 to item 2.1 are closed sessions of the day 2.1 and 2.2 conference with legal counsel existing litigation and conference with legal counsel anticipated litigation. Madam City Clerk, can you please facilitate public comment on these items? Thank you. We are now taking public comment on item 2 closed sessions. If you'd like to provide a comment, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. Speaker, go ahead at the podium. Mr. Els, are you going to provide public comment on item 2? Yes, do forgive me. These PFAS, the DuPont products, just as bad or worse than glyphosate and they are various substitutions for refrigerants and things that really didn't work. There used to be a law that said you had to give studies of the chemicals that you were introducing and those were reversed. So back at the time when the Toxic Substance Control Act and so on when these were implemented in the 80s and the late 70s and the 80s, it was required for them to do studies to say that those chemicals were not hazardous or more hazardous than the ones they were replacing. And those laws were reversed through Congress and the EPA or sometimes they were just presidential orders. So this is actually very important and I appreciate the council's looking into that and continuing with that. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I see no one else in the room wishing to provide public comment on closed session items. Thank you. We will now recess into closed session. Welcome, everyone, to our November 26 Center of the City Council meeting. It is now 4.01 and we will be starting our meeting, seeing the quorum. Madam City Clerk, can you please call the roll? Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Stapp? Here. Council Member Rogers? Council Member O'Crepke? Here. Council Member Fleming? Here. Council Member Alvarez? Present. Vice Mayor McDonald? Here. Mayor Rogers? Present. Let the record show that all council members are present with the exception of Council Member Chris Rogers. We have no study sessions today, so we'll move on to item five, which is our report on our closed session. Madam City Attorney? Thank you, Madam Mayor. We had a closed session on the item 2.1 and 2.2. By a unanimous vote of the City Council, the Council decided to opt out of the two class action settlements with Dupont and 3M. The decision was based on the City Council's concern that the city not prematurely settle until the city can better understand its potential claims as technology continues to evolve. Other than that, there is no reportable action to share. Madam City Clerk, can you please facilitate a public comment on this item? We are now taking public comment on item five. If you'd like to provide a public comment, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes, and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. Mayor, I'm seeing no one approach the podium for item five. Thank you. We have no proclamations today, so we will continue on to item seven, which are our staff briefings. Madam City Manager? Good evening, Mayor and members of Council. Item 7.1 is the Transportation and Public Works Capital Projects Overview. Good evening, Mayor Rogers, Vice Mayor McDonald, members of the Council. I'm James Jensen. I'm the Deputy Director of Transportation and Public Works for Engineering Services. We're the division of TPW that delivers capital projects, many for our own department, but for other departments in the city. I'm joined this evening with two of our supervisors. To my left is Greg Mariscal. He's the supervising engineer in charge of team one. And to his left is Lisa Welsh, the supervising engineer in charge of team four. What we've prepared for you this evening is a statistical overview of the general what's going on with capital projects. So we're going to provide some statistical data. And we're going to review basic prioritization criteria that can often come into play, that can shuffle projects around a little bit. We're going to present specific details of a couple of projects that we hope you find interesting. And we're going to wrap up with soliciting feedback that we can use for future staff briefings. The objective is that we can bring this report forward twice a year, every six months, kind of as we exit construction season. And as we get back into it, that'll be enough time for the data to change so that we can have new information to share. So we hope you like this. Just a quick overview of the project process. It's a fairly linear process. The planning and scoping of a project generally rests with our client departments where they identify the need of a project, start to scope the project and see what the actual need is. That's when we'll get involved and we'll take over at the design stage, which has various stages of quality control and quality assurance nested within it. It starts with what the development community sees as kind of a planning application, going through the CEQA process, developing a project enough to get to the point where you can prepare that environmental document. We temporarily go pencils down once we have enough detail to prepare that document. We let the CEQA process complete. And that's the reason that we stopped there is the environmental analysis can result in a mitigation measure that could, if you went too far down a certain path, it could cause you to change tact deep into the project, which is not pleasant. Followed by the design process is construction, which is the exciting part, but also the most stressful for us and the community, followed by warranty. Currently, we have 99 total active projects and an active project we define as a project that's in design, construction or warranty. What we're looking at up here is a bar chart that shows the project volumes at different stages. And the orange bars are what we call TPW projects. We also call them non-water. So that'll be road widenings, parks projects, fire stations, things of that nature. And then the blue bars are water projects, which are enterprise fund-driven. We have 48 non-utility projects and we have 51 utility projects. The way that we're organized is we have two delivery teams that handle the orange bars and we have two delivery teams that handle the blue bars. We average about five to eight projects per project manager and we have typically three project managers per delivery team. So looking at this chart from left to right, this kinda gives you an idea of how the projects kind of work through the process, what volumes we can expect to see coming up for future council action. So the two bars on the left, 10 and 10 for water and non-water, those are the projects that are starting the process. We're developing enough information to get that environmental document complete, sometimes with an exemption, which is great, that those projects are still in what we would consider the planning application stage. As we work from left to right, the projects are working through a percent completion process, which is where we take opportunities to circulate plans with our client departments, other stakeholders, and sometimes just other professionals that can help provide feedback. And we increment the plans, specifications and estimates through this process. Once we reach 100%, assuming the project doesn't require any further funding, it goes out to bid. And then on the right, we see 31 current projects in construction, those are projects that have public works contracts, and then we've got 14 projects that are in warranty. So when we're looking at this data here, it shows me that we're gonna have some projects going out to bid here in the next few months. So there will be awards that we can expect to bring to council. We have a decent number of TPW side projects at 90%. So we're gonna be wrapping up quite a few projects, and those will be hitting the street too. So over the next six months to a year, I think we can expect quite a bit of our items to be on consent, and we're looking forward to that. And then after that wave, there's gonna be a little bit of a quiet period as a new wave of projects comes through. And I'm gonna move on, these next slides are not meant to force everybody to read a bunch of words on slides. But this is just a list of the projects that we're working on. The idea here is that everyone can go back into the link on the presentation and read these lists. So we don't want everyone to just read through these. But there's a lot of signature projects here, the bicycle and pedestrian over crossing, fire station five, the Coffee Park and Fountain Grove neighborhood road disaster recovery project. And the next slide here is just more project names for folks to be able to go back and read at their own convenience. Projects listed here with black text are TPW, and projects with blue text are water. And if you look at the water projects, there's a lot of cool technology, booster stations, well rehabilitations, radio and PLC upgrades. So engineer, I kind of geek out on reading those words, but a lot of high-end technology projects on the water side, which is very cool. This is just a quick rundown of prioritization criteria that can often come into play. So we look at things like asset management versus asset creation. Of course, funding adequacy, if two projects are ready to go, one of them is fully funded and the other one is waiting for another deposit on July one. The funded one moves forward. Distributed benefit, which is related to the bottom criteria of growth and safety warrants. Traffic and utility models can often generate projects that may be driven somewhat by development or other growth factors. And those projects benefit large numbers of people and those types of projects often get priority for that. A grant can come into play and bring a timeline requirement that may or may not have been unexpected, but it can trigger a project, kind of getting a fast pass. The trump card will be regulatory mandate. If there's a regulatory mandate that comes into play, those projects have compliance requirements, so those types of projects will get priority. Risk mitigation is a factor as well in provision of core services. Something I'd like to mention is that we're looking at these criteria and more to try to craft a little more, a less shot from the hit means of prioritizing projects to build a more objective mechanism for our clients to bring projects forward with somewhat of an application that advocates the project in comparison to these criteria and we're working with our client departments with a working group or a task force that we've created to get our clients in the room. We talk about these criteria and so it's taking time, we're getting there, but that is something that we're doing in the background of all the other work that's going on. Next, I wanna look at construction contracts. We currently have 26 construction contracts, 10 of them are on the TPW side and 16 are on the water side and you may ask James, if we got 26 construction contracts, why did the other bar chart show 31 total projects? That's because some of those projects are self-performed and not all of them have a public works construction contract associated with them. On the TPW side, we have a total contract value of over 38 million, the largest single contract in that volume is Fulton Road, 15 and a half million and we anxiously await the completion of that project, it's almost there. On the water side, we have a total volume of 106 million, the largest is the disinfection project out of the treatment plant, that's 68 million. Something I do wanna make sure is understood here is that these numbers do not currently include staff time, soft cost associated with design, the construction management and inspection time that happens alongside the public works contract. And I'm looking to get that included in the future. The bar chart here just, it shows volume for size of contracts. So we only have a couple of minor contracts which I think right now is anything under 388,000 and then we have five projects that are major contracts but less than a million and then we have 19 major contracts that are greater than a million. So we're typically seeing large contracts. Next slide is similar to what I showed before for design. So it's just a list of projects for folks to have handy. These are the projects that are currently in construction and again, black text is TPW and on this slide is the blue text, that's water. So that's just a general statistical overview of what we're working on and now we're gonna give some insight into a couple of projects that we've hand selected to provide some detail on that will have some upcoming action in the future. So with that, I'll give the floor to Greg. Thank you, James. