 they'll also be having to
convince the businesses to continue the program.
And I think the idea of reducing the safety ambassadors
while trying to expand or continue in the program
will have a significant impact on the downtown.
And especially right now, when we do,
we are really building up to be able to have so much,
so many more people just out walking and shopping
and being in the downtown.
That one really, just in terms of the cost
and the return on that cost is so significant.
And for some additional context, the current budget allocation
is $351,000 a year.
So this brings it down to about $280,000.
So as you're considering all the cuts,
that's the scale of the reduction that we're proposing.
Mandy, a comment?
Questions?
OK, so on this one, I agree that I
have a lot of interest in the downtown best program.
So when it comes back to finance,
Please help us understand, potentially,
election picker production, time of day,
just something that makes it a little bit more concrete.
Ideally, with some sort of feedback from Morgan's team
at Celia and from the chamber, I also,
the element that caught my attention
was reduced event sponsorships, not a lot of money,
but significant impact.
I'm assuming that this is some of the monthly events
that we're doing.
We're giving them $3,000 to just help subsidize the cost.
Is that correct?
Yes, it's a downtown event.
So I'm just saying it drives activity into downtown.
We've kind of developed a brand around this.
And once you give momentum, just stop momentum
when it's going for such a small amount of benefit,
I think it's just highly consequential for the amount
the money that we spent to encourage that to happen.
So those would be the two that catch my attention.
So you're looking at all of the economic development,
key economic development items.
So we were on the first slide here,
so I just want to make sure that anybody else had comments
related to the second slide,
which is where we have the reduce event sponsorship.
Other comments here, or even on this third slide,
we had two further.
So I want to make sure that we're not shortchanging
questions or comments that Council may have. I'm sorry are we just looking at that slide or at all the economic?
Yeah, now or if we just open it up. So I'm particularly concerned about looking at line 25, bullet number one,
reduce budget for third-party and landlord services and housing assistance services I think that as
we are implementing, next slide. As we implement our rent civilization ordinance and as it kind of
goes live, I think that that particular bullet to me would like to know what
the amount is for that one bullet because I think that there will be an
increase just in terms of questions of like what what is this and I don't know
if that was included in the budget for the rent stabilization implementation.
We can bring back more details on this for the finance committee. This is our
city-wide program that's existing it's not specific to the tenant landlord
resources that will be provided through rent stabilization rent program but
we'll bring more details it's about a ten percent reduction every single
program community development operates has taken a haircut and this proposed
budget so there's no consultant no program that was left hold just for
context, but we'll provide those details.
Okay, I'll turn it over to Sam.
Yeah, number 26, I'm concerned about the first time home buyer reduction, more information
on the amount of reduction, and this goes into lots of different avenues, so one of
them I'm just thinking of is the whole redlining resolution and providing housing for people
who haven't had the ability to have housing historically in St. Angel and I see this as a direct item that helps people that haven't had that opportunity.
So I'm very concerned about that and in my mind becoming a home buyer is so important for people and it would have made a lot of issues
hearing about, about opening and taking advantage of when you're entering.
Absolutely, yeah, it's a very important program and the funding reductions that
we're showing here would functionally make the first party program infeasible.
We write from about 82,000 down to 32,
which is just not enough money to run a successful program and contract.
So a lot of this work would be shifting to staff and maybe taking on more and
more work, which is why earlier we talked about the delays proposed for the mobile home
program, because with all these cuts, our staff is absorbing all that work. So something's
got to get involved.
Okay, I'm a hard-known one. This one, because of home ownership, it's still important to
me for those questions. Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, any other questions or comments on these?
Alright, so I'm not hearing on these consensus of four to take it completely off, but noting
the note of your comments or your concerns along the way, which is, again, highly instructive
and helpful to hear.
Okay, ready to move to our last area?
So this is the general fund transfer to capital funds, and so reducing that investment for
capital projects.
I'll just make a comment. I understand the need, why we need to do it, but it's really disheartening to see continued degradation and street road improvements.
We're just, we're arresting the city. I understand why it's being done, and that's where the bond measure comes in, in fact bringing money in, how important it is.
I mean just something to add to this.
I think what I would want to ensure is that as I mean this is essentially we're delaying
improvements, right? So I'm just concerned that there is equity in the physical parts of the city
to ensure that it's uniform so that there is not a perception and that there are a reduction in
potholes or a reduction in like the senior community center versus the marina community
center that it is across the board because I am sensitive to the fact of a
perception whether it's true or not but a perception that certain parts of the
city get more funds or that they are not you know
susceptible to those cuts and just and looking in the I'm looking into like
what the process will be for the decreased funding infrastructure needs
them, what's the next in between that and the CIP plan? Just in terms of process, I
just want to figure out what that is a million dollar deferral. Thank you for
that question. So this would be a subsidy from the general fund to the capital. So
there would still be a capital budget, there would be opportunities for grant
funding to support these efforts. This is just a, we're showing a one million, we
would bring forward to the Finance Committee how our transfers are broken
up over the next several years. A huge portion of that is related to road
improvements as well as facilities and parks and so we would provide that
information and look to the committee and to the Council on how they would recommend
the distribution of the reduction of the million dollars.
Yes I'm really concerned about this one and one on the first slide around
core services, well with public safety and EMS and fire and we have our roads
and our roads are and maybe I think we're the second worst CPI in the county
I think by just one and in our last ACTC meeting we approved some requirements
for grants and at minimum you have to have at least 60 which we do not have
And so our CPI is not going to improve without being reported.
We talked about deferrals, we're trying to prevent further cuts.
And I'm really afraid that if we don't spend money on our roads,
we're going to have to spend more money on our roads.
And the conversations around equity,
there are so many layers of that.
obviously like where are we located.
I just, you know, recently learned about, you know,
if we're closer to the water and the foundation of the land
and, you know, like the impacts that like the trucks
and cars would have on that versus other areas.
And so, or if I go for a pothole and it costs me $600
the impact on me could be significant
versus a different person and what that means.
And so just trying to think through like
services were provided in the city and how we're really serving our residents and so I just this one is I know that it's a
very big number
But it is it's a new one or like a critical move that we're just it's a hard one that we're going to have to attract
I agree on our
wholeheartedly
I'm trying to use that
concept of you pay the smallest billion you have with the most money first
get off your plate
I've been in line with that, taking the $3 million and throwing it right at the streets and roads for the next three years.
Doing our best to make sure that we're not dropping it, we're taking out two different grants.
But I don't know, it's just, it's really tough to see this, but
I don't know if I'm 100% no-go, because I know smarter people that look at me and
understand and do good and I- Okay, so for me, I am no-go.
I feel adamant when I first started, I said that I was gonna focus on the total
cost of running a city.
This is part of the total cost that we've ignored for years.
we have underfunded our roads for many years.
What happens is that as the road degrades
and the PCI falls, you get to a point,
and this is math, this is engineering, this is science,
you get to a point where you go off a cliff.
That's where we are.
And where we're treading water
would be the best description, but we're in trouble.
And as councilor Bowen rightfully pointed out,
ACTC maintained those discussion
about dropping the PCI minimum.
We said, no, we're gonna keep it at 60
because we owe it to particularly our poorer residents.
You see, our roads are free to use.
And so the equity consideration is paramount here
because when you damage the car of someone
who can't afford to fix their car,
when you're damaging struts, axles, blowing tires, etc.
That has a significant impact
on our individuals who can't afford to pay.
So I feel very strongly that this is a no-go.
I know that you'll get the four votes or consensus here,
but that to me is paramount
and we're just kicking the can down the road.
Even if a revenue measure of some type passes,
we need to recognize that we have so many problems
in our infrastructure, and we're gonna come down
in this presentation right in about 20 pages.
It is, we're not even talking about the stuff
that we haven't funded that we have to fund.
So we're just missing the boat
if we're willing to put this on the table.
To me, this is just avoiding making
some more difficult decisions, and no disrespect
to the team, because I know it's very painful
what you're already doing, but this is the hard stuff.
This is, this is why we get paid the big bucks to set up at this diocese.
I support pulling this off the table, I agree with the mayor, this is really important.
This is a hard decision almost like the Mulford Library where we don't have money to do it
but we knew it was that important to do the library so we did it anyway.
And I feel this is just like the library.
we have to do this.
So, my dumb is up.
And we need to keep doing this,
and remove this from the public concerns.
Okay, to continue the conversation,
you're saying, take off list,
continue to contribute from the general plan
to the capital funds for the road,
particularly the roads, as well.
I'm hearing you talk about people.
Okay, do I have others that agree?
Or for the conversation, obviously,
there's a lot in this,
in terms of what the conversation might look like,
I thought you were a no-go, I'm sorry, this is not useful for the folks that have access
needs.
I think we need to talk about it.
I mean, I think maybe not a million.
I need to look at the capital improvement plant and figure out if we are going to focus
on one of these things, like streets, then let's focus on streets.
I don't want to say no go on a million dollars because we need to tease that out more.
So I want to keep it in the conversation, but I don't want to not transfer it.
So I want to keep it as is, and then I want to zero in on the streets.
Okay, we feel the same.
She always says it myself.
Sometimes that's really handy, but it helps a lot of us keep it.
Okay, alright, so obviously lots to choose out here, and lots of recognition and concern
around the streets, and so what does that look like with a conversation to continue
around that's what I'm hearing today.
All right, so that gets us through all of the initial ideas.
And again, this is just seeding the conversation
for future discussion.
So just to recap, there was nothing
that formally came off the list as a no go.
However, there was a lot of concern
and it expressed along a number of the items.
And so unless somebody heard differently,
Those are my notes, so we didn't have anything stripped from the consideration list.
Let's just watch the reservation.
Okay, all right.
So we're going to break for lunch, and then we will come back, and talk about the work plan,
and where that stands, and what's on deck.
And then we will, who's going to come back?
I'm not going to go work on it, but...