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Members. Again, my name is Gregory Mariscal. I'm a supervising engineer in capital projects. The project I wanted to present quickly for you guys is the Hopper Avenue project. This is between Coffee Lane and the Highway 101. The project goals include working with the community and stakeholders to develop a collective vision, a vision that accommodates multiple modes of travel, including pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles, while at the same time, calming measures to slow cars down without impacting burn-see evacuation routes. We have hosted three community meetings with the public and have incorporated their feedback in the preferred design that you see now. Some of the enhanced features include proposing bull bouts at the intersection, high visibility crosswalks throughout, and buffered bike lanes with the inclusion of flexible ballards. In terms of funding, we are funding is coming from the PG&E settlement funds. If you wanna go to the next slide please. In terms of the delivery method, this will be a design build method, and we are currently in preliminary design. In terms of council action items, we're planning to award construction contract in summer of 2024. The estimated construction cost is 4.9 million. That's what we're estimating currently. And in terms of the construction timeframe, we are looking at fall 2025 to spring of 2026. And I will turn it over to Lisa. Good evening, Lisa Walsh, another supervising engineer in capital projects. So I kind of wanted to highlight a little and then a big project on my side. So the little project was Hearn and Burbank traffic signal. It's just traffic signal installation at the intersection of Burbank and Hearn Avenue, Southwest Community Parks right there. And it's met traffic warrants and is a need for the area. So one of those vital projects, but kind of little in the scheme, $600,000 contract expected. We're gonna be bringing to you guys a request for an addendum to the 2016 Roseland area subasphal road specific plan and Roseland area annex EIR in January. So I just wanted to give you a heads up on that. So we're moving that one forward. Next slide. So the other project I highlighted, Greg and I are working on. And it's the Highway 101 bike and pedestrian over crossing. This is a project that's been exciting and been in the works for a very long time. It's going to be, the focus of it is pedestrian and bicycle traffic to provide safe passage on the north side of Santa Rosa. It's connecting at the JC area and Cunnington mall area. That's not the only impact it's hoping for. It's hoping to be globally the north part of Santa Rosa, kind of giving a safe route for those pedestrian and bicycle. And with that, I wanted to send a link to the website and shout out there. We actually have a two minute rendering video where you can actually walk through because it's so far along, we're about 95% designed. So you can walk through and it shows different angles and puts you in real life space into this one of a kind of bridge. Next slide. And then I just want to quickly run through these facts. So we are going to traditional design bid build method. As Lisa mentioned, it's at 95% design. In terms of council action items, we are anticipating a design amendment early next year and then for the construction contract in fall of 2024. In terms of the construction cost, we are estimating between 29 and 31 million. I mean, there's also soft costs involved with this, but this is strictly construction costs that we're anticipating. And finally, the anticipated construction timeframe is fall 2024 to fall of 2026. Thank you, Greg. Thank you, Lisa. And with that, we'd like to hear your thoughts and feedback on what we can do for our next briefing in six months. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for being here and thank you for that presentation, looking to council vice mayor McDonald. Thank you so much for the presentation. I've been really wanting to have an update on our CIP project. So I really appreciate the overview of everything that's been happening. So a few things, comments and a little bit of feedback for you. I've been asking for us to have sort of an interactive map maybe on our website that everyone can see where the projects are taking place in the city of Santa Rosa. And I think that this helps for a lot of different reasons. One, taxpayers get to see where we're spending their money. And two, it's a communication tool if there's gonna be extra traffic, specifically Fulton Road. In addition to that, I love the color coordinated presentation. Everything was in black for TPW, everything is in blue for water. But on our website or even for council, I think it would be helpful to have a red, yellow, green system. Red, the project hasn't been started. Yellow, it started, but it's not completed. And green, it's completed. And the reason I like this is because it's simple and I can explain it to constituents and we can explain it to community members and even to myself, this is where we're at on these projects. So I think anything that we can do when you're looking at $145 million or just a hair over that, in projects that we're doing around our city, I think we could do a better job communicating to everyone about what we're doing, including to me as a council member. So I think this would be really helpful. Okay, I'm not done. I wish I was, but I really feel pretty passionate about this one. The other thing that we don't have is a breakdown of where these projects are taking place. If you look in the budget book, it's hard, even though the little maps and pictures are all through it, you can't say this is in district one or this is in district three or wherever they're at around the city. And it's helpful whether we have the integrated map or not just to have a list of where the projects are in each of our districts so that we as council members can communicate out to all of our constituents. This is what's happening this year in our area. This is what's happening in the next three years or what have you. I do really like the whole presentation and it was very helpful, just the overview of what we're doing in water and in TPW. And then I just have a couple of questions for you now. I see that the Hopper landscaping is being something that you acknowledged in this. And I know if we go over Fountain Grove, you can see a ton of landscaping that's being done and it looks beautiful and I appreciate that. But is there any costs that's integrated into this about how we're going to maintain that or who maintains that after we plant all these beautiful plants and have that done or is this under your department or does it fall under somebody else? Median landscaping is traditionally held by parks. Okay. And so that isn't taken into account when we're looking at the CIP projects, right? Just actually planting it and getting it taken care of. Correct. Okay, thank you. I wanted to know how that was all budgeted for after the fact and if it's being budgeted for as well to maintain the look. Vice Mayor McDonnell, we can expand on that question if I could get Assistant City Manager Nutt to explain how we're gonna handle the maintenance moving forward, please. It looks beautiful now. I just wanna make sure it stays that way. Jason, Assistant City Manager, thank you Vice Mayor McDonnell for that question. It is true when we go through the construction project we incorporate the maintenance departments so that they are aware of what's coming forward. It gives them the opportunity to begin planning for what's going to come. However, it's not initially incorporated into their budget. So once we get closer to completion of a project, we look to make either amendments into the contract services or into the services that are on the ground with the staff members that we have in place. So that will come, for example, for Hopper, if we're completing in 26, there'll be a dialogue earlier that year or the prior year starting to develop what's the cost of doing the ongoing maintenance. Right now we don't have a clear and final design on every plant species that's gonna be there. They're developing that right now with the contractor or with the consultant. So until we get all of that final document in place is very difficult for us to turn to the Park Maintenance Team and say, okay, develop a cost estimate for us. Here's what this is going to cost us in the along on an annual basis moving forward. But we do provide that information to them up front as far as the design so that they can start to anticipate. Thank you. And thank you again for the overall presentation. I appreciate it. Are there any additional questions or comments from council members? No, I did have a quick question. So when we look at the CIP and we know that there are big projects, how does the public know that we are being responsive to let's say small projects like potholes right outside their area that they drive all the time which may not be a big project but for someone that hits a pothole quite often when they're pulling out of their subdivision it may be big for them. Thank you, mayor. This is an area that we're starting to do a better job at noting. Those types of day to day maintenance activities are starting to show up on a dynamic website that we have that relates to our service and work order system. And we are creating a dashboard right now that starts to show where those locations are. We're still refining how that's going to look. For example, when we send a crew out on a day to do potholing they may actually fill 80 potholes in that one day and it's hard to identify at the specific location for each of those 80 spots for that one crew that's out there. Doesn't mean it's infeasible. It means that that's part of the work that we're doing so that we can better answer your question. What it will show is on this particular date crews were out filling potholes in response to the following service requests. And so if you had submitted a pothole request you should be able to receive feedback that states your potholes filled on that day. We're trying to relate that specific location to the map itself. And that's work that we're doing right now. Does that answer your question? It definitely does. And can you please remind council and also members of the public how is it that they put in a service request if they have such? Yeah, we have an app that you can use on your either Apple or Android device which is the My Santa Rosa app. It's also available through the city's website. The interface is the same and it gives you the opportunity to report a wide variety of different concerns or complaints or request service for different types of activities. For example, a pothole or a graffiti abatement or if there's debris along a roadside it would give you the opportunity to describe in more detail where that is and crews will provide a response once they've had the opportunity to get it in the queue for work. Perfect, thank you so much. And looking at council to see if there are any additional questions or comments. Thank you for being here for the presentation. That was great. And Madam City Clerk, may you please facilitate public comment on this item? Thank you, Mayor. We are now taking public comment on item 7.1. If you'd like to make a public comment please make your way to the podium. You'll have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. Can we use the overhead? Certainly. Did you turn the power button on? Or share at the top of the wall, can you help? Thank you. Share? Thank you. There we go. So this is Santa Rosa and it shows the USGS Quadrangle map for south of town. You can see 101 was improved here, but it was not elevated, I believe, at that point. What I'm pointing out here is that this is Herne Avenue and this is Kiwana Springs and this is Yolanda. And something happened. Oh, I can't show what I'm trying to show. And from that time, they were always problematic as far as getting across town east and west, but there weren't very many people that live there. So I want to point out that by my analysis that I found in the southwest there are seven crossings of 12 and 101 and 24 lanes. In the southeast, there are 13 crossings and 37 lanes that you can actually use. In the northwest, there are 13 crossings, similarly, but there are 56 lanes that you can use. And in the northeast, there are 19 crossings and 69 lanes that you can evacuate and do the things you need to do on a daily basis. Whether it's going to school, going to the JC or anything, you can't really do that. That's what I was saying about building a wall around Gaza. This is kind of a Gaza place. One of the, twice as many crossings and half again as many lanes, two and a half times as many crossings and three times as many lanes as the southwest has and twice as many crossings and more than double the number of lanes for the northwest than the southwest has. And this is a legacy. And people have said that it's a legacy that the fact was it wasn't in the city. So it wasn't the city's responsibility to do something about it initially, but in fact it was their responsibility to annex and then it would have been their responsibility. And so by not annexing, then they have done this a tragedy really. In fact, Bicentennial was a product of shenanigans down here with regard to Bellevue, a proposal for Bellevue that really would never have occurred, but it was a potential and gee, maybe that'll happen and we won't need to do hern, but that never was accurate and magically Bicentennial gets constructed, the Bicentennial overcrossing suitable for the county and isn't that wonderful for Fowling Grove. This is the proposal that would be a diverging diamond design. Oops, we lost everything again. I would like to have my time back to recover the time. Oops. So the existing design is here. The existing hern is here and the existing line is here. And the other part. Thank you. Next speaker please from the west or east lectern. Okay, thank you. Is this, do I make sure it's on? It's on, you just have to get uncomfortably close to the microphone. I'm comfortably close, there we go. Okay, thank you very much. I'm Peter Allen, President of the Wild Oak Homeowners Association and I walked in while there was discussion about making the progress of city projects more transparent for all of us to look at and I really wanna support that. Thank you for your efforts on that. I also wanted to support Vice Mayor Diane McDonald's efforts to make it even more transparent. So thank you. I just had a question about making, how to make a service request. I heard the description on how to do it. Could you tell me one more time so I can be sure to write it down? I'm internet challenged sometimes. I go to the city's portal, where does it start? I believe that was my Santa Rosa app that you can download on either an Android or your iPhone. Okay, say that again, I didn't understand. It's my Santa Rosa app. My Santa Rosa, okay, my Santa Rosa app. Yes, when you go in the app store. Okay, go to the app store, okay, very good. And then you can download it there, but if you need additional help, I'm sure someone will be happy to help and they are right behind you on their way. Okay, thank you very much. Okay, everybody, I'll be back for another step, thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I see no one else wishing to provide public comment. Thank you. We will now continue to item eight, which is our city manager and city attorney's report. We will start off with our city manager. Thank you, Mayor. So our Santa Rosa transit department is partnering with Toys for Tots, stuff the bus holiday toy drive event this Saturday. The event is from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. It will be here in front of City Hall. So I encourage everyone to get into the holiday spirit, donate some toys, unwrap toys, a game, sports entertainment, shoes, clothing, whatever your heart desires. Also happening this weekend is the 48th Handmade Holiday Crafts Fair. That is located at the Finley Community Center. It is from 10 to four on both Saturday and Sunday. And this is one of our traditional holiday events. It's hosted by the Recreation and Parks Department, and it features over 90 local artists, and the entry fee is $5. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I have no report this evening. Thank you, Madam City Clerk. Can you please facilitate public comment? Thank you, we are now taking public comment on item eight. If you'd like to make a comment, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. Whoa, hello. Mayor, it looks like there are no public comments from the Chamber. Thank you. Looking at Council to see if there are any abstentions that need to be made. Council Member Alvarez. Thank you, Mayor. I'm standing from item 14.1 because I'm involved in the cannabis industry. Thank you. Now we will move on to Mayor and Council Members' Reports. Vice Mayor McDonald. Thank you, Mayor. I have a couple of things to report on. Zero waste met, and I want to thank Renee Gundy for her representation while I was away at a city conference. We authorized to enter into a purchase agreement to acquire three and a half acres for $3 million out on Pruitt Avenue in Windsor. We adopted a green resolution recognizing Green Mary and a green resolution so for zero waste to recognize entities that exemplify zero waste practices. And the Executive Director Report, the Airport Compost Facility Project was going to the Board of Supervisors in January, and this is a partnership between the County and Zero Waste Sonoma to bring compost back to the County. And then I also had just a couple highlights. I attended the National League of Cities Conference in Atlanta, and a few of the workshops that I attended was on integrated data and public safety, drones as first responders, and a presentation on youth violence and prevention and strategies. And so I'm able to come back and bring some of those things to the various departments that they'll be under. And then another highlight was that we were able to meet with the Department of Transportation to have a conversation with them that I thought went very well. And then I just want to do a public thank you to my colleagues. I ended up getting very sick at the conference with Vertigo and all of them had to literally get me back to the hotel and deal with me for several hours. And so just publicly, I want to thank you all who attended and had to deal with me. It really meant a lot to know that you're there for me, not just on the dais, but also when I needed you all. So thank you. It was quite an event. Do we have any other seeing none? Madam City Clerk, can you please facilitate public comment? Yes Mayor, we are now taking public comment on item 10. If you'd like to make a comment, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. Mayor, I'm seeing no one approach the podiums for public comment. Thank you. Item 10.2, which will be our election of Vice Mayor. We will address this item after our last public comment on non-agenda matters, item 17, so we will table that for now and move on to item 11, which will be our approval of minutes for November 14th, 2023. Council, are there any corrections to the minutes? All right, seeing none. Madam City Clerk, can you please facilitate public comment? We are now taking public comments on item 11.1. If you'd like to make a comment, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record. Mayor, I'm seeing no one approach the podium for public comment on 11.1. Thank you. We will now adopt item 11.1 as presented, moving on to our consent items. Madam City Clerk, can you please read the consent items? Yes, item 12.1, resolution, approval and adoption of the city's salary plan and schedule. Item 12.2, resolution, approval of a second amendment to professional services agreement with Green Valley Consulting Engineers Incorporated Construction Management and Inspection Services associated with fire damage roadway landscaping. Item 12.3, ordinance adoption second reading, ordinance of the Council of the City of Santa Rosa amending title 20 of the Santa Rosa City Code to extend the expiration date of Zoning Code Chapter 20-16, Resilient City Development Measures and Zoning Code Section 20-28.100 Resilient City RC Combining District by one year from December 31st, 2023 to December 31st, 2024. Thank you, bringing it back to council. Are there any questions on the consent items? All right, seeing no questions. Madam City Clerk, may you please facilitate public comment on this item? We are now taking public comment on item 12, the Consent Calendar. Please make your way to the podium if you'd like to provide a comment. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. There, I'm seeing no one approach the podiums for public comment on consent. Thank you. Acknowledging this will be your last consent items but you will put before us Vice Mayor McDonald. Can you please make a motion? Thank you, Mayor. I move items 12.1 through 12.3. Second. We have a motion made by Vice Mayor McDonald and a second made by Council Member Rogers. Madam City Clerk, may you please call the vote. Thank you, Council Member Stapp. Aye. Council Member Rogers. Aye. Council Member Ocrepke. Aye. Council Member Fleming. Aye. Council Member Alvarez. Aye. Vice Mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. Let the record show that passes unanimously. Thank you. Being as though it is not five o'clock and we cannot have our first public comment on non-agenda matters, we will now go to our report items and we are going to start with item 14.1, that's fine. Item 14.1 is a report, cannabis equity assessment. Good afternoon, Mayor Rogers and members of the Council. My name is Jessica Jones. I'm the Deputy Director of Planning. With me tonight is, or this afternoon, is Monet Chacalli, a senior planner here with the city who has been focusing on our cannabis program and we also have our consultant for this project, Kyle Tankard, who is with SCI Consulting Group. So they will be doing the presentation for you and then we'll be available for any questions. Thank you, Jessica. Good evening, Miss Smith and Mayor Rogers and Council members. So as Jessica said, we are going to present our Cannabis Equity Assessment tonight. So I will give a quick background about the Equity Grant and about the Equity Act and the grant and then our consultant, Kyle, will give you an overview of the assessment and its results and the next steps and then staff will go over the timing. So about the Equity Grant, I have to read my notes for this act. So the Equity Act was signed into law by the state of California to address the harm caused by the war on the drugs and to increase the participation in the cannabis industry by marginalized and economically disadvantaged individuals and communities who have been impacted by cannabis criminalizations. So as a result of this in 2019, DCC entered into an interagency agreement with GOBIZ to administer a Cannabis Equity Grant that would assist local jurisdictions with grants to help equity applicants. And about this grant, this grant has two type. A type one that would provide assistance to local jurisdictions to conduct an assessment and to or to develop a program and then there is a type two that would provide local with a grant to help equity applicants. In 2021, the city applied for a type one grant and in March of 2022, we received a $75,000 to conduct the assessment that we are going to present it tonight. So the purpose of this session is to present you the equity assessment and its results and then tell you about the next steps and ask for direction. And with that, I will pass it to Kyle. Thank you. Thank you, Monet. Good evening, Mayor Rogers, members of the council, staff and the public. So Kyle Tankard, senior consultant and cannabis policy leader with SCI Consultant Group. So over the past year, we have been working closely with staff and the community to prepare a cannabis equity assessment. So tonight I will provide an overview of that assessment along with the key findings and recommendations from that report. So I'd like to begin by briefly outlining the focus on social equity in the cannabis industry and our goals for a local cannabis equity program here in the city of Santa Rosa. So the cannabis prohibition era had a profound impact on communities, particularly people of color in California and here in Santa Rosa. Proposition 64's legalization of recreational cannabis and the commercial cannabis industry came to address the past injustices, eliminate barriers, but has failed to effectively diversify the now billion dollar cannabis industry and provide opportunities for those who have been impacted by the war on drugs. So our approach to developing an equity program involves four key steps. So step one, outreach and education, two, the cannabis equity assessment, three, program development, and four, program implementation. So to facilitate the development and guidance of the equity assessment, we engaged in community outreach efforts. This outreach included an online survey, a virtual community meeting and interviews with key stakeholders. The city also developed a page on their website to post information about the cannabis assessment we were producing. So the primary objective of the cannabis equity assessment is to examine the historical consequences of cannabis related policies and legalization on communities and populations within the city. So by analyzing police statistics, demographics, poverty rates, and other relevant factors, we aim to pinpoint communities within the city that have been disproportionately impacted by the war on drugs. So by understanding the barriers to entry into the cannabis industry, the report offers key policy suggestions and recommendations to guide the city when they develop their equity program. So very quickly, this graphic illustrates our analysis process for the assessment. So one, identify disparities. Two, map arrest hotspots or locations. Three, bring in low income data, other demographic information, and then overlay this information onto one map to identify impacted communities. So starting with the ethnic and racial distribution of the population within the city, for people reporting one race alone, 62% are white, 34% are Hispanic or Latino, 6% are Asian, 2% are black or African American, 1.2% are American Indian and Alaska Native, and 0.4% are Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander. So in our analysis, we examined the historical cannabis related arrest in the city, spanning from a period of 2004 to the current year 2023. So throughout this timeframe, a total of 4,781 cannabis related arrests were recorded city-wide. Thanks. So in evaluating these cannabis related arrests in the city, we compared the arrest percentages to the demographic populations. So as you can see on this table and in this graph, Caucasian white individuals constituted for 52.6% of the arrest followed by Hispanic, Latino individuals at 33%, and black African American individuals at 9.4%. What stands out here and what the data shows us is this disproportionate arrest rates for black African American individuals who only make up 2% of the city's population, but accounted for 9.4% of the arrest, nearly five times their representation in the city's total population. Whereas if you look at the other demographic groups, the arrest rates aligned more closely with their population proportions. So to identify the disproportionately affected communities, a geospatial analysis of the arrest locations was conducted considering three factors, the presence of people of color populations, low income populations, and educational attainment levels at the census tract level. So this first map shows the concentration of non-white residents in Santa Rosa. So looking at the map, you can see that the Southwest and Southeast census tracts have the highest concentration of non-white residents with populations ranging between 50 to 100%. The green dots on this map indicate locations of cannabis related arrests. So as you can see on the map, the highest concentration of arrests are concentrated in areas where there are higher populations of people of color. And then going to the eastern side of the city, you'll see less concentration of arrests. This next map shows the proportion of low income households in the city of Santa Rosa by census tract. So most areas have 25% or fewer low income households, indicated in relatively low poverty concentration city-wide. However, census tract 151406 in the Southwest area of the city stands out to us, having the highest concentration at 52%. Additionally, the Southwest and Southeast areas have 25% to 50% low income households, again, correlated with the higher percentage of non-white populations, as well as the number of cannabis related arrests. And then lastly, so I apologize in advance, this map is the same as the previous slides, but it is correct in your staff report as well as the assessment. But this map displays the percentage of individuals aged 25 years or older without a high school diploma in Santa Rosa's census tracts. So most areas across the city show high educational attainment levels. But again, exceptions exist in the Southwest, some areas in the Northwest as well as central areas where concentrations between 25% to 50% of individuals lack high school diplomas. Again, these regions also have high concentrations of non-white low income households, highlighting the connection between education, race and socioeconomic status. So the highest percentage of cannabis related arrests were recorded in census tracts 152-000 and 153-002, accounting for 14% and 8% of the total arrests respectively. Notably, these two tracts are both located within the Midwestern regions of the city. This region is the area of the city