Yeah, yeah, I think so.
Okay, we are coming back after lunch.
And it's only two minutes after 12.45, so we're pretty good.
So what we're going to do now is go through very briefly
the work plan, the city manager and her staff
who developed the work plan and our working network plan
based on the city council's priorities.
So I'm going to just flip through to public safety
and turn this mic over to you please.
Thank you.
Good afternoon. I would like to spend a few minutes talking about some of our major accomplishments.
The good news is that we've had so many, it was hard to narrow it down, so just a couple.
So, as you can see on the slide, our goal was to increase our joint staffing to 78%, so even though we're 1% short,
on track and happy to report right 77% and on the rise.
We started a program in August of last year
where community members could sign up
to be a free grant analyst.
And so far we've distributed 648 cameras to the community,
which has increased our public safety efforts.
We participated in 14 community events,
including our annual Cookies, Little Cops,
and United for Safety and National Light Out.
I'm very happy to report that by the results of our efforts,
we were able to very quickly identify and capture
two homicide suspects within days of the incidents occurring.
And as far as our animal control efforts,
we reunited 96 doctors and care owners
and reduced our overall animal intake.
Before we started this project,
our numbers were through the roof.
For some reason, our city has a lot of animals,
like stray animals.
They're run wild.
But we've really narrowed our focus,
and figured out how to reduce our intake
through responsible means, such as social media messaging.
And we are in the process of working on micro-trivings
for our residents.
Next slide.
in this slide just to pick what our efforts are today,
all of our projects right now are on track.
I'm very happy to report.
And I think that's all right.
Thank you so much, Katie.
Good afternoon.
She remembers again, public service director,
pleased to report the progress that we
made with infrastructure.
I'll just sit here, just going to highlight the parties
that we've been able to throw because
of our new infrastructure.
The top right there is our scene-teeler pavilion.
This is the ribbon-cutting ceremony
early this year in January.
Behind Council, you'll see our new public art installation
called Life Force.
And the bottom right is the ribbon-cutting ceremony
from Memorial Park.
And this is our city's first all-abilities art,
which the ribbon cutting was about September last year.
We listed on the table up top of our projects
that are on track for upcoming.
On the bottom I wanted to dive a little bit deeper
on the projects that we're recommending to discontinue.
It's titled asset management,
but the focus here is software
that was eliminated in our budget.
And I just want to make sure you're continuing
to manage our assets, but we do have a program
that we use internally for our work order system.
And this was budget to enhance or upgrade that software.
Our focus, you know, I have a few slides in this later
in the presentation, but our focus is going to be more
on the larger investments in our facilities,
the roofs and the exterior. The enhancement for the software was to focus on the individual
components in our facilities, which was not our focus at this time. So for the software
budget, that was proposed to be helped.
He sent the SUNYGA Recreation Parks Director. This was a joint effort for this work plan, quality
life work plan. So there is a lot a lot of accomplishments. I do want to share that this
plan was presented in October 2024 and it was intentionally designed to align with a lot of
department strategic plans and adult and master plans. And so I do also want to share that since
that time we have a completion we've completed 81% of that work plan and so
highlighting that several initiatives were delivered ahead of schedule and
just really demonstrating that that alignment between council priorities at
department work plans works very well. We can go to the next slide I'm going to
summarize some of the accomplishments. So the city launched the centralized
cultural events calendar on our website. We've expanded early childhood literacy
participation to 236 registered participants, over 22,000 books
read, allocated over 200,000 to 11 agencies serving over 10,000 residents
through food access programs, built a beautified San Leandro volunteer database
of over 600 members secured 244,000 extreme heat grant and were projected to
nearly triple participation in summer all-ages and all-ages programming
compared to 2024 when we started this plan. So those three projects are on track. I don't have any additional
updates for those but the last one we're recommending for modifications are to
to be discontinued to establish a private tree protection ordinance so the
recommendation to discontinue that just due to it being unfunded and
implementation capacity so it's not lack of commitment we're still focusing on a
lot of the directives to increase tree county coverage so still continue
community tree planning initiatives still focusing on getting private funding
We launched a sponsorship package for tree planting initiatives, as well as you, still
working on a regional tree planting partnerships with that buddy to be building an ecosystem
and grassroots group to assist with tree planting, and also incorporate tree planting into our
part in capital projects as well, too.
Katie Bowman with Economic Development,
and I will speak about the Economic Development Work Plan.
And throughout the course of the year,
we have completed a number of things under the plan,
including our two major initiatives, Innovation
Action Plan and Retail Action Plan, both of which
We'll be diving into more with you on Monday night.
Also, we have held several successful events,
including development outreach events
to introduce family and drone to businesses and developers
and encourage investment.
We have made updates to our commercial incentive program,
working to address some of the challenges
that small businesses were experiencing with it
and making it more user-friendly.
And that has really paid off because, at this time,
increased interest in participation in the program
with about six businesses in the program at this time.
Also, a multi-departmental major effort
that was completed with Public Works and Community
Development was a development process evaluation, which
looked at ways to streamline and make the development permit
process or permit center activities more efficient.
And also we developed a workforce partnership strategy
in small business assistance work plan
to help to partner our businesses
with workforce resources
and with small business assistance.
And for our work plan, our items remain on track
for upcoming and we'll share more with you throughout the year.
It's Tom Liao, the new development director.
I'm here to present the accomplishments
into the housing wellness update.
I wanted to share that, most importantly, a big picture.
We are in line with state and regional housing priorities
regarding production and protection.
As you know, we've adopted and are based over the years,
most recently, and are in the process
of implementing the rent registry.
We've also been working, even though the development
market is soft right now, we are working
on a based streamline and reduce fees.
So when the market does heat back up,
I need to continue to advance homeless prevention
mental assistance program to help lower income mentors.
So with that, I'm going to hand it over to my colleague,
human services director Jessica Verma-Dunn,
go over upcoming projects and monarchy.
Thank you, Tom.
As Tom mentioned, I've got the fun job
of sharing recommended modification.
Several, don't worry, we planned it.
Several of our projects are on track.
We do have several modifications to share with you today.
We are recommending for the mobile home space rent
stabilization ordinance delayed from bringing
the ordinance to council in June of 2027 to June of 2028.
For operating the dwelling interim housing
and drop-in center, we are recommending discontinuing
identifying the successor site.
At present, we don't have funding for beyond five years of operations.
And so while we've received funding through the state to convert this into permanent
supportive housing, part of our work plan is to identify a new location for
the interim portion.
So that would provide both capital investment as well as ongoing
operational dollars.
For that reason, we're recommending to discontinue that and
revisit at a later date.
For exploring safe parking, we are also
recommending to discontinue this project.
This is an unfunded project of our work plan.
And as such, we require ongoing operational dollars.
And as well as exploring the safety ambassador expansion
program, this is also unfunded.
And as such, we are recommending to discontinue this project.
Thank you, Eric, and it's important to do that.
Thank you so much, Jan.
Thank you to our executive team sponsors for presenting.
So this is the list of the six items that Spad and myself
are recommending for modification
to the council work plans.
We have the list here in front of you.
Your packet, you have this as a cover slide
as we move forward through this slide.
But also you have the high level look
at the work plans in totality.
And then also, I know you guys have a chance
to look at the website that we created
to have the workplace which has a lot of that detailed information.
I think this would be an opportunity for
members to ask questions or make comments on the city members' recommendations on these.
It's tough, right?
There are some things that I think everybody's connected to, but at this point you've got to do something.
And if this is the best recommendation coming forward from staff,
Yeah, at least they're painful to look at.
However, the ones that I could live with going away would be asset management, and explore
the safety ambassador program.
However, two through five, and I look to people and say, oh, it's just a tree.
but a tree, many neighborhoods are urban desert and I know these are private trees but people are just mutilating it, chopping it down and it is the air quality, it is the property value, curb appeal, everything, and I want to be interested to know how much does this work, what's the impact on this ordinance, is it?
How much staff time is it? I know it is staff time, but is it broken and improved? Is it a big one?
I would like to see the treatment stay. Mobile home rent, stabilization, definitely would like to see that stay.
I know we have some constituents in the audience who is supporting that today, but not everybody knows.
But we continue to delay in delaying because we've been in a number of years already.
So, I don't support delaying that, and I know I'm trying to cut, I understand, I got such core items.
But the welling in from housing, again, this is almost like the alternatives. Same thing.
Where if we don't have this, what problems are we going to incur?
And the safe parking, people are living in their cars throughout the city.
And as we've seen, we are doing things we shouldn't do.
Living in the cars and work homes to our environment.
And until we ask them to design the space,
they're going to continue, unfortunately, harming
our environment and our businesses.
So 1 and 6, I'm OK with getting rid of.
And 2 through 5, I am not.
OK.
Let's hear from all the House members
and then go through one by one and find out
what the majority of council has to say about each one.
Thank you.
I seem to remember that the safe parking program,
there was a difficulty in even identifying a place
where they were looking at churches.
That's my understanding that even like there's just,
there's no willingness out there to host that space.
So I think just, am I correct in that recollection?
We have had difficulty identifying a location
that could host basic parking sites.
Yeah.
I think out of all of those,
I supported keeping the mobile home
resident location ordinance amendment,
however, I do wanna clarify that we were very,
I mean, at least I was clear that just in terms of
prioritizing staff time,
that it was, and we were all told the same information
that staff, if you wanted to pursue
a rent civilization ordinance,
that we had to put a pause on that.
So I don't necessarily see that as a delay
in terms of like, it has not been looked at.
It was a trade off that as a council we had to make
because there's limited staff
and getting a rent civilization ordinance
to add to the Tenant Protection.
So I just want to just, in terms of narrative,
I don't necessarily see that as a three-year delay.
We were very clear in terms of capacity and a trade-off.
So it sounds like the City Manager wants to.
Thank you Vice Mayor, that is correct.