that we have identified as being disproportionately affected given the convergence of the factors such as high rates of cannabis related arrests, significant non-white population and the prevalence of low income households. So the equity assessment identifies census tracts, again in the Western and Central side of the city, with economic and social disadvantages where majority of the cannabis arrests were concentrated. And the analysis of the cannabis related arrests reveals a disparity particularly impacting black African American individuals whose arrest rates were nearly five times higher than their population representation. And so the cannabis equity assessment discusses barriers to entry into the cannabis industry that impacted individuals face when trying to enter the industry. So the barriers can be summarized into the following categories, financial, technical, criminal and other. So one of the goals of the city's equity program will be to reduce and to eliminate these barriers to entry through the services that are provided by the program. So financial challenges included limited access to capital and past criminal histories hinder financing opportunities as well as property lease and opportunities. Technical barriers encompass a lack of business skills or industry expertise which are only compounded by the complex local and state cannabis regulations. And then lastly, the transition from the illicit to the legal markets faces, trust issues between affected communities that have borne the brunt of the cannabis enforcement and the government. So our analysis identified or analysis of the barriers to entry and our review of equity programs that have been established elsewhere in the state inform potential equity program services to address the financial, the technical and knowledge-based barriers for equity applicants. So financial assistance is crucial. So we suggest that the city consider establishing some form of loan or grant program. From all the outreach we did financial assistance was by far the largest barrier facing individuals. So loan and grant programs would offer essential financial support for startup licensing and operational costs. Loans could include low interest or even no interest loans while grants would provide non-repayable funds to applicants. Additionally, a comprehensive technical assistance program is recommended. This would be a tailored curriculum, tailored to business development, industry specific training and legal support for applicants. Really here the goal is to equip applicants with the skills, the knowledge and the resources necessary to open up and operate a successful cannabis business. And then ongoing support, including mentorship, networking opportunities, access to industry experts, legal assistance would ensure the long-term success of these businesses. And lastly, ongoing outreach, education, awareness campaigns are crucial for the equities program's success. So next I will transition to the top line findings from the report. So finding number one, equity program eligibility criteria should focus on the inclusion of populations in communities disproportionately impacted by cannabis enforcement. So careful consideration should be placed on when developing and establishing the eligibility criteria for the program. First and foremost, the requirement should focus on serving the communities and populations that have been impacted. The requirement should be adequately structured to capture the majority of these individuals that have been previously impacted. So we recommend that the city consider the following criteria. So a prior cannabis conviction or arrest history, this can extend to immediate family members, a low income status, a residency requirement. So either being a previous resident or a current resident of the city of Santa Rosa or even owning and operating a different business here in the city. And then the last one is equity business ownership percentage. So essentially this is a threshold requirement that an equity applicant must maintain a certain percentage of their business, whether that's 51% or greater, to avoid some of the predatory investors that we've seen elsewhere in the state with equity programs that use equity applicants to get licenses and end up taking advantage of them down the road. So finding number two is the equity program application and permanent process should be structured to ensure equity applicant success and incentivize ongoing support. So the city should consider priority application and permanent processing for equity applicants, moving them to the front of the line and then potentially considering a amnesty program for non-permitted businesses who are currently operating to guide them to the compliant regulated market. And then finding number three is the city's equity program must develop and implement benefits and services for equity applicants that address and mitigate the barriers to entry. So as a kind of a bottom line, we recommend that the city provide the following services. So fee waivers, a grant program and a technical assistance program. Finding four, a criminal history can limit an individual's ability to gain employment and apply for government assistance and or obtain a loan. So the city, we recommend that the city look into a cannabis and expungement program in collaboration with relevant partners like the district attorney's office and the courts. This initiative is aimed at assistant individuals from these impacted areas, expunging those past cannabis offenses from their criminal records. And then finding number five is to advance workforce development opportunities in the cannabis industry. So a lack of training for well-paying jobs is a common barrier in the cannabis industry and other industries alike. So prioritizing workforce development in the industry can boost the involvement and success of impacted communities enhancing their participation in the candidates related opportunities. And then finding number six is equity program funding. So adequate funding and a well-equipped staff are crucial for the success of an equity program. Other municipalities experiences show that having that lacking this supportive infrastructure can hinder those programs and cause setbacks along the way. To address this, the city should continue to pursue grants like those offered by GO-Biz as well as other sources. Reliance solely on the state grants isn't sustainable for the city in the long run. So down the road, the city should consider diversifying those funds and possibly looking to tap into the cannabis tax revenue or exploring alternative financial avenues. And lastly, finding number seven is to conduct public outreach and education to increase awareness of the equity program and reduce the social stigma regarding cannabis. So through community meetings, workshops, a strong presence with media and public relations as well as social media as well and an online presence to advertise and communicate about the city's equity program. So the next steps for staff and the city are as follows to develop the equity program, adopt a cannabis equity program to implement that program and then to apply for grant funding. So following council's approval of the cannabis equity of staffmen, if given the direction staff would proceed with the development of the equity program, this process involves crafting the program guidelines, determining the responsible city division or department that would oversee the program. Additionally, staff would draft a policy document or an ordinance that would come back for council approval that would outline the eligibility criteria, the services and benefits that would be provided by the program and establish the protocols for administering, monitoring and update in the program. And then upon completion of the adoption process, the city would then be eligible to apply for the type two grant funding via the cannabis equity grants program for local jurisdictions. And so again, the eligibility criteria determines who qualifies to participate in the city's program upon meeting these criteria and gaining admission to the city's program, participants will gain access to all the support services offered by the city's equity program. And then lastly, in addition to the type one funding that the city has already received, once the city's program has been adopted, the city is eligible to apply for type two funding from the state. So each year, the grant solicitation period opens up in October with applications due sometime in mid-December. The city can seek up to $3 million in financial support through the type two grant to fund and administer their equity program. However, it's essential to note that grant awards in excess of $500,000 require a one-to-one matching fund contribution from the city during that grant term. In addition, the guidelines set up by the state specify that no more than 10% of the grant award received by the city can be allocated for administration and no more than 10% of that grant can be used for direct technical assistance or hiring outside consultants to provide those services. So with that, I will turn the presentation back over to staff to conclude. All right, thank you for that. So I'm just gonna quickly go over the timeline here and then I'm gonna hand it over to Monet for the recommendation. So as was just outlined in the next steps, the next steps should Council wanna proceed would be staff drafting a cannabis equity program that would include all the criteria and eligibility requirements within it. Prior to doing that though, one of the things that we will be looking at is determining which department and staff here at the city would be best to administer that program. One, develop the draft program to bring forward to Council and then ultimately to administer that program. So we'll be looking at that first and then planning will continue to work with whoever is determined to be the subject matter expert for this next step to develop that program. And so that process will happen winter and spring into 2024. In the summer of 2024, that draft program will be brought forward to Council for your consideration and that would include at that point a determination of how many businesses could potentially be eligible for the program which would ultimately give us an idea of the staff time that would be needed to administer the program. So all that information we brought forward to you for your consideration in the summer of 2024 so you can make a decision at that point as to whether you want to move forward with that type two grant. If the Council directs staff to proceed, then we would be preparing that application for ultimate submittal in December of 2024. So with that, I'm gonna hand it over to Monet for the recommendation. And so with that, it is recommended by the Planning and Economic Development Department that Council by resolution accept the city of center was a cannabis equity assessment and to direct staff to prepare a type two grant application. Thank you. Thank you for that very thorough presentation. I did have a question. Who conducted the assessment and analysis? It was not done in-house. So that was conducted by SCI Consultant Group. Okay, in SCI Consultant Group, when they were picked, was it looked at to see what their diversity, like if they were diverse or if they actually, if there were consultants that met some of the criteria that we would actually be looking at? Oh, here is what I remember. We received three applications that we interviewed and we chose SCI Group. So I can't remember what we look at exactly, but the application that was receiver three and interview two out of three and we chose only one. Okay, it's just important to me that if we're looking for someone to look into equity, that maybe we can, when picking consultants, we can also look at equity to see if they, to make it equitable across the board. And then also, how were the key stakeholders identified? So those key stakeholders were identified through multiple avenues. So we reached out to the current cannabis business owners in the city through the survey that was released to the general public, folks that were interested had the opportunity to put their contact information and participate in those one-on-one stakeholder interviews. And then during the community meeting, the individuals that showed up were also, again, offered that opportunity. So we had folks that currently operate businesses. I spoke to a gentleman that is in an equity program in the city of San Francisco. I spoke to someone representing a law firm, individuals that own and operate technical assistance programs for equity applicants up and down the state. So a wide variety of individuals provided feedback. Okay, I just, when we're looking at all the dots on the map, I wanna make sure that the people within those areas were reached out to and actually included. We see a lot of times that we can publish stuff or invite people somewhere, but unless we go to where people are that we're trying to target, we don't always get that feedback that we want. And then, I think that is good for me. Are there any other questions from council members? Council members, stop. Thank you, Mayor. A few questions. Do we have any demographic data regarding our existing cannabis business permit holders? We have information about location of the dispensaries and we have the list of cannabis applicants for cultivation and manufactured dispensaries and distributions. So we have the list and data, but we have only the map for dispensaries currently. Okay, so we don't have the same kind of demographic data that we do for arrests, for example. For what? For arrests, for example, where it was broken down into different demographic categories. We didn't find out. No. Question number two, do we have any data regarding the effect of cannabis businesses on neighborhood revitalization? Are there some success stories out there that show that encouraging cannabis-specific operations leads to good outcomes in neighborhoods? A couple more questions here. Is there a tension pursuing this kind of policy given that just in our last council meeting, we were pursuing a very different policy with