So what you're seeing on that item for number three
is not new information,
it's just the formal process of updating the work plan
to reflect what has been shared with the Council
through the word stabilization process that we have heard.
That's also my understanding.
And it was set at a public meeting,
at several public meetings.
I also, I'm speaking, I respect that,
but I'm still speaking.
I do, and doesn't quite understand what it means.
I'm looking at item four, the identify successor sites.
Can you, you explained it, but I wasn't here when this,
anyway, can you just rephrase that?
Yes, I will jump in and then if Tarek took the audience
to clarify anything.
But essentially, the funds that we rewarded from the state
through the home key program was under a category
of interim housing and then transitioned
into permanent housing.
And so we have our funding secured for five years.
We've been operating for one year.
But part of our funding agreement is that we will then convert that site into permanent housing
after five years of operations of interim housing.
So as of now, in five years, that site as it stands currently will either need to discontinue operations
or it will need to be relocated to a new location.
And I would add, as you know, that the Llewellyn earned housing that has been in the planning stages for several years.
And so part of that is that's exactly what we're committed to with the state to provide permanent housing and to replace and hopefully help the same population and others with the new project in five or six years.
But in terms of identifying successor sites, that was not a state requirement.
requirement that was something that we mentioned that we would see potentially
but we also were mindful that we did not have crystal ball in the future at that
time and given we now are in a very dire budget situation I think we had said
publicly as well to be aware that successor sites also mean a complete
type of service center may not be a navigation in this case again the dire
situation we're in we're forecasting that this is probably the most feasible
route going forward but we are committed to making the project after five years
into a permanent supportive mental housing project with some other
forgiveness as well that's what we are tying to in our state funding. I just want to
clarify the term supportive housing. I assume that if it was supportive housing
that it would be affordable.
Is that not the case?
Yes, supportive is typically time to be affordable.
And we are committed.
We have 29 units in the motel, current former motel,
and we are committed to at least replacing those.
We expect, because of the state laws
and our own zoning changes, that we could probably
build a more dense project that could provide other income
levels and that, as well, potentially in the long run.
I just wanted some clarifying questions.
thank you for displaying that above the Loon Interim housing, I mean that makes me oh let's
be optimistic about the future that maybe in four years something will pop up and will actually
be able to continue that that's what I'm coming for right now. Just some clarification on number
three, I know with the web digitalization that we did just recently passed and then with the
The ERP system, I think it was for the registry.
Our list of tenant protections mechanisms
that we're looking through, the archives are pushed,
but the archives are pushed,
the timelines are pushed back, correct?
That is correct.
And as we know, these are very challenging,
complex issues that we're dealing with, so.
Okay, and I also recognize that we are trying to still hire for an FTE for the vectorization
that we just passed, the ones we just passed, and the thing that's not up here that I'm
wondering about too, is in terms of, you know, we're just deemed because of something to
aren't funded, what's the, is it, is the fiscal impact much more to do with like resource
constraints with staff and height and capacity,
because we got one word earlier that some of the programs
that they were not taking away from third party countries
are also going to staff.
So try to piece together exactly where we're at.
No, that's a great question.
So it's all the above that you mentioned.
So as you said, and as some of the council mentioned,
we have been given the green light now
that our transition is to go to a comprehensive
lead protection program with that registry
since February.
So we are, so we do not have staff
at this point.
We are actively recruiting for that.
So there is a burden as we have noted
in the presentations last couple of years
on existing staff to carry some of that forward
towards implementation.
We have some critical deadlines
because we know now implementing the rent program
is priority one from this council
to hit those marks over the next six to 10 months.
We are sort of like on a path.
Now if what we're saying,
I appreciate Vice Mayor Walton to say,
this is not a discontinuation.
This is not an extended delay.
That delay number is actually for the second reading
of the ordinance.
There are multiple steps that will be presented to you
when you see the updated work plan happening.
We are asking for some relief while we are implementing
this huge endeavor for rent programs.
So in April, we are coming forward to you,
as we mentioned, with fees and a budget.
So to tie that hopefully together.
But as you can see, there's some things that we need,
given the recent prioritization of that,
we wanna make that work.
This is important to mobile homes.
I wanted to let you know the guide is going to end deadline,
the final piece, second reading final adoption.
There's many pieces that go for that
that you can be able to see in the upcoming council.
Great, thank you.
And then just to clarify,
are we, you can't do this work without additional staff.
Can you speak to some of those constraints?
Are we having issues with being able to move forward with staffing?
Well, again, we're in the process of creating a red program staff.
And so we have nobody right now to dedicate it.
We were given the general green light.
But again, the green light will also be more official when you've had a chance to look
at those fees and budget coming up.
So we are relying on the existing team.
We did make some changes on the third party, as you mentioned, in the budget.
So we do not have, we are doing like the overall long term budget.
So we are relying more on staff to fulfill some of those attributes.
I just want to up-lift something you said, you said you understood that as a council.
It was a priority to address the potential package that you'll be involved with the time.
Yes, overall, yes.
I think everything's been said that needs to be said.
It's obviously a bit frustrating, but it's the reality of the leaders at one point having
rather tall involves.
We've ended up here, we are here, now we have to make choices.
Yeah, I wanted to touch briefly on three of the items again.
And I'm hearing my colleagues, I understand that the higher financial situation ran and
and we have to make some cuts, some decisions.
However, I do want to express it in my container.
And looking at slide 60, and I understand
you can be a word writer as trade items.
But mobile home ordinance, I will hit that one again.
Because it's our seniors, primarily our seniors,
that are being impacted here, who are on the fixed incomes,
and who may, we've heard it before,
they may be on the street if we don't take action.
And I understand you're asking for more time, I got it.
But so are they, you're asking, so that they can stay in their homes,
that they want time to stay in their homes.
And they may not have that time if we do not act.
And my understanding is that they have been, when I hear it from the constituents,
they have been told we're going to be getting on this next, and then next.
So I'm really concerned about this.
like to explore it, are there other things you could trade off for that?
Recognizing staff's limitations in their timing.
So on slide 16, local preference, disparate impact study.
What is that and is that the thing we can trade out?
So can you keep moving on the mobile home for a minute?
Again, the local disparate impact is a study that's actually already been started a while back.
That actually is something that we need if we want to give San Diego residents preference
and future affordable housing projects.
And so again, that one is actually almost completed.
So it's kind of a minor thing.
And to your point, council member, I think we need to talk about trade off.
So I think what we're saying, again, we're not trying to make a major delay,
but the delay is that we would have to start looking at the things that are on track,
including the rent program.
That's the fact that I was kind of concluding.
The next one is the Welling Interim Housing, just so I understand.
Are you planning on tearing down that motel in five years and building more dense housing?
Yes, that is the program that we were funded for out of the state.
Okay, that's a pretty good building, I would think, to tear it down.
Have we looked at keeping that building as the supportive resources that it provided
looking at a new building like Dix over in District 3, I think, and tearing that down
and building there?
Again, that gets into the future and cost impacts there.
Again, under the state category that we are funded for, it's basically been doing interim
housing and eventually doing permanent housing on that site.
And so that's why the state only gave us a five-year operating subsidy because they
know that these are hugely expensive programs to run on the inner inside.
And there's more permanent financing if you get into affordable housing on a permanent
development basis.
So the site has to be torn down?
Well the other thing is that as part of the investment that the city made to buy the building,
there is value in that building and we know that there will be nonprofit housing developers
that will want to build higher denser on that property.
So it's not financially feasible to just build 29 units
on that site.
They will need to have more units.
That's why I was saying, it's probably going to be
a bigger facility with maybe more affordable units
for other income categories as well.
So we are committed to that under this grant.
Okay, but you can't build some place else.
You cannot build some place else to satisfy a requirement
like at the Dix.
We that is not currently available and again, that's future investment and and part of the commitment that we made in our event application
It was this location and we laid out a plan in our grant application for this path forward
My last one is exploring the safe parking
Curious at the corner of Williams and Doolittle. There's a lot right behind the fire station
For our piece has that been explored that particular site? That's I've bypassed
So essentially, staff have paused exploration of identifying different sites as we don't
have capital funds for acquisition or even for renting a site for a temporary period
of time.
And so we have done some initial exploration that we presented to the Rules Committee on
what were the general average expenses for a site that we were looking at, both in the
industrial and non-industrial area and those costs were hovering over a million
dollars for that property penny. So at this time because the capital expense is
just one component of what this programming costs, that's why we're
recommending discontinuing. I will say though that's not to say that if
something comes up, if county funding or state funding comes up, we won't do it. It's
just that as of now we're recommending discontinuing it from our work plan as we don't
Okay, in that particular site I'm mentioning, has that been explored?
And William's in, too little behind the fire station?
It's possible that I'd have to look back on the sites that we've looked at already.
Thank you.
And, just for clarity, Council Member Simon was going on after that question.
Unfunded does not mean that the proposals today are unfunding it.
It means when the council adopted the last budget, the council did not fund it.
Okay, so, I'm sorry.
Does that make sense? Okay.
And then I'll just, I'll add a little bit to the point against my recollection.
With respect to the safe parking site, because that was several million dollars for
anything that's sizable, and a piece of the infrastructure you have to put in.
A place to capture waste.
provision of electricity or other things to bring up to health code was my recollection of what we heard.
I think that's correct. I just can't remember off the top of my head that I wanted to be conservative.
Okay. So I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page. My sense is that the will of the majority is that this is Essex. Is that your interpretation?
Just for clarity, I don't see that there are four council members that want to take any of those off.
You've heard comments from council members, but I do not see four that want to take any off.
There's one.
There's one.
Yes.
Okay.
I think the city manager is looking for clarity so that she can proceed with staff and then come back for formal direction.
I see.
I think I would.
So, we want to just touch base on the council's top priorities.
You have five, and when James and I had the opportunity to interview council members,
we heard they're good, and those five are still relevant.