respect to tobacco, where we're looking to limit the sales of various kinds of tobacco process or products, but now we're looking to encourage the growth of cannabis? I don't have any answer for that, no. Okay. With respect to staff resources, if we really did ramp up this program, how significant are the staff resources and also the likely budget resources given that the state grants are required one-to-one match? So that's something that we would be looking into should the council want to proceed with developing a program. At this point, we don't have an answer to that. We do know that the program only provides a 10% allocation towards staff administration of the grant and we did reach out to the county and spoke to the person that runs their program and they have a significant amount of staff time that goes towards that. It really depends on the number of businesses that come into the program and utilize it and so we will have an answer for that when we bring the program back should the council want to proceed. Perfect, thank you. That's it for me. Vice Mayor? Thank you, Mayor. So I have a couple of different questions for you. There was some data around the arrests that went up to 2023. Because cannabis has been legalized since 2016, was there any data that showed what the arrests were for prior to that versus what they were for after 2016 to 2023? Because I felt like that information wasn't clear. It just showed there was something related to cannabis. So I'm kind of curious what that was. So are you asking post legalization or? Yeah, what are we arresting people for post legalization from 2016? Yeah, so I would have to go back through the data that we received from the police department. I'm not sure if it detailed the types of infractions. We could probably request that information to see if they have that. But looking at the peak in the cannabis arrests, it peaked in 2010 and then from 2016 moving forward, it dropped drastically. So likely those arrests are possession with the intent to sell illegally or operate in a legal cannabis business. I'm having a tough time understanding how arrests prior to legalization and opening businesses relates to something that we're trying to do potentially now. That's hard for me to understand why we would have data that was based on old laws versus what we're looking at right now. So that's a tough one for me to try to say, oh, we should definitely legalize more or have more businesses of cannabis distribution because this helps some older arrests that were done prior to legalization. I'm having a hard time tying those two things together. So I'm not sure if you can explain it to me or not. But I have a couple more questions here. As we go along, maybe that'll help my brain process us a little. One of the barriers that I understand is around banking. And that wasn't mentioned here because it's a high cash business. Do we have any way that that's legalized because of FDIC and the regulations from the federal level? Is there a bank in California that's going to be taking on these expanded cannabis businesses or how's that working currently? Yeah, so currently federal banking is not an option. There are credit unions up and down the state that do accept cannabis businesses. So that is one avenue for them. What's our current return on investment right now for the cannabis business? I mean, I know there's a high tax, but I'm not certain that that high tax goes right back to the city of Santa Rosa. So if it's a high tax, because of it, is it state and federal that get the tax? I'm looking to Allen right behind you who's shaking his head, yes, who's RCFO. So when I hear about us matching grants on this kind of business, I guess my question is, would we be getting any more from this business than any other business in the city of Santa Rosa? Or is it simply because the state is offering a grant for us to help promote this because the state receives more money on their tax take? While staff comes to the podium, I do want to answer one question. So cannabis equity programs were implemented by race one. It was designed to address the disproportionate impacts of the law, the drugs, the impacts that drug laws had on certain communities, right? Specifically communities of colors. So back when we had the war on drugs, there was a higher risk rate, a risk rate for people of color. So when they started to legalize cannabis, they wanted to make certain that those people who have been disproportionately impacted were allowed to enter the market. Okay, that helps clarify some of my questions and to see that we're not having a barrier for the people that were adversely affected by this industry in the past or not the industry in the past, but actually arrested. Okay, that helps clarify some of my questions. One other question is, how many cannabis distributions, what are they called? Dispensaries do we have in the city of Santa Rosa? So we, okay, so we have 24 dispensaries that are operating. We have received 45 permits total since 2017. One is close, three we drew the application and three are expired. So 24 are now operating and we might have three or four more open and start operating again. Okay, and then just so I'm clear on the type two grant that you're asking us to maybe give direction on tonight, that would not require any matching funds if it was under $500,000, but anything over $500,000, the city would be committing to matching those funds. Correct. And we'd only be able to recover 10% for the work from staff that's going to go into this potential program. Correct, that's correct. Thank you. Council Member O'Cropkey. Thank you very much, Mayor. A couple of questions, kind of dovetailing off the vice mayor's questions. So she asked about dispensaries, how many total cannabis business permits do we have? Microbusinesses, distribution, processing, all of us. So we have 13 cultivators, 24 cannabis dispensaries operating, 19 manufacturing operating currently, 31 distribution and one lab testing. Okay, thank you very much. The total 88 registered cannabis operators. Great, thank you. Do we have any equity programs for any other industry? Not that I'm aware of, look, I'm not aware of any. Okay. And then regarding the arrests, when looking at cannabis arrests, are we looking at all of the charges brought during that arrest or if they were just arrested for cannabis? So to my point, would it be, could they have been arrested for firing a gun in city limits but also had cannabis on them and so they were charged with cannabis as well or is it strictly just cannabis and nothing else? So my understanding was it was cannabis related, so cannabis was the primary offense. Okay, thank you very much. Are there any additional comments from council members? All right, seeing none, Madam City Clerk, may you please facilitate public comment? Thank you, we are now taking public comment on item 14.1. Please make your way to the podium if you'd like to make a comment. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. Please go ahead. Can you hear me? Yes. Great, thank you. Tom Sells and it may seem a non sequitur but I'm actually an anthropologist and civil and environmental engineer so do forgive me and I wanna point out that the low income regions in Santa Rosa are overburdened because the high income areas resisted the dispensaries if we go back to the time when those were allocated if you will, the very complicated process and over application and then people were stuck out in a really complicated situation. San Francisco did a study on their enforcement of various laws and they found that they were about 20 times more overburdening their young children, particularly young women of color in San Francisco, 20 times more than St. Charles County which was Ferguson, Missouri. So the US Justice Department went and found that Ferguson and St. Charles were out of compliance because they're vastly over arrested people of color and San Francisco did a study and found they were 20 times more likely to arrest a young black woman in San Francisco than in St. Charles County than they would have done and they were already determined to have been. So there's a great deal of this that could be addressed but I would point out maybe cannabis is not the right industry. What I would say is that many people for instance, if they were to do anything, very difficult to get an application for doing any of these because of the over abundance of them in low income areas and difficulty in inciting these, the most critical thing is real estate. For them to have an understanding of real estate and they could transcend with that. So there's a great school that's called the Lumlow School of Real Estate and they offer an online course. I have nothing to do with it. I've taken the course, it's a fantastic course. It's like $50. You could offer that to the people that were affected and it would change their life. I guarantee you it would change their life. They would come away if they took it, if they sat and went through it. It would change their life and their understanding of real estate and everything that you do here. And so do forgive me for pointing it out that there really was an impact to people of color. But it's up to you as to how to redress that and I'm not sure that's trying, how many dispensaries would you add? How many people would you help? But I guarantee you if you gave them $50 or $100 and the other thing is, of the first $500,000 is free and the next say $500,000 you have to put $250,000 and you can get 40% of what year, of that second 50, because it's 10 and 10, it's 20 but it's half, right? So you got the other $500,000 free, right? So. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening. Moses Flickinger here speaking. I just wanted to say it is important that we establish a program here in Sonoma County because the majority of black and brown folks live here within this area of Santa Rosa and the city limits. So and also I appreciate the report and just wanted to say it might be imperative to also expedite this whole thing for the operators and the few people of color that are operating in this town, you know what I mean? We've waited and watched the county develop their own program and have still been waiting through that. So it might be important to make this, you know what I mean, quick for all of us. Thank you so much. Thank you. Mayor, I see no one else approaching the podium for public comment on this item. Thank you. Are there any additional questions or comments from council members? Okay, seeing none, I just had go for it. Just a quick one from me. Normally I would jump at the chance to support a well-intentioned program that wants to look at things through an equity lens and wants to go after state grant funds and wants to support entrepreneurship in the community. Those are things I love to support. In this case, this seems like an inefficient, or kind of muddled policy way to go about it. And I think that came out with some of our questions up here. So I don't feel the urge to support that I normally would. I guess I wanted to just frame my vote in that context. Thank you. Okay, are there any other comments? Chris, I'm busting out the seams. I just have to say what I wanna say. Give me two seconds. First, I wanna say that this is not the same as the tobacco. This does not mean that we are going to put dispensaries on every corner. If you go back to the presentation, there were other items within the presentation that outline expunging someone's record and helping them to do other things. So this is about equity. It's not about putting dispensaries on every corner. Start there. The second thing is this honestly reminds me of another program that we have, which is tattoo removal, right? It's about helping people to get where they need to be. And I think that Santa Rosa has done a good job at doing that. So I'm a little surprised at some of the comments that I'm hearing tonight, especially asking if any of the arrests were because of something else, or could we look at that? To me, that implies something that I don't wanna touch on. I just wanna say it makes some implications to even ask that question. As far as I'm concerned, when you look at the demographics of the people that are affected by this and the demographics of the people that we're talking about, and I'll breathe in with that. Council Member Rogers. Thank you, Mayor. If Council Member O'Crepkey, because I'm also making the motion, I believe, right? You wanna have Council Member O'Crepkey give his comments first? Council Member O'Crepkey. Just to your point, Mayor, I think you're misinterpreting my question. My question was to clarify, if it was just for cannabis or cannabis and something else, we have a clear, idea of what the data is. It was not implying anything or trying to say anything. It's just were they arrested for something else or not? Yes or no, to get a clear idea and the consultant answered my question. I tend to agree with Council Member Stapp on this and looking at the barriers to entry. I mean, I've seen more cannabis applications than anybody on this, having done four years on planning commission right after the legalization of cannabis. And I've seen so many come through and so many just not get done. They get approved and then they just never get built. They never get opened, nothing happens. Financial and technical, those are barriers for everybody. Criminal, that's something that we don't, we can discuss whether or not we wanna help with expungement or not. But when it comes to the other things, distrust of government and social stigma, we can't address that at all. That's something we can't change. I've seen people up here yell, don't you dare open another pot dealership. I mean, it's just the way people think about certain things. And then, Castle and Licenses and Zoning, that's the ordinance itself. In order to address those, we'd have to completely reopen the ordinance. I don't know if any of us would be willing to do that or not. So, the barriers are great, but I tend to agree with Council Member Stapp, especially since we don't have an equity program for any other kind of business, whether it be restaurants or construction or anything. I mean, we could talk about helping people get open up their own construction business and getting involved in the trades and trainings and stuff like that, but I just tend to not have the, as Council Member Stapp put it, the drive to do something like this, because it's very convoluted. And I am definitely not in favor of anything having to do with matching funds coming out of our budget, considering where we are budget-wise. Council Member Stapp. Oh, just to follow up on my earlier comments as well, Mayor, given your thoughtful rejoinder, I've been very much in support of having this kind of entrepreneurship support with an equity lens. To some extent, we're building this in the community now as with the Small Business Development Center. I would love to expand that. My issues with this program are the single industry focus, first of all, and then the fact that it seems like it's gonna be taxing on both city staff and city budget for uncertain effects. So I would love to revisit items like this that are broader-based, but with the same focus. I'm just not sure that this is the right item, and that's how I'm seeing it tonight. Council Member Bluming. Yeah, I appreciate some of the concerns about this. However, I think that there are, the argument that we only do this for cannabis is not exactly fully accurate. We have a project labor agreement in place in large part because that unionized trade groups hire women and hire people of color and train people who have criminal records and help people to move on with their lives, which is a really large part of what the city does. So that's one example. I think the argument that because we don't do it in one industry doesn't mean that we, that therefore we shouldn't do it in others, then limits us from effort starting anywhere. And then just with great respect, folks from lower income backgrounds definitely don't have the same financial or technical training that people who come from families of higher incomes or with greater levels of education have. And so to say that we can't fix that, this is an opportunity to help and potentially to rebuild some trust that people have lost in our governments. You see 500 times more likely to be arrested for cannabis in the city of Santa Rosa of your African-American. That's really stunning. So I think that we need to maybe take a moment and reflect on how we can be part of a solution here rather than picking at something when we wouldn't do it if it was something that was maybe more aligned with interests of everybody or with certain parts of our community. I think that this report has been given perhaps a higher level of scrutiny than other causes for our city. So with respect, I hope that we can pass this and move forward for our community and repair some of the damage that has been done in the war on drugs. Are there any other vice mayor? I just wanna go back to the staff capacity because I think that that's some of our hesitation that we're seeing because of the amount of staff time that potentially could be needed to implement a program like this. It's good that we had this study done and give us the information, but my concern is around that. Could you talk a little bit more about how many hours of staff time would be needed for implementation with the 10% that we're able to retain from this grant, be able to cover that staff time and then do we have the current staff for this if we were able to do it or is it like we're taking our current staff and we're stretching them thinner to implement a program that's in place. That's my concern right now. And then I do want Allen to address the ROI on that just so I'm clear that we don't get any additional money for cannabis. It's just the same as any other business in the city of Santa Rosa. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening mayor, vice mayor and members of the council, Gabe Osborne, acting director of planning and economic development. I'll actually touch on a few questions that the council brought forward. I think it's important to understand the process we're looking at here. So this is essentially adopting the assessment. And then our next step is to analyze what the program would look like. So as we go down that road of looking at the program, obviously there's eligibility criteria. There's understanding how many members of the community will benefit from this program. And then we're controlling that eligibility criteria. There can also be additional analysis as performed to determine the return on investment. There can be an additional analysis to perform to determine what sort of benefit that's has purely from an economic development standpoint and from a neighborhood revitalization standpoint. That's what we would be working through in 2024 in the summer of 2024. So the level of staff time that that takes that would be a planning driven exercise to start framing that up. But it will tie into other departments because really the understanding we have to come to at that point is where does it live? What are the staffing timelines associated with the development, but then also the long-term nature of this program and really how many full-time employees are needed to run this? And part of that analysis will look at best industry standards, what other jurisdictions have done on this front to understand what that looks like. But a lot of that is unknown at this point because that will be the exercise that we would go through if the council so chooses to provide direction for us to prepare that program manual. Now, when we bring that program forward, we will bring that program forward with all those additional details so the council can make a decision on whether adoption makes sense or not for the community. And we'll provide the appropriate staffing levels for what we think that program should look like long-term. But to answer your immediate question, Vice Mayor, I believe and I lean on Jessica a little bit for the response to this, but overall where we are right now from a policy development standpoint is the department has a set of priorities. This will fit into those priorities because we've defined a timeline to it. My guess will it absorb a significant amount of time from a senior planner to work out that policy and then it will also touch into other departments. So usually with policies of this nature, I generally say 25% of one person to get it going and then as it moves into other departments, it's a bit unknown. We have to go through that exercise, but it will take staff time simply to stand up and develop the program manual to bring that forward in front of the council. And then as I mentioned, the long-term is a bit unknown at this point, but we'll bring all that information to council as we come through with adoption. And Director Osburn, can you clarify? There will be other rounds of funding we kind of apply for. It doesn't mean we necessarily have to apply for this, but we also were mandated to supply a report based off of the funding, based off the grant that we applied for. So we needed, we have requirements to respond to this for the grant too as well. That is correct City Manager. So the item you're seeing today is in response to the grant. So that's presenting the assessment. As we move forward and we start identifying what a program would look like, we can also identify what other funding sources would look like for that program. What was discussed today can be a bit challenging. Anytime we have a grant that only provides 10% of the administration costs, then obviously general fund dollars are the next in line for the support to that under most circumstances. But as we go through that exercise, we can also look at other funding sources that may be able to support that program long-term. And then if you were to take some, but if we were to implement this program now, was this something that you had planned from the beginning of the year that we were going to start to take staff time away or would there be other programs or things that would have to be delayed because of this action? That is an excellent question. When we initially started the process of doing the assessment, it was well-known what the next steps to that would be. When we look at where we currently stand with other initiatives that the city's working on, taking it, I will once again lead to Jessica because she runs that team, it was thought through for as long as I've been in my current capacity with the department that we would potentially be looking at this next step in the program. So it's not something that was not envisioned from a priority setting standpoint, but Jessica and provide a little more of an impact, a little more of an explanation, excuse me, on the impacts to the planning team. Yes, and one thing I want to note is when we initiated this type one grant that we're here before you right now with the assessment on, at that time, my understanding was that there was a somewhat of an assumption that we could partner with the county and their program and utilize their staffing and their program to then manage this type two. And the only way to proceed with that was to do this assessment first. So we were successful in getting this assessment and we're proceeding with that idea that we would then be partnering with the county, which would have very or limited impacts to staff resources for the type two. However, as we were getting closer towards the end of this assessment period, we met with the county, sat down with them to talk about their program, understand it and how we could fit into it. And it was brought to our attention that the county would not be able to include us in their program that we would have to go on our own. That's not to say that we couldn't, you know, this is the first year of the county's program right now. They're in it right now. So we could continue that conversation with them to see if there's any possibility in the future. But as of right now, the county does not have the capacity or the ability to administer the city's program. But from a capacity standpoint, yes. And we are at full capacity with working on the policies that we're currently working on. And as Gabe mentioned, you know, I think it very likely would take about a quarter of a planner to move forward this next piece. We can figure out a way to make that work, but we do have a lot going on with policy work in our department right now. Can you clarify, the county has two full-time staff to handle this program correct? Is it two? I believe that's correct. I'm sorry. So the county has two full-time employees that do their program, and they're able to pay that out of a 10% retention from their grant. So I don't have all the specifics, but no, I do know that they are not able to pay for it with just the 10%. They have allocated funding to move that forward. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify because staff is saying a quarter of a person, half of a person, but the county itself has two full-time staff members dedicated to this. Yeah, and also to clarify that the quarter of a person that we're talking about would be just to move forward with drafting the draft program that we would bring forward to council that it does not include whatever staff time is needed to execute the program, you know, once we move forward with that grant application, should we do it at this point, as Gabe mentioned, and I mentioned earlier, we don't know what that impact will be because we don't yet know what the program looks like and how many businesses and individuals would benefit from that program. And I would add to that, if I may, just generally a program of this nature, obviously the volume is unknown. It really requires a dedication of at least one full-time employee to be successful. There often starts and stops in the application process, but the general support at least requires that, and then you're building off of that. Thank you, that's helpful. So Vice Mayor, relative to the cannabis industry tax, the city and I apologize, I don't have the exact rates where they are right now. My understanding is that our rates are actually quite low. So the taxes, I would imagine that the tax barrier is more on the state end than it is on the city's end. I know ours, especially for dispensaries, could go up to 8%, and we are not near that right now. I think ours is held pretty low, and we did that intentionally as the program began. We have the ability to raise it, or the council has the ability to raise it, and we have not brought that to you at this time. From a revenue standpoint, this is general fund operating revenue that comes in. It runs anywhere from 1.8 to about $2 million. I think it may have even come in at 2.1 for the last year, but that's about where we are. We feel that we're plateauing at that $1.8 to $2 million range. I believe I have the rates in front of me. You may wanna clarify this. For cultivator, it's 2%, or $5 per square feet. For manufacturer, it's 1%, and for adult dispensary, it's 3%. And I believe CFO stated 8% is a max, or $25 per square foot. And I do believe medicinal is 0%. That is correct. And so is distributor, it's zero as well. Are there any additional questions? Seeing none, Councilman Brogess. I appreciate that. I'm gonna play resident historian for a minute. Back in 2016, the city decided that it wanted to be at the forefront and treat cannabis like any other industry. You see in that tax rate how we tried to craft it to attract specific jobs based on the expected wages. That's why manufacturing was held low so that manufacturing would be located here. There's also a de facto agreement with the county about we would be the proper place to cite dispensaries while they would be the proper site for cultivation where they had more room. So it was all sort of built together. In our haste to throw together a program and really capture an emerging market, one of the things that we did miss was this conversation around equity. And once we had our programs that were in place, we started to hear this conversation from other jurisdictions about particularly the BIPOC community how it had for decades felt the brunt of cannabis policies and over-policing around cannabis and that what people were