And we also heard, and it's in line of this conversation we've had all day,
that adding a baseline principle of financial sustainability could be a good thing
to underlie all of your constant priorities.
So we're recommending that we be modified
to simply add that as a baseline principle,
so that would simply become part
of how you characterize your principles.
So we're looking to see if you
as a council agree with that.
Thumbs up if you agree with that.
All right, thank you.
I'm sorry, Jane, just for the sake of the recording,
since we don't have a camera,
I just wanted for the record to show
that we have been having this consensus from the council
to have it as a paceminer.
We talked about it until now.
We are at the point when, again,
I'm gonna let it work for us first.
Yeah, I just wanted to add,
support of the one we just talked about
with finance field as a principle,
at a later time can we actually have
conversation around what the, there are these other principles that I would love
to be able to incorporate within the main equity as something that we all
care about as a principal. We're looking at our, yeah, the background. We're looking
at our student priorities. We can put that on the background. Thank you, consider it done.
First Director. Last year, I gave a lengthy presentation outlining the whole scope of this city's three-year assets.
Don't worry, I'm not going to stand here. This is one of those units with last year.
What you see here is a simplified dashboard of some of our key indicators that I monitor just to understand the overall health of those assets and the products that I'm using.
These pages represent the areas of pavement condition in deaths, that's PCI, the condition
of our critical facilities, the general grade book, and the regulatory compliance of our
trash capture requirements.
No funding policies and priorities naturally fluctuate every year.
That's why our responsibility as a public works director to keep a close eye on these
we manage the system to make sure that we're going in the right direction.
As we already touched on earlier this morning,
the city's largest and most visible infrastructure asset is our employees.
Our current wide average PCI fee recognition index is 59.
Our current payment investments about $4.5 million per year,
which is a combination of county funds fees and
The county, as the mayor mentioned earlier this morning, the county does require minimum
MTCI to remain eligible for direct local distribution funding and the for-out you see here in the
top right is that cliff that the mayor referred to.
So payment, although it's pretty predictable, is it's your radiation curve with a critical
point of about PCI of 60, which is also about the point where a resident starts being concerned
and submitting their complaints.
And if we maintain the payment before that critical claim, about 60, their repairs are
real exciting and affordable.
Once it falls past that point, deterioration in the cost of repair increases dramatically.
So you can see there in the green area, it's $8 per square yard of pavement.
But when it deteriorates significantly below in the red area, we're looking at about $100 per square yard.
So, I've inferred maintenance. It's like putting our infrastructure in a credit card.
Eventually, the bill comes due later and it costs much more.
What you see here is our gauge for trash capture.
The city has currently issued about 81% trash capture, leaving about 19% remaining to the regulatory requirements.
When I refer to trash capture, that means the systems and the maintenance and practices
that we use to stop the litter from entering our storm drains and entering the bay.
The city did not meet the June 2025 requirement and therefore the Waterborne issued us a cease
and desist order in December 2025.
a revised plan outlines approximately $16 million in projects to reach full compliance by 2020
otherwise the waterfalls may take action. So we really want to focus and stay the course.
Another way to look at the first things first mindset is, for example, when the human body
is under stress, it prioritizes the blood flow to your vital organs like your brain, your heart,
So, cities operate the same way when we're in the fiscal crisis.
So, we focus on our critical facilities and services that must remain operational to protect
life, safety, and basic community function.
So, with that, first things first line is that we start to be using the internal grading
system to evaluate the facilities that support those critical operations.
Our local hazard mitigation plan lists these facilities as critical because these are the
buildings that need to support essential services and must remain operational, especially during
emergencies.
So, focusing on the F graded facilities, these are facilities that are at the end of their
life and don't meet the current needs of the users of them.
Facilities are in fact the only part of our service delivery, when they fail, our services fail.
So staff recommends a proactive investment to avoid critical failure to preserve city facilities
in our dispatch and record management system.
We'll start with the painting of city facilities may seem like it's simply just to improve aesthetics,
but the reality is that painting preserves the structural integrity of our buildings
by protecting them from the elements and deterioration.
So two of our critical buildings are in need of painting,
that is a city hall and marina community center.
It may be hard to see,
but that's about half a million dollars for each.
And if not funded, the deterioration accelerates,
needing to return old damage,
reduce workplace quality for our occupants,
and reduce repair costs.
The fire station 10,
The roof is about 23 meters tall and it's a wooded replacement and by the cost of 625,000, if not funded, the roof will leak and damage the interior of the building as a compliment.
I'm sorry to interrupt. The fire station 10 is on Marina.
Fire station 10 is on 143rd.
Oh, okay. So we're going to go.
Oh, sorry.
Oh.
And let's pass the mic on to Kathleen Hawke.
Good afternoon, Captain Khan, I've got the chief here with me as my bodyguard.
I'm here to talk about our CAD and RMS panel, but just to kind of give you a quick overview
what CAD and RMS truly is. So the CAD is our forward-facing software. Our 911
dispatchers heavily rely on CAD that is the primary platform that they use, which
is tied into our police officers who use their mobile data to enroll. So they talk
to each other constantly. However, RMS is everything in the background that is
is essentially the skeleton backbone of our software
system.
And currently, our software system
was implemented 21 years ago.
Industry standard is agencies, law enforcement agencies,
the switch systems, because of technology advancement,
every seven to 10 years, on average 10 years,
we're double that lifespan.
The unfortunate thing is that our current vendor
is no longer supporting our RMS system.
Notified by this, we're having difficulty
getting any software updates because they're not
providing it sort of back on the software system itself.
It is no longer being supported.
Because of this, there is a significant lapse in data.
If you recall a couple of years ago,
the police department did a staffing study.
it lacks significant amount of information, and the reason was because we couldn't extract
that data from our current software system.
As you're aware, we're currently going through another staffing study.
We're going to be facing the same exact thing.
Not that I'm trying to be the doom and gloom, but the worst case scenario is that our RMS
system will stop looking, primarily because the vendors will only be able to support it,
and it's already in trouble.
If that continues, we will be forced to go to the Sheriff's Office and seek their assistance
and their software system.
The Council had approved during dire emergency by a year and a half for us to go to the Sheriff's
Office, if you recall, it was substantially expensive and we were only getting services
from them from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.
business of soccer stops are working, it's going to be four hours a day.
We're already seeing some blackouts and brownouts from the system.
And when that does happen, not only when dispatch centers are going back to
our community of doing things, everything's on paper,
our police officers' computer systems stop working.
I have a question.
Sure.
So the replacement cost is $3 million.
is the ongoing maintenance and just updating and maintaining.
Is that similar to our current CAD RMS?
It depends on vendor that we would go with.
But yes, almost all vendors will have
a really maintenance costs associated to it.
The reason I'm asking is because I,
and several of us have mentioned it and have elevated it,
but just in terms of the cost of updating our CAD,
our MMS system is not just the replacement cost,
but the ongoing maintenance of it.
And what is that look like in terms of maintaining
the system, the new replacement system for it to be working?
What is the cost at it?
The ongoing maintenance cost.
it's hard to tell hopefully Chief Technology Officer can kind of stay there and hopefully.
We will learn more in an RFP process to understand what the true cost but we we currently pay around
a couple hundred thousand dollars a year for maintenance of this system and we will likely
see an increase we don't know exactly what that increase would be but you're correct the three
million is it doesn't include long-term maintenance that's the implementation
cost and then there there will likely be some kind of because most vendors are
as we look to move from on-premise systems to cloud it becomes more of a
subscription service and the subscription service is can be higher so I
just were just encouraged to include that's just the cost of the equipment
but the implementation cost should be baked into that, which I'm assuming just based on our work, is it workday or, uh, the, uh, the museum?
Workday.
Yeah.
Um, there's a significant impact, phasing out the previous end, moving into the new system, there's a cost of that, is that included in the replacement cost, or is that just straight up equipment?
this cost represents implementation that includes internal labor and includes it
includes software it includes equipment as well it does not include any changes
in the ongoing costs which we would like we see but we will not know until we go
Okay, so there's some that baked into the 3 million?
Yes.
Not ongoing?
Thank you.
Next slide that I presented last year as well, just as a reminder that we often deal with
the visible symptoms that it's easier to see on top of the tree, which are the leaks,
and the potholes, and really the root causes, and often the things we need to focus on,
which are underfunding the life cycle of our infrastructure, deferred maintenance.
you move on to the next part of the planning to discuss the potential
project. I think we're just going to keep in mind the budget principles we discussed this
morning. The public director gauges and whatever gauges there are for the other
departments and this tree in mind. Also a reminder that we're striving to become a
great city. Great cities don't just build infrastructure well. Great cities
also proactively invest to protect and maintain those assets so that they don't become my abilities.
Thank you.
So to the City Manager now, here's what patients have got.
Excellent, that's a really great presentation for the upcoming budget.
Thank you so much Jan.
So and thank you Director Marquisis and all who presented.
So for this section, Council, there's really two things to evaluate the directional work report.
It's slide 74, which is the cat RMS funding up to $3 million.
And then the facilities slide, slide 73, which is funding approximately a million and a half there.
And so the council so wishes because this is the area that we have lots of needs throughout the city.
This is the critical infrastructure that is failing.
This council directs staff to include this in the funding
as we move forward through the finance committee
and in the budget process.
These two areas are not included in the budget
that we will be presenting as of yet
that we need your direction to move forward.
I will also add, I was just messing with Nicole Gonzales,
our finance director.
And legally, we'd have to further analyze this,
but we do believe that the one-time cost
for the implementation of the person of the new cat
or in that system could fall
within the $5 million annual emergency fund.
So that could be the way that we could paper that as well.
Okay, so one thing that I want to make sure that we do
is to the extent that council members have questions
about everything that was presented,
It was like PCI, but we got none of those questions.
We talked a little bit, we'll leave you up there.
Since I don't wanna undermine what you're doing,
if you wanna wrap this, that's fine by me.