concerned about was that if we didn't advance an equity program, what could happen was you'd have rich white folks who would move in and make money off of an industry that had historically harmed BIPOC communities. So we made an agreement at that time that we would come back and look at the equity programs. We're behind other jurisdictions. But that's why I'm perfectly, I get all of the concerns around staffing. I hope that the quarter staff person, the quarter that we're getting is their head that would be the most helpful, I think. Like I get the concerns. And yet that was part of our promise that we made to the community when we embarked on this. So I'm happy to move the resolution of the council, the city of Santa Rosa, accepting the city of Santa Rosa cannabis equity assessment and directing staff to prepare a cannabis equity program, wait for the reading of the text. And that's because it's a promise that we made when we had this as an emerging market that we understandably sprinted in the beginning and then had to take stock of what were other places doing that was more equitable or better than what we were doing. Second, and if the mayor pleases, I'd like to offer a small anecdote about the early days of permitting these dispensaries. You know, we had, I'll never forget one of the most difficult discussions we have when I first came on council, I thought all we did on the city council was make determinations about cannabis density. It seemed that every day during my first six months we were picking between two competing applicants. And one of them I'll never forget was a Caucasian, a white guy who came forward, had no criminal background. And in a person of color, I think he was Latino. And we denied his application. It was totally subjective, but one of the reasons that I heard from council members in deliberations was that the person did have a criminal background. And so it's really clear to me that we have historically made these decisions whether conscious or unconscious about who gets to participate in the legal and regulated market based on factors that disproportionately impact people of color. So it's my hope that we see our way toward not getting stuck and mired in the details today, but that we think broadly and with leadership and leave the details of the implementation and execution of this to our capable staff. So with that, I hope you consider my comments. When you vote. We have a motion made by council member Rogers and a second by council member Fleming. Madam city clerk, may you please call the vote. Thank you, council member step. I was very close to being persuaded by my two colleagues to my right. Thank you for that history. And you did make me think about it. Ultimately, I think the staff, the near term staff burden, as well as the muddled policy wins out in my head, but not without some second thoughts. So thank you again on this one, I'm gonna vote now. Council member Rogers. Hi. Council member O'Crepkey. No. Council member Fleming. Hi. Council member Alvarez is abstaining. Councilor vice mayor McDonald. No. Mayor Rogers. Yes. Let the record show this motion fails with a split vote, three yes, three no, and one abstention. Thank you. We will now go back up to our public comment on non-agenda matters. 13. Madam city clerk. Thank you. We are now taking public comments on item 13, non-agenda matters. This is a time when any person may address the council on matters not listed on the agenda, but which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council. If you are in the chamber, I would like to comment, but have not provided a speaker card or your name, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. Mr. Ells, go ahead. Previously, I was addressing the statistics, so that item was on capital improvements were statistics, and I hope you will allow me to address not statistical elements with respect to Hearn Avenue and the capital improvements, but not statistical elements. Thank you. So I'm having trouble with the overhead here. Thank you. I'll turn it on and I didn't hear you say you needed the overhead. Oh, I thought it was on. Okay, thank you. So over here is the proposal to provide overcrossings for Hearn, which would build two lanes, remove two lanes and replace these two lanes. So you would add two lanes at a current cost of four lanes over twice the normal cost to make improvement of this type. That happens a lot in urban areas. If you're gonna build in Barcadero Freeway through San Francisco, it's gonna cost you a lot. If you build the 91 Freeway or in Los Angeles from the LAX, if you're gonna build that, then you have to go through community after community, you have to elevate the entire thing. It's gonna be very expensive. That's what happens. You have infrastructure in place. Here you have no other infrastructure in place, except for this ramps. The ramps, as proposed here, using the diverging diamond would be free flowing. No signals here, a possible roundabout here. So no signals here. You could envision how existing Hearn would actually flow. It could be reversing. So you could have two lanes in the morning and two lanes in the evening coming back. This is a tremendous problem for people and their families to move at those times in the morning to get to work, to get to school, and in the evening to get home. As I showed you before, without going into the statistics, it's overwhelming that this area is isolated. And to spend twice as much to improve it or essentially getting half of what you're spending when you could go ahead and actually put all of that to benefit, and instead of having just four lanes, you would get four new lanes and you would have six lanes. So you would have an additional crossing for this area. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. I see, oh, please approach the podium for your public comments, sir. When you see it there, for your... Do you need the overhead as well? This is good. Thank you. I'm Peter Allen, president of the Wild Oak Homeowners Association. And in my last visit to the city council, I expressed appreciation to the city for finally recognizing that an easement in our association was private, not public, and that it was owned by our association. So thank you. The city building office then issued a notice of violation of city codes to the homeowner at 805 White Oak Drive for two reasons. The utility meters were illegally placed on her easement, and the post for the electrical meter was also illegally placed on private property owned by our association. This notice required a plan to remove these two code violations by November 20th. We didn't hear anything on this by November 21st. So I asked the city building department, what happened? I was told that the notice of violation was paused by request of the attorney for this homeowner. There is a separate civil action on this against this homeowner for a violation of our homeowner's rules, not the city's rules, but the city's not a plaintiff nor a defendant in this civil action, and again, it is not about civil code. So I will be blunt. The evidence by this action is that it would suggest that the city is unfairly colluding with this homeowner to deny us the use of our property. For example, I'm asking if any of you had a neighbor who put a post or their utility meters on your property, would you accept the city's refusal to enforce the law and have them removed? No, I think every one of you wouldn't be as upset as I am. These meters are also in shallow and unstable soil at the top of a road cut. Should the soil slip and break both the gas and utility, gas and electrical lines, the risk of fire is very large and the city's liability for its failure to correct this unsafe condition is potentially huge. The summary justice must be blind, but it is not in this case. It took us a year, a year to convince the city that it was unfairly favoring the homeowner by claiming the easement was owned by the city, not us. The city finally recognized it as unfair by recognizing we owned it, not the city. But now it is once again acting unfairly. The city can correct this appearance of unfairness by now requiring that the city codes be enforced and restarting the enforcement action that it has issued. It will also protect the safety of the citizens in our part of Santa Rosa. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor MC, no one else approached the podium for public comment on non-agenda matters. Thank you. We will now proceed with item 14.2, Madam City Manager. Item 14.2 is a report, Home Investment Partnership, American Rescue Plan, Home ARP, Funding Awards. Good afternoon, Mayor Rogers, Vice Mayor McDonald and members of the council. I am Sasha Brown, program specialist for Housing and Community Services. And here with me today is Kelly Kaikendall, Housing and Community Services Manager. The item in front of you today seeks approval of two funding awards using Home ARP funds. This slide provides an overview of the presentation. I'll provide some background on the Home ARP program and allocation plan, then get into the request for proposals, summary of those proposals, and then finish up with our recommendation. The Home ARP program was created by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which appropriated $5 billion to provide housing, services and shelter to qualifying populations, which I'll define further on the next slide. The city was allocated $2,737,433 in Home ARP funds by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, known as HUD. Through HUD's required consultation and public participation process, the city developed a Home ARP allocation plan, which identified the use of Home ARP funds for supportive services, specifically focusing on homelessness prevention. On February 28th of 2023, council authorized the middle of the plan to HUD. As stated on the previous slide, Home ARP funds must be used to benefit qualifying populations. These qualifying populations are individuals and families who are homeless at risk of homelessness, fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence, including dating violence, sexual assault, stalking or human trafficking, other populations at risk of homelessness due to housing instability, and veterans and families that include a veteran that meet one of the preceding criteria. Of the total Home ARP award, 15% is allocated for city administration, 80% is for program delivery, and 5% is for nonprofit operating costs. This provided a total of $2,326,819 available for supportive services in our RFP. We released our RFP on August 31st of 2023 with proposals due on October 2nd of 2023. We were seeking qualified and experienced organizations to provide supportive services starting January 1st of 2024. We received two proposals, one from committee on the shelter lists known as COTS and the other from Catholic Charities. The evaluation criteria for these proposals was on a scale of 100 points with five bonus points available for including homeless prevention services. The criteria included proven delivery of supportive services, the ability to serve all qualifying populations, organizational capacity, financial reasonability of the proposal, the proven delivery of accurate data and compliance with various reporting requirements, experience and alignment with best practices, alignment with the homelessness solutions strategic plan, having policies and procedures for engaging clients in seeking feedback and the overall completeness and quality of the proposal. This criteria was used to score the two proposals received, which I'll summarize next. One of the home art proposals was from COTS. COTS is based in Petaluma and has more than 35 years of experience providing services and housing to vulnerable populations in Sonoma County, including homelessness prevention and supportive services. In Petaluma, COTS operates the Mary Isaac Center Shelter, Kids First Family Shelter, Recuperative Care and People's Village Kiney Homes. Additionally, COTS is expanding their permanent supportive housing services to Santa Rosa. They're utilizing Measure O funding from the Sonoma County Continuum of Care, COC, now known as the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition. This is adding additional units of scattered site permanent supportive housing in Santa Rosa. It proposes to open a satellite office in Santa Rosa and provide financial assistance to 50 participants targeted at assisting individuals to retain their current housing or exit homelessness. Participants will also have access to urgent assistance providing for urgent needs such as toiletries and blankets, case management, food, transportation and mental health services. Mental health services will be provided by a contracted licensed marriage and family therapist. COTS plans to reduce the length of time participants spend homeless, increase the retention of permanent housing and limit returns to homelessness. The other home art proposal was from Catholic Charities. Catholic Charities has more than 40 years of experience serving vulnerable populations in Sonoma County, also including homelessness prevention and supportive services. They currently operate Samuel L. Jones Hall Homeless Shelter, Caritas Family Center, the Safe Parking Program, Caritas Drop and Center and the Homeless Outreach Services Team host. These programs all receive city funding. Catholic Charities proposes to provide financial assistance to 90 participants targeted at assisting individuals to retain their current housing or exit homelessness. Participants will also have access to housing counseling, food and mental health services. These mental health services will be contracted by Santa Rosa Community Health and available at the Caritas Center Clinic. Catholic Charities plans to assist participants by building financial resiliency and housing stability to bolster personal resiliency and coping skills to stabilize housing outcomes and seeks to reduce food and security, recurrence of homelessness and the impacts of homelessness. On October 10th of 2023, an Evaluation Committee reviewed and scored the two proposals. The Evaluation Committee was comprised of four staff members including representatives from the Housing