I just wanna make sure that we get questions
up a bit of the top.
How would you prefer to proceed?
I think we can let our facilitators
go through questions right now,
then we can go back to the direction on this area.
Yep, good.
So let's get the questions out now
on this public works presentation.
So from my perspective, slides 68 through 70, whatever.
One of my questions was how long before it showed a police station?
When did they get to F, like how far away?
You know what I'm saying, like, what is that?
One thing's for me from working in the police department building, or at a D-minus.
It's like using duct tape to hold the building together.
And honestly, I have to command our PE staff for working in this building for as long as they have.
I don't know the exact figure on what our annual maintenance costs are,
but we have constant, constant, constant issues in the building.
And on top of that, it's too small.
Even though we're short-staffed, it's actually been somewhat of a blessing because we still fit,
but we're shoe-winding our employees in there every single day. It's untenable.
I think that's, you know, obviously the only one that's concerned about that.
We're going to end up having, you know, see it, be a seed in that continual fall.
So to the question of those three things, obviously, it would be great if we that emergency funding can grow for the CAH system.
But when I'm looking at the having the two buildings painted compared to the roof, these can be fixed.
To me, it's fix the roof first and then if you can paint one building next year and then, you know, whichever one is lacking,
You saved the $500,000 in essence now for this year and the next year we go to the floor.
I agree the roof is higher priority in my opinion.
Assuming they were stuck over concrete because wood, I would say the paint is important because it's not wood.
I will let that one wait.
As far as the public storage items, the streets, and back to the streets that we talked about before,
I'm curious why, when we talk about the importance of the PCI,
why aren't the streets being listed as we should do them?
Great question.
Your question is, why aren't they listed here?
Yeah, and the previous slide, yeah.
So right here, we were focusing on the infrastructure
critical failure that are about to fail, that we don't take action. Our roads are, you're
right, they are in that critical point, but we're also working yearly to take
action on these fees. We're not taking any action. We could always use more funding for
roads, but fees don't have any action and they're not in the CIP plan, they're not in
upcoming budget. If I can add just kind of using the CADR and that's in the system. If this does not get funded, it will not work and so what we're saying is the Council needs our
suggestions that the Council as a way to pay the three million dollars or some number of your loans are doing RFP for that system or it will not work. We are not in that position with the
roads. We were not in a position to tell you in two years if you don't add more
money to the road system, you will not be able to drive down down the intro
street. So that's kind of the difference between critical failure today versus
overall we have a city that has lots of needs. Okay, my concern is not blaming anyone. It's like we're putting out fire support instead of long-term looking at cost
within the analysis what's actually the most cost-effective for our city. We're
not doing that. We're in fire mode and our police system will go out and it's gone. That's a really
bad situation that we are in as a city. And going forward hopefully this bond
measure, I'll bring that up again, bond measure will help get us out of this if
our residents will support it because we need it. I mean I support what you're
proposing here and this will go back to that $1 million for the roads in the
morning we talked about again I will support that because I would say yeah
it's not the police's and that will collapse but there are roads in the
manner that won't be touched I understand because they're that bad
they're that bad they won't be touched so essentially they have collapsed and
eventually people will be driving in this exaggeration on a dirt road and that's
how gravel road, whatever you call it. So I support what you're proposing and I will go back to that
million dollars back to the roads. So I just would like to understand a
little bit of the history of the pet RMS. Was this brought up to previous
generations of council in terms of failure? Oh, that was horrible. I'm just asking because it's a
significant investment and I doubt that previous chiefs have not brought this
up so I'm just wondering like why was it not included in the 10-year capital
improvement the CIP plan I mean there's we've had several cycles of strategic
planning and budgeting and I'm just wondering why it's coming up now as if
you don't find it it's critical I just want to understand the history a little
little bit because if this was brought up and other priorities came up, that's fine.
But I just want to understand a little bit of that history.
The only history that I can talk to you definitively about is my history in the two years I've
been here.
And I can tell you from day one, we knew that it was at a critical mass.
We thought that we could do some patches to the system to kind of keep it going.
and it wasn't until I know for certain last year that we realized that it was beyond its end of life.
And that is because our vendor reached out to us and told us that they were no longer supporting our system, literally.
Right now it's coughing along and we are having some support from our vendor, but it's such an old system,
I don't even know how many police departments still have this version of our system.
So, you know, I'm not gonna go backwards and point the finger at anyone, but what I can say is that as soon as we identify that this was a need, we've been bringing it forward.
And this is not a nice to have, this is a must have.
As you see from the slide, there are so many implications that come into play here if we don't replace the system.
It will severely impact public safety, it will severely impact our dispatch center.
right so I'm not trying to be a dead horse but I also know that if we don't do this and plan for
this now I'm not sure how we're going to be able to operate effectively in the future.
If I can also add again I can't speak for people in the past so I can really speak to what my
approach so as your city members from the conversations that I have with each one of you
through the meetings is as we are approaching our budget process, we approach speaking,
angry retreats, my approach is I need you to know what you don't know, I need to know
what I don't know. I don't know what was asked before and so my question to staff is yes
we want to hear from council and what their referrals are, what they think is important.
The council needs to know from you as the people who are operating in this city every
what are the things that you see that I don't see, they don't see that are
important and then we'll bring it to you and you make a decision on which one you
think is the one we're going. But that is my approach going forward and so I don't
know what was said in the past or not but that's that's why you can hear it
and I'll meet you now and we'll continue to.
Okay just some questions and comments and I will say and this is what the fourth
workshop third fourth workshop I've done every single one there's always been
a very nice presentation by the run-through-man pieces but they always say we're on the brink of
I mean the reality of what's happening right like we're on the brink of failure and
infrastructure it's very expensive so I'll start with the positive I love the new dashboard
it's lovely it's really important and it's really important for like the community to see as well
because they're always asking about different projects of where we're at with it and also it
helps us to understand like how it really builds up to our work plans like there are real things
that are happening. I'm gonna the very first page with PCI at 59 and the fact
that right now it's or it could be eight eight eight eight dollars an eight cents square
square up to 99 square yard and it's where we are that's a big red line like
that's problematic. So I appreciate it being shared with us so clearly because
it makes it the next slide with trash capture the fact that we like were not
able to complete what we needed to and then we received the cease and deserters
disorder like I worry about us not getting county funding like ACTC we will
not be able to get it and we desperately need it for so many things and that's
real and I look at slide 71 critical fillers grade book and seeing the
bees, bees, bees, and apps, like my father would be so mad at me and I don't know if any of that would stand, especially when it
was by the station's police, like all of those critical things that we needed to fund, that were mandated to provide for a city of services.
So that's just, thank you for making it very clear and triggering for me as a child.
So I think the thing is later on, but the symptoms with the group causes, this is something
that we really need to spend a lot more time on and I think we should have it laminated
and put in front of our desk, like everything else that we have, because we're actually
talking about maintenance addresses, like temporarily, like these, if we don't do these
things or continue to do these things, we're not going to be able to move on from where
we're at, right?
And we talked about, oh, maybe we can use $3 million for the emergency fund to potentially
pay for the software, but then we have to replenish the emergency fund up to $5 million
because we also committed to keeping it at $5 million, right?
So we just go on a circle then, so I think this is where we really need to sit in.
And then think about over making these decisions,
like if we take it from one part,
how are we feeling it back on?
And what aren't we serving, what aren't we funding them?
So, but I'm also supportive of spending it
to fix these things.
So I just, you know, like, yes, that's where I'm at.
Okay, so a couple, some thoughts from me.
We have, at least some of us, been aware
of this CAD-RMS problem for an issue for a time period,
for some period of time.
And IT Director Snyder, you have told us about this.
And I think the difference is the way it's presented here,
it's a crisis, and hasn't been necessarily presented
as a crisis until recently.
That's probably why it didn't catch our attention.
And just for the benefit of the public,
this is one small IT crisis.
Director Seiner has been dealing with some other severe challenges and has been taking
them off the list one at a time.
So very grateful for how you've been progressing through.
In no way does that diminish what's here at all.
I do think that the world is moving to cloud-based platforms.
We have been moving to using cloud as a solution.
And I think how we budget for the cloud is fundamentally different.
And we need to be thinking about budgeting that.
And in some ways, it's better because it's an operating cost,
as opposed to every 10 to 20 year big fixed cost followed by maintenance cost.
And I think our budgeting needs to reflect that.
Because that $3 million complement is really on the order of 200,000 over 15
years, each year. I think that the cloud model addresses that more realistically. If we,
in our budgeting, need to reflect that as we move forward.
Going to PCI, I love this chart. I've used this chart. There is a problem with this chart.
This chart needs to be supplemented with a second chart that shows the cost per unit
as the scale, not PCI as the scale.
Why is that?
PCI can be along the bottom if you want to.
Why?
Because the $99 per square yard is many times higher than the $8.80.
And so the chart will look fundamentally different, and it will highlight the importance of addressing
those issues further.
It will just be visually incredibly compelling.
So I think we really need to change our storytelling to help the public understand why it was such
an important issue as we address it. And I completely concur with my colleague who also
sits on ACTC, Commissioner Bowen, that it is critical that we get our PCI up to at least 60.
Coming to our facility preservation, I don't know. Do we happen to know for these buildings
that are being painted when the last time was that they were painted? We happen to know.
We don't have a record of the last time the City Hall was painted, renovations in 1992
with MCC, we're in the Community Center, it was early 2000.
My recollection just being in the City, I don't really remember City Hall being painted,
I've been here 30 some odd years, it's possible.
I think it's kind of standard practice, I'll do it in my tradesperson, it's like over 10
10 years or something, you're supposed to paint things
regularly.
And again, it's like we've gotten away from the basics,
taking care of our buildings.
We have some beautiful buildings.
Our library is an amazingly beautiful building.
But if we don't paint, if we don't do the roof,
if we don't paint care of the buildings,
then we just pass on junk to our children.