Community Services and the Finance Department. Based on the evaluation criteria and subsequent scoring, COTS received an average score of 99 points and Catholic Charities received an average score of 97.25 points. The total funding available in this RFP was $2,326,819. So we are recommending funding COTS for the full amount of their request and we recommend funding Catholic Charities for the remaining amount. This is a 10% reduction from Catholic Charities original request. However, Catholic Charities has already adjusted their proposed scope of services accordingly and this was the proposal presented in the previous slides. It is recommended by the Housing Community Services Department that the Council by resolution approve a grant agreement for the home art program with committee on the shelter list COTS and the amount of $711,375 for an 18 month period, January 1st, 2024 to June 30th, 2025. Approve a grant agreement for the home art program with Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Santa Rosa and the amount of $1,615,444 for an 18 month period, January 1st, 2024 to June 30th, 2025. And authorize the Director of Housing Community Services to execute the grant agreements for home art program funds with COTS and Catholic Charities and the total amount of $2,326,819. Thank you. Thank you for that presentation. Looking to Council to see if there are any questions. Council Member Rogers. Not a question per se, but I think this is the first time we've seen Sasha since she got married, so I just wanted to say congratulations. All right, are there any other questions from Council members seeing no questions? Madam City Clerk, Vice Mayor. Just had a quick question. I'm perfectly happy supporting these two groups and following the recommendation tonight, but do we ever appropriate money to SAY Dream Center or TLC since that really meets the criteria of those at risk youth that are in the community? I just saw this was a pretty large grant and I wasn't sure if funds were available for that. So we did put out a request for proposals in RFP and say did not respond to that RFP. Also as part of the home art requirements, they do have to serve all qualifying populations so they wouldn't be able to just serve age-based populations. Thank you, that's helpful. Are there any other questions from Council members seeing none, Madam City Clerk, may you please facilitate public comment? Thank you, Mayor. We are now taking public comment on item 14.2. Please make your way to the podium if you'd like to provide public comment. You'll have three minutes and a countdown timer we'll alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. All right, speaker, go ahead. Okay, can y'all hear me? Yes. So my name is Jenny Lynn Holmes. I'm the CEO of Catholic Charities in Santa Rosa. And I first wanna say thank you so very much for this very incredible opportunity for the home art funds. Every single day we see people walking through our front doors, looking for housing assistance, food assistance and all types of other services. And we currently have 200 people on our waiting list just to receive financial assistance just stay in their homes. And so the funds that this will provide will allow us to serve those individuals, keep them housed. And for those that become homeless, hopefully get them rehoused so that homelessness is very brief in their experience of it. We've been working really hard to get upstream of homelessness and preventing that homelessness in this case is a critical source of funding that has been very rare for us to be able to find. So we're very grateful for this opportunity to be able to do that. Additionally, I just wanna mention this will also support our food distributions. We currently are unable to meet the need of individuals coming to our food distributions because we literally run out of food. So this is an opportunity to enhance our food distributions in the city of Santa Rosa. And the part that we're probably most excited about is the additional support for mental health care. And we will be subcontracting that to Santa Rosa Community Health Center, which will also enhance the care for mental health services among the individuals that we are serving in this qualifying populations, but also help to subcontract to other providers that allow us to serve our individuals in an even more holistic way. And I just wanna also say one quick thing to Vice Mayor McDonald's question around SAOA. I will just mention we do subcontract some of the funds that we received from the city of Santa Rosa to SAOA for targeted support of the transitional age to youth individuals. So some of the funds does flow through cavitarities, but we do take the approach of subcontracting to have diverse approaches to the individuals that are coming through our front doors for need and to bolster other nonprofits as well. So with that, I thank you again for this opportunity and available to answer any additional questions later. Thank you. Good evening, council members. My name is Sanford Robinson and I'm the director of grants with COTS Committee on the Shelter List. And I just wanted to also express our gratitude for considering us for this opportunity to officially partner with the city of Santa Rosa and provide the much needed services for homelessness prevention. And that's really all I have. Hello, yes, Thomas Ells and do forgive me. In the question regarding SAY, they've been here for a while. The founder of the organization that I run was Alan Strong. He was the founder of SAY. And currently, as I understand, they have just eliminated their executive offices and branch, if you will, and joined with a sabastable organization. So they're in a bit of flux and probably we're not able to actually complete the applications. And that's what I'm really here to address is that if you noticed, it showed 15% for administration of this grant for the city and 5% for administration of the grant by the nonprofit. So one third of the ratio and funds. So if you look at that, it was $2.5, approximately a million dollars and 15% or 400,000 would be allocated to the city and 5%. So for COTS, that's gonna be $35,000. And for Catholic Charities, the 5% is gonna be $80,000 to run that $1.6 million program administratively. And now you gotta think of all the accounting and all the different things that you wanna have and responses and responsibilities and so on. It's very hard, the 5%. So when I was at the task force for the homeless, we Georgia issued grants, federal grants that were called emergency food and service grants, ESFG. And I became their accountant and I did the checking of those, if you will. And each expenditure for those entities is a food expenditure. So if somebody gets food, it's $5. So almost every, maybe the average, maybe it's $2, $2.50, maybe something else is $7 and the average is maybe five, it's less than $10. So if you think of 1.6 million, that's 160,000 accounting entries. 160,000 accounting entries and they only get 5%. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I see no one else wishing to provide public comment in the chamber. Thank you, Council Member Fleming. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to bring a resolution of the Council of the City of Santa Rosa, approving two grant agreements for the Home Investment Partnership American Rescue Plan, Home ARP program with committee on the shelterless and Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Santa Rosa in the respective amounts of 700,011, $1,375, sorry, and 1.615,444 for an 18 month period, January 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 and way further reading of the text. Second. We have a motion made by Council Member Fleming in a second by Vice Mayor McDonald. Are there any additional comments from Council Members? And yes, congratulations on your nuptials. All right, like that. Madam City Clerk, can you please call the vote? Thank you, Council Member Stapp. Aye. Council Member Rogers. Aye. Council Member O'Crepkey. Aye. Council Member Fleming. Aye. Council Member Alvarez. Aye. Vice Mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. Let the record show that passes unanimously. Thank you. I appreciate their repeated attempts to embarrass Sasha. I'm sure she loved it. Thank you very much for the presentation. Madam Mayor, if we can, we would like to go back to item 14.1. So we'll let Councilman excuse itself. We will be going back to 14.1. So Council Member Rogers, this is your motion. So listen up. And we will have our Madam City Attorney walk us through this process. Yes, thank you. Thank you for going back, Madam Mayor. I am understanding from staff that we really do need to ask that the Council accept the report that you heard on this item because it was, we used funding, federal funding for this, I'm sorry, grant funding for this item. And so I am making our request and recommendation on behalf of staff that we do a little bit of surgery to your proposed resolution. And at the end it will be a resolution that simply accepts the report. My proposed surgery to the resolution that is in your packet would be to make the following changes. The first change would be to remove from the title the following text and directing staff to prepare a cannabis equity program. The second change would be to remove three of the whereas clauses. They are the last three whereas clauses which are paragraphs five through seven. And then finally the third change would be on page two of the proposed resolution in your materials. We would be removing the paragraph at the top of page two that begins be it further resolved that city staff shall prepare, et cetera. That entire paragraph should also come out. With those changes you end up with a resolution that simply acknowledges and accepts the report. I'll make a motion with the proposed changes. Second. We have a motion made by council member Rogers seconded by the mayor. Madam city clerk may we please call the vote? Does it have to be the initial person that seconded? You already took public comment on this item. It would be the mayor's call whether you take public comment again on this additional action. Being as though we already took public comment on this item. I don't believe we need to. We're just for technicality purposes. Accepting the report. You have satisfied the requirements under both the Brown Act and your local rules. Yes, so I think we can proceed. Thank you. Thank you. Council member staff. Aye. Council member Rogers. Aye. Council member O'Crepkey. Aye. Council member Fleming. Aye. Council member Alvarez has abstained. Vice mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. Let the record show this passes a six affirmative votes as amended. Thank you once again. No problem. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. We have no public hearings tonight, so we will go back to item, no we won't. We will take our second public comments on non-agenda matters. Thank you. We are now taking public comment on item 17, non-agenda matters. This is the second period where we take public comments. If you did not provide public comment on item 13, now is your opportunity to provide comment on non-agenda matters. Mayor Mesey, no one approached the podium for public comments on non-agenda matters. Thank you. Sorry, this is a bit confusing. We kind of hopped all over on this agenda. We'll now go to item 10.2.1, which is our time to elect our next vice mayor. I would like to take the opportunity to thank Vice Mayor McDonald for being a great partner. You have been nothing but supportive during my first year as mayor, your ability to put the city's interests first, no matter what is admirable. And again, thank you for your dedication and your willingness to be a great partner. You are very much appreciated. Thank you. And with that, I would like to give the vice mayor an opportunity to say a few words if she desires. I just wanna say thank you so much to our mayor as well as the council for the honor of being elected as your vice mayor this last year. I really love being in the thick of everything, going through the agendas and seeing what's up next for us to be considering as a council. So it's such an honor for me to serve in this role, no matter if it's a council member or your vice mayor, and I just really want the staff to know how much I appreciate all the work they do when you're vice mayor to a great mayor. You get to see what's been happening behind the scenes and they make it seem so seamless and it's really the dedication of our incredible staff that make everything really happen. But it's been a great year and I appreciate working with you and I've appreciated working with all this fine council as well as the other two members who left after the last election. So thank you again. And I look forward to supporting our next vice mayor and you as you continue in this role. And thank you for the flowers, they're beautiful. You're welcome and thank you. Madam City Clerk, may we please have public comment on this item? Thank you mayor, we are now taking public comment on item 10.2.1, the election of the vice mayor. If you'd like to provide public comment, please make your way to the podium. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. As you approach the podium, please provide your name for public record if you choose to do so. I see no one approached the podiums for public comment, mayor. Thank you. So looking to council to see if we have a nomination for vice mayor, council member Rogers. I'd like to nominate council member Stapp. Second. We have a nomination from council member Rogers and a second from council member Oak Krepke. May we see if there are any additional? Council member Stapp, do you accept the nomination? I do. Thank you. Are there any additional nominations? All right, seeing none, then I guess congratulations. Council member Stapp on becoming the next vice mayor. Thank you everyone. All right, we have nothing more on our agenda, but I would like to adjourn the meeting in the name of Frances Diaz, who was a long time planning commissioner for the city of Santa Rosa. She was a trailblazer in our city and she will be missed. So with that meeting adjourned, have a great night.