So very cognizant of we have to take care of the basics
and employ supportive of painting those buildings
and building the roof.
I did have one other.
There was a practically subtle statement made.
The vendor is not supporting the RMS.
What do people think of CAD-RMS?
Or they're not supporting really the whole system
or we have two different vendors or?
We have the same vendor for both systems.
The state of California has given us funding
to update our 911 system,
which we are in the process of doing.
But it's not going to do anything to support our RMS, which
is records management system, which as capital funds plays
like the back end of our system.
And the vendor notified us that because our RMS system is like,
I don't even know.
I think Wrenchley Old is the best way to go like this.
It's funny.
I mean, we're like in dinosaur land right now
with our RMS system.
And they have refused to continue to support it.
It's pointless.
It's not going to make the system any better.
And like I said, it's hopping along
on the wing of the prayer of this planet.
Okay, so thank you.
Were there other questions?
I want to hammer home that eloquent statement that was made by the city manager who's chief and vice mayor
about a bunch of bums who used to sit in this seat and didn't care, but we're here to help.
I'm cool, I'm cool.
We will interpret that as sarcasm, after most of we get into a little bit of trouble.
So, I just want to come. I think you wanted consensus around the next slide, two slides over.
I keep going. Do you want a consensus around this? I'll give you a thumbs up. I don't know.
Yeah. Thumbs up.
I think that's where it goes. Thumbs up. So, you at least have four.
One is my address. And here's the conversation, too. What I'm hearing is, yes, this needs to be factored into the budget, right, into what's coming.
But also just a really informed dialogue around the importance of kind of getting back to basics to include infrastructure.
That's going to require additional revenue or trade-offs, like to make the, to pencil all those things out, which we know are so important,
as a part of your budget conversation, you know, over the next few months, that's going to be unlikely, assuming something that's going to be important.
Yes, I just want to state that not the bum part but if we push the painting I don't want to push it long, but if we were able to look at which one is worse off if we can do that one say in a year and then that way it's not such a huge hit right now but a hundred percent of the roof being repaired in fact.
I did have one other question. Marina, community center, week, Ruth. Is that
already budgeted to be repaired? The second to that critical because we have
three pieces the same yes. Yeah, it's already budgeted. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So good. So you have some
direction on that. Okay. One comment. Oh, I'm sorry. One question. Looking at efficiencies and saving money for the long run. Just thinking out loud here as far as
roof replacement, fire station, solar panels. Not an upfront cost, but is there some type of
lease, something that we can incorporate at the same time to save money in the long run
from the electrical standpoint. Yes, we are looking at those opportunities and which is why
we're recommending all these, all some of the roofs to be worked on. So actually right now we
have a lot of new steam replace at the courtyard and other facilities and the
fire station is definitely one that we wanted to call a facility to consider those facilities are
solar. So in light of all of those needs we have a whole host of council
referrals that are pending.
And so this slide is to ask the council if, in light
of the budget reductions that need to be made and all
the staff work that has to go into that,
whether it's changing programs or it's actually creating budget
changes themselves, whether the council would
to put a pause on your current referrals, or 19 of them, and a moratorium on any new
referrals so you can actually prioritize what you've been talking about for the
last several hours. So that's that's the request of staff. Yes, maybe. So I think
some are low-hanging low-hanging fruit that we really should take advantage of
now that will help with efficiencies. Okay, first let's see whether there is a
council consensus to put a pause on them. If there's not a majority to put a pause then
we'll have a process to determine which ones might not be paused. So rather than
going through all of them right now so let's first so councilmember Simon
you're a maybe and so let's pause on talking about which ones so first I just
want to get a sense of the council you're willing to put a pause on all of
them it's unclear to me what if so is it to just do nothing of all these I'm not
on that, but I am open to putting a moratorium on e-referrals that are in non-emergency.
Or that, with a double negative, that are to not include emergency items in the moratorium.
I'm just trying to understand your last one. So it's, if it's an emergency
referral to address it.
So here's my thinking about it.
The referrals that we have, let me start over.
So we have all this stuff, referrals.
And there's different types of referrals.
Maybe I can jump in.
There's only five of you today, but I'm
I'm hearing from two of you that you do want to take the moment.
I don't think there's four people who are saying,
do not explore what's on the list right now
and have a chance to look at it.
So I think that question has to be asked and answered,
and so we can move to the next step
that Jen kind of addressing how to explore the 19 out here.
But I would like to look at it.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Before we move on.
Yeah, because I was going to say I would actually
be fine with putting a hold on it, but I just
There are so if like if there's the emergency one where actually there's the end, and then there are some that are not
I'll just say I'm in my way. I think I
Am certainly willing to put a hold up. I have like five or six up here
I'm only putting a hold on all of them for one year to revisit them a year
But what I will not do is put a hold on mine and let others proceed
So, I'm ready to put a hold and let staff focus on the problems that we have.
Because therein lies the problem.
I would like to, in some of these, I think that we have to address from an efficiency standpoint.
If we don't address them, we're going to continue down the same route, but we don't have time, we don't have money, we have to address them.
One of which is, and I'm just going to put it out here, and hopefully I'm looking at our city manager in this one, this is council meeting times.
I really do believe that our council meeting time starting at seven o'clock p.m. ending at ten to twelve o'clock at night is very hard on our staff, very hard on our public, very hard on our council, which leads to inefficiencies.
Imagine going to work the next day,
8 o'clock in the morning, getting up at 6 o'clock,
our staff having to stay up to midnight.
That's not efficient, and it's not healthy or anything.
So I think that's low hanging fruit.
Just takes a matter of, yes, let's try it.
So as proposed, first and third Mondays of the month,
starting at 5 p.m. with closed sessions,
only at the end if needed,
and then closed sessions only on the second Monday of the month.
I think we should try it because it's really inefficient
how we're operating till 10 to midnight.
Okay, so what we're suggesting,
we'd like to suggest by way of process is,
rather than advocating for individual ones,
Nancy has some dots to hand out
and she's gonna give each council member six dots
And we'd like to see if there is a good, strong consensus
on a private council to elevate some of them to move forward.
Let me just get a sense, and I realize there are only five
members of council here today.
There are some of these that have costs associated with them.
So just in terms of our principles
that we talked about early on around identifying things
customizable, and identifying funding sources.
I think I would like the opportunity to at least pitch,
do like a one minute pitch for the one
that I would like to prioritize,
because I also would like to be clear with my colleagues,
like, OK, I have three, but I would like to prioritize one.
And if, like, I don't want you all to waste your dots
on something that I'm willing to give to my, you know, do.
I think, what about?
If we go through.
So we've got them on slide, so we can go through them.
One of the ones we can agree we can take off the list,
we'll see what remains and then we can go from there.
Does that make sense?
Yes, I just also, can we, before we do that,
can we go back to what we decided were our principles
around making these decisions?
So if we're gonna choose to add something new,
what are we taking away?
Because we just spent the whole first part of this day
struggling with funding the programs we already have.
Yes.
we have to open this way back, and so we'll pull it back up.
Sarah, can you pull it to the slide
that has principles on there?
Do you have a memory?
It's way back.
Oh, remember?
Is it 38?
38.
38.
Yeah.
Let's jump right in.
There you go.
And your point is a good one, that anything that continues
is going to be an additional trade-off.
There's going to be something else
that you'll have to find to make sure that you have some.
So let's just remind people.
And here's the principles that you came up with earlier today.
So I think part of the facilitators of counsel
is looking for how to navigate through our questionnaire.
Suggestion is to be able to uplift the one
and which one needs a one that's a priority,
and then kind of like counsel, you know,
which one is not a priority,
so that their dots are not wasting something
that is not a priority for her specifically.
And the same would go for all council members.
And also, do we have to use our dots?
Because if we're moving, let's walk through them
and see where we are.
I think we might be able to get there.
And so, as we walk through, there's four slides.
They're also behind you for reference in your slide deck.
But go to the first one, there we go.
And so, the question, though,
is our little comment that it's up there.
So let's just go through these.
And first of all, where there's either agreement
that now is not the time.
kind of a question or if there are comments you want to make if you have
something that you really want to elevate for conversation. Then we'll note
that one and we'll see where we land on those. Before we start can I suggest that
we allow the city manager on each one to say whether it would match the goals
that we said earlier in the day and we take it as gospel we are. If she feels it's
It's going to take time, or it's going to take money,
then we remove it, and we move to number two.
And I discuss, and go, oh, I don't think so.
But I think we don't have it.
Have you underneath the map?
Well.
See the impact of the item, whether it has a location.
Let the city manager weigh in and say,
it follows the values we adopted earlier.
Is it going to cost us more money?
Is it going to cost staff more time?
because it doesn't do these things in the end.
And if she decides one way or the other, that's gospel.
We don't argue, we don't discuss it,
we want to number two, we want to number three.
Have you done that at all, sir?
Yeah.
I don't know.
I don't know.
Be great, be great.
Hi, I appreciate Councilor Gold's point.
I obviously have not done a deep dive.
Some of these, I could say, for example,
Councilor Simon just brought up the one
about less council meetings.
Because you're asking the question.
We all want that.
On that one.
But the other one's obviously number one right there.
I've done no work to say, I know we're not
coming in right this minute.
So I can tell you, in addition to what we're currently.
But it would cost funding?
I think it's simple to just, right?
So I think if we allow you to be that person,
and we understand it, and we don't just
Disregard your comments and just let it be gospel, then we can move through the script.
Sorry, I'm probably taking too much time to prove you're done.
But we do need to, just because it costs more money doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing.
Because we had already made the decision that as long as, let's say she proposed something that costs money,
that she has to come back with, hey, I think we can save some money here to fund something that I desire.
So that's where it gets kind of tricky to just say, oh, it costs money.
their boards out.
Can I also just ask them my question?
We tried to, today, work on figuring out
a way to balance the budget.
If we say yes to another geotechnical report, which
would actually cost money, unless it comes with money,
like you have it and you're giving it to us to use,
we will have to take that money from somewhere else.
So would we not also have to go back
and look at where that would come from
in the list of things we just looked through?
The short answer is yes, you would need revenue,
we wouldn't do that today.
It would have to be, it's gonna add to the total
then we'll have to come back and be incorporated
into your total target for reduction.
And the other important consideration
is not just money but it's staff time.
And that's really critical
because you're going through a budget reduction process
right now and that takes a lot of staff time,
a lot of analysis, changing programs.
And so the initial request by the city manager
to put them on, all of these on pause,
is in part in consideration of the staff efforts.
It's not just a budgetary consideration.
And Janelle if you want to elaborate on that,
it might be helpful.
Thank you so much Jan, that is true.
the other thing we didn't cover because today because this is a council retreat it's kind of
step one as we go forward in this process over the next few months as we focused on what is
immediately something that's public facing the public will see. We didn't discuss earlier with
whatever number slide it was there was a line of all the internal cuts and so in that both external
facing and internal there were a lot of vacant positions that were eliminated through this
process and so that means the staff that we currently have which is extremely lean in the
The first one is we've been talking about that for years at Retreat.
The weight of the work demand is on who's left.
And so when you add to their plate, Director Liao talks about this earlier program he's
working on, that becomes a better of a larger weight and a larger stress on who is left
to carry a load.
So on this slide, are there any that are must-dos from Councilman Merritt's point of view that
you want to pitch?
So we want to go ahead and order up.
We'll just take this line.
So I would like to prioritize item one.
And the funding source for that is
that we already have allocated funds
in the capital improvement plan for, and we have a grant.
I would like to use the existing funds to fund
the full geotechnical report.
I would just like to elaborate that my referral included
a water management portion of that,
because the problem with Digital Road
is actually the water, right?
That came from up the hill, down the hill,
across the slide, and then,
so there's a water management component
that I would like to have included,
but I would like to use the existing funds
that are ready for a partial repair of the slides
and use that to fund the geotechnical report.
We already have plans for eviction, or a portion.
Other comments on this slide?
I support number one.
And just in terms of items two and three since I have not identified a
Revenue source for two and three. I'm willing to
Pause them or what is what are we calling pause pause? Yeah
And I will need to work on
Anyway, just two and three you can take it off the list
but I would like to prioritize one because that is a critical failure.
So we're going to note these and then we will summarize and we'll have a broader conversation to see where this agreement
do you have things followed?
Does that work?
Okay, so now we're on number four.
Mayor, did you have a comment?
No other comments on this side?
We actually did five. It was part of a meeting we just recently had.
And four is if it's fine, we would also already have an art block, but I wanted to just have an idea for it.
So if it's possible, it can possibly be a thing to know.
Pause it, yes. Stick it to the principles.
Yeah, number six actually ties into number ten, so I'll hit that one when I hit number ten.
Number seven, I'll pause on that.
So now I don't know how to source for that one.
Number eight, I'll pause on that one.
Number nine, just give a little bit of update on what this is.
This relates, it's not really a heavy city capital cost.
It's more of a staff time.
I know we're talking about low end staff time.
But the new pedestrian bridges across Seminole Creek will help with
helping the Llewellyn bike lane projects coming up because a lot of the kids that live in the
manor drive across Washington Avenue to get to Arroyo High School, it's gonna be a traffic jam.
And if they had a way to ride the bicycles or walk a more direct route it would be huge.
Talking to the county now, this would be mainly county capital dollars, not ours,
but there needs to be some coordination with the city to at least sit down with them.
So it's not, there's cost associated with it, but it is, it is important.
I think it's a low income type item, so we'd like to consider it.
Number ten, I would say it's extremely important.
And I would think perhaps an ad hoc committee of council members could work
on this to lighten the load on staff.
As we saw the discipline policy, the investigation policy took two years of
time on council took away a lot of time they couldn't spend on a lot of topics
we spent today there are some improvements that are necessary there I
believe I will list them here including but not limited to prohibiting the
accuser from judging the accused deescalating issues using restorative
justice mediation counsel approval prior to use of outside investigators double
hearsay and witnesses in city lawsuits prohibited city manager and city
it, train, report policy violations, and make recommendations to change unjust policies.
All parties, investigations sign a code of confidentiality and recent release of reports
to the public requires unanimous counsel approval.
That's the framework I'm proposing and I think what we've just been through for two years,
we really should invest some time into updating this policy to prevent another two-year issue
happening.
So I'm very strong on that, and I'm offering my time as an ad-hoc community person.
Next, I believe this is strong as well, and we heard many people from the public in past
council meetings and today about resolution acknowledging, apologizing the city's role
and redlining practices.
I proposed that.
Bernard Ashcaffax drafted it and did a very nice job.
So I would take a large amount of that effort to do that.
And there could be some cost associated with that to help with the reconciliation part
from a housing perspective.
And there are some concepts out there.
I did talk to a council member in Evanston, Illinois, Rue Simmons, one of the first cities
in the country to make reconciliation for folks that were redlined out.
And medicinal marijuana, applying additional tax to that is how they fund it in Evanston.
And I think that's something that we could do here in our city is applying the tax to
Minnesota wanted to help address this issue that is still impacting people today and
Last one number 12. This is I would say
The opposite of a cost item. This is a cost savings item right off the bat if we change the hours
as I presented earlier
Going back to this slide then
members of others on this site, 7-3-11.
Okay, what was the question?
Do you have any comments on that?
I do, let me stop.
Okay, the primary comment that I'll offer is that I am a strong opponent on the bridge
across the San Lorenzo Creek, but we need to get funding.
I've had discussions about that bridge and I'm sure Councilmember Simon has for a while.
So I think being in concept, it's important we don't want kids walking down the railroad
Tressel Bridge to get from one side to the other.
I do not see this as something that we do right now,
if I can get funding, but we could start putting it
into the calculus of the discussions that we have.
I just don't see it being, you know,
that we spend money on it this year.
Just one clarification here.
Yes, please.
I believe that St. Louis Creek is county property,
and I believe it's a county bridge.
So it would be accounting funding and we would support it because it ties into the city limits
Presumably we would buy the land for the landing pad. We do engineering for where it lands on our side
We use staff time in all staff time. Yes, that's where it gets a little bit complicated in terms of funding
Think that's all that I have in terms of commentary
Okay on this slide 12 to 15 other council member comments
Yeah, I've got a five o'clock. Oh, please
Please do it or please don't please do it. Please don't that doesn't that I agree with them. I agree with the council members
I don't think that's a cost
to us to to find I could be wrong and
I don't think it's at all
Okay, so last slide, 16 through 19.
Okay, so in the ones that I've got for number 13,
big believer in, we saw data that says
the cap rate for construction in San Leandro
is inordinately high compared to our
neighboring jurisdictions.
The question is how can we make adjustments
on our current policies to drive
actual construction of housing and this is something that I think will help
achieve that because it changes the economics. I feel pretty strongly about
13. 14 I'm going to postpone for a year. 15 I believe PV has already started to
explore or will be exploring so I don't need to have that on the list. 16 this is a
high priority for residents but I am sensitive to the cost that we'll
introduce so I'm gonna remove that as well. Number 17 I don't believe is a
cost issue at all it is a policy that we just say hey we're gonna spend X million
dollars on roads and maintenance I don't think there's a lot of cost to that we
just write a number down and then we debate them on ourselves and then we
I don't see it as high cost, so I'm gonna keep that one in to force the discipline on ourselves.
18. I'm a big believer that corporations are buying up single-family residences and other things.
I've talked about this a big tent. I've been very clear what I think about this.
I'm gonna leave this one in. And then number 19, I'm willing to postpone.
So for me, I'm leaving on the table 13, 17, and 18.
So three of my seven.
All right.
And I think they're low cost, right?
Limiting less?
The one that's probably the most costly is the number 18.
So you think that it will fix that on mine.
And I know that's that.
But the consequence is more housing being built in our city.
13 and 18 will go together.
Okay, we're gonna walk back through the big notes
on what you just talked about.
And so those that are still on the table
as recommended by the nominating council member,
we're gonna see if there's four.
There's a consensus to continue to have that
on the work plan and integrate it.
Does that work for everybody?
Can we, yeah, sorry Nancy for jumping in there.
I think, number one, the life may or may at some point,
and I was getting messages from the director of our pieces
that I think the council needs a little clarification on that.
OK.
So the HWA road funding, we have about $720,000
in local CIP funds, and the grant
that was purchased at HWA emergency relief,
The grant we are required to focus just on this line
that we requested to repair.
And the $720,000 was part of the local match
and also part of the construction to build the road.
Now we estimate for the total cost of the project
to be about 2.8 million.
We don't go out to bid until later this year.
So only then will we know the true costs
when those bids are received.
But as of now, we estimate 2.8 million for the cost
in the funding that we have available
is up 2.8 million.
Thank you.
I think the reason that I'm prioritizing
the full geotechnical report and a full cost estimate
for both the water management and the repair
is because it sets us up for future grant funding.
So we are front loading, yes.
and that's why I'm prioritizing.
I would like to propose to my colleagues
that we prioritize the full geotechnical reward
and the full cost because it sets us up
to be able to pursue other types of funding,
but where if we continue on the path that we are now,
we don't even set ourselves up
for a funding cycle or for any grants
because, so I would actually would like to propose the approach is understanding, anyway I think that
made my point. To clarify what you just said Director Markey says the funding, so is there funding then
for a geotechnical study already baked in or we would have to find it somewhere else covered?
No, no we're not finding it from somewhere else, it's we already have 700-ish but that's that is
budgeted to be the local match for the grant.
And what I propose, we're not even scheduled to go up to bid
until 2027?
End of this year in the configuration link design.
So the proposal is to take funding that we've allocated
towards construction and to use towards,
if we've already, we already had that
something thousand for... I don't understand how, where the funding you're
talking about is versus what Director Marchese is saying, because I also,
the argument that we're making for this I feel like we could make for many of the
projects we chose back to, or the cuts we chose to accept today as well. So that's
how I'm thinking about it. We've allocated certain funds aside for this particular thing.
There are many projects in any number, I think, of the departments we could say,
well, let's actually use that, do something else right now because we could protect, you know,
for different programs. So that's... Unless I'm believing this understanding what is being proposed.
Allow me to try to clarify and tell me if I'm capturing the totality of what you're saying and what you've said.
So, we currently have budgeted about $2.8 million.
700 of that is from the city to match the 2.1
that the federal government has given us.
That is limited to slides one and four.
I understand that as part of that,
we will be doing some geotechnical work.
We've conducted those geotechnical works.
That's completed.
Just for those slides.
That's complete 10.
So I was thinking that potentially we could expand that work,
but what I'm hearing is that would be a separate piece of work.
What would that extra piece of work cost?
Approximately.
Approximately $150,000.
So if I'm understanding your request correctly,
it would be that if we agreed to spend an extra $150,000,
but then that study could be done and posted,
and it would inform potential pursuit of grants.
So I think the question on the table for a council
to consider in this list is, would we
keep that on for a future finance council sitting council
discussion about trading off?
Do we take that 150 from another project,
from some other way of funding it,
and is council willing to have that future discussion?
Mayor, if I could clarify,
cause I believe Director smart case's answer
was for part one of what we're looking at,
the cost for a geotechnical report.
The second half of that is a cost estimate
for full repair of Lake Chavo Road.
And I don't believe you're answering
how much that's gonna cost.
To prepare the cost estimate?
Correct.
Correct.
Yeah, that would be included in the technical,
which will inform us how much it's already a constant.
So I think, so going back to,
are we kind of in agreement
that I've characterized it correctly?
Maso Mano.
So, I wanted to,
we already have 720,000 as part of the match.
And so we're not even going on to bid.
Okay.
I understand.
I understand.
All right.
So, so, so I see the question on the table is whether or not this comes back or to the
finance committee for future discussion, understanding the need for a trade-off of $100,000 to $150,000
find that funding in order to do the geotech and cost estimate report. That's
the question. And are there four folks on council who want to keep this
on the list to bring through the finance committee process? One, two, three.
So we're missing a council member. Do we really want to go through all these?
Yes, and we also take votes on a normal question which we didn't even come to notice, so I don't understand why I didn't put a date in with that.
So maybe the suggestion is to summarize these items that were asked and they require, we'll go through that.
There may be some that you have four of our votes on. If you don't, then it comes back as a part of the bike wreck, Janelle, what were your thoughts?
If there are four votes for one of these items then that item moves forward.
The other ones did not.
Right, from this point, I'm going to be clear.
If Council Member Bold is accurate in his statement,
then he's going to kill all of them.
And I will kill all of them.
He'll be dead.
Oh, OK.
Is that?
OK.
We're done.
We're done?
We're all dead.
OK.
I'm happy to get four votes.
OK.
All right.
There it is.
OK.
OK.
We're going to take our one more time.
We're sorry.
I think the conclusion on that is that you don't have your referral list and you'll need to be coming back to the city council to determine the direction on your referral list.
Do you have a different-
No. I don't have a referral list that's going to move forward.
So this- this- what we've- what I'm- the direction I'm getting is that the referrals do not move forward in the budgeting process.
So we have the five interest in the House of Priorities, changes to work plan and direction
on referrals.
That's all been accomplished.
One of the priorities plus the principle around financial goals.
So now we get down to how to maintain your financial sustainability principle, staying
focus on the priority of this responsibility and we had a very robust conversation about
how to do that. First things first, you get a lot of very different choices to make,
but you've been focusing on how to do that and then pausing on adding new items to staff's
workflow. So this metaphor of the big rocks approach, you've got a lot of big things on
your plate, and just continuing to focus on what are those very large projects
that you want to keep moving forward and pausing on adding smaller things.
Acknowledging that everything's important. San Leandro has many, many
important things to do, so it's not a choice of important versus unimportant.
They're all important. And then how to stay on track with the priorities and with
your work plan. We started out this session by talking about discipline as
a measure of success and how you've achieved a lot of things over the last
several years. Maintaining your focus, not taking your staff time away from
established priorities and the work plans, having full council support so
once you do decide on a direction and support that direction and the
implementation that's involved.
And then finally, lots of conversation
about what drops off if something new is added.
And then best practice criteria for adding projects.
And I think you've agreed not to do that.
But there may be an emergency.
And you may have to add something in an emergency.
Or there may be some new outside funding.
Maybe there's a grant that comes your way.
Or a new multi-agency opportunity
that comes along, that perhaps comes with funding,
or a community safety issue, or a run that collapses
that you have to address, or changes in laws or mandates.
Those are all things that the City Manager and her staff
will have to address and bring to the City Council.
So with that, we really are at our next steps,
and I'm going to turn to Nancy to do a wrap up.
Alright, we've covered a lot around today.
And what I said at the beginning of our time together
was that we would take the outcomes of your conversation
and the decisions that you have brought forward today
and summarize that into our report.
So that is our next step.
We will work with the city manager to make sure
that it's complete and reflects our shared understanding
of the conversation today, because we've covered a lot.
I want to make sure we're accurate about that.
Those will then, the outcomes about them will be,
Obviously utilized, integrated, and informed
in the budget development process.
This is the beginning of that journey.
So this will be instructive to the staff process
in moving that forward.
So those are our immediate next steps,
and the timeline of all the other elements,
I'm sure will, if not already,
scheduled will be coming soon.
So the last thing we wanted to just leave everybody with
was an opportunity to just do kind of a quick,
final reflection or take away.
What is one thing that we did today
that came from our conversation that you felt was useful?
And so we want to just do some closing comments
and then we'll call it out.
I just wanna point out some of the staff's process
and when they talked about how in one spot,
I put a hat in my nose, I put it away,
I can tell, I'm right back there, so.
But when we were talking about how
the youth advisory committee is going to be utilized in a different way.
I mean, that goes to one of the points that the council members will may need,
mayor of Maine, about trying to leverage different groups to do more things and
not actually losing a lot of services.
So that's great, I really appreciate that.
And hopefully this is putting us on the right track to fix our,
the problems we have, but you're terrible.
Thank you very much.
I'm just going to go along with it.
A word I would say is prepared.
I would say staff was very prepared, as usual.
But it just really shows today the work that was put into this.
The questions were all thoughtfully answered,
and they were very, some people were very tough.
And the staff did an excellent job.
And I really do see us getting out
of this hole with the staff that we have behind us.
And then my colleagues as well, preparation, everyone really did their homework,
researched, and we were able to agree to disagree.
I want to echo my colleagues in just thanking the team for
a really well thought out, and I know that you all have probably spent hours.
But I also would like to acknowledge our facilitators and for helping us.
but also aside from all the people
putting the budgets together,
but all the staff that made today happen
in terms of logistics, our food,
making sure that everything went smoothly,
just appreciation for the people behind the scenes
to be able to make today happen.
In terms of our conversation,
It's been a difficult one and I look forward to untangling all of this together and I'll just leave with that. Thank you.
Security.
Chancellor Rivalle?
Yes, um, she'll take away that one word.
I appreciate the work that we did today.
It got really reflected our role as a council
about governance and fiscal responsibility.
This was very hard and we did a really good job
of being very disciplined about it, which I really appreciate.
And the other thing that I want to highlight,
aside from gratitude to staff, so that's the cause of my second,
but is something that the city manager mentioned,
which was like the internal work that needs to be done,
any organization with any contractual issue with budget
or workforce, it makes it a harder place to work
with the vacancies, like it's hard for everybody,
including the staff, and so I really want to,
again, uplift what they've done,
but also for us to consider what it's gonna be like
for the hundreds of employees that the city has
going to be experiencing these cuts or the increase in work and so just don't
have to know we see it. My word is effective, I thought today we were effective.
Big picture, we need to continue to drive the use of artificial intelligence in
the city. That will help us achieve more with less. We need to rely on other
cities have done before us to drive that effectiveness, to learn from their ability to increase their
effectiveness. But today, I thought, you know, everybody gave. Everyone gave. Everyone sacrificed.
Everyone uplifted each other. I think it was just an effective day. I think that comes to you guys,
in your preparation as facilitators, and he goes to staff in your preparation. You were able to
answer questions and clarify and demonstrate that when you come back to
us in finance at City Council, we're going to pivot and adjust and nobody took
anything personally and that's the environment that we need to operate in.
So, scheme manager, thank you for having such a way, team.
There we go. I just want to start by saying thank you. I want to say thank you to my
Council. I appreciate the hard work that you've been doing. I appreciate your discipline and
focus and your guidance on where you see the city going because that clear direction allows us to
do that work. I want to say thank you to the community for the participation today and through
this process we've got a row ahead of us but I know we can do that together. My
staff, best staff in America, just appreciating you for being flexible and for answering all the time at the last minute when we're trying to make last-minute changes and just for all of your
hard work. Council's right this does not happen without them and I appreciate all
of you to our fantastic facilitators.
Your expertise in this field has shown today
when we need that most, and so I really appreciate it.
So I just, thank you.
All right, yes, come from.
I want to acknowledge the pictures
in a beautiful artwork.
That's incredible.
I've never seen that before.
Thank you.
Excellent.
Well, thank you, thank you all.
I mean, what your comments is to talk about is,
This is gonna be hard when you're ready and you can do this and you can do this together.
I mean this is about team and you've got a lot of capable, strong folks sitting in today's
and also backing you up in staff.
So team spirit, team San Leandro, on you go.
Thank you so much for letting us be a part of your journey.
Have a great weekend ahead.
It's almost the weekend you guys.
All right, so with that, let's do 24 and we are adjourned.