 I've got a green light there we go thank you okay welcome everyone to the September 10th San Jose City Council meeting can we have an announcement of the roll call please let the record show that all council members are present thank you we had no study session or closed session but we do have a couple of proclamations I will start with miss Fleming I think you have our first one for Creek Pollution Prevention Week thank you mr. Mayor and somebody do me a favor and find out who we're supposed to call down while I'm getting out my agenda the recipients of this would Katie Robinson come forward please hi sorry about that we just got in whereas throughout the United States the week starting on the third Monday of September is recognized as National Pollution Prevention Week and whereas throughout much of California including the Russian River Watershed cities counties and other stewardship organizations are recognized in the fourth week of September as Creek Week and whereas our pollution prevention practices are intrinsically linked to the health of our watershed lands and waterways and whereas the city of Santa Rosa supports programs to reduce pollution increase environmental quality of our watershed and provide our communities with the knowledge to be effective stewards of the Russian River watershed lands and waterways and whereas the nearly 1500 square miles of lands 238 creeks and approximately 350,000 residents of the Russian River watershed are connected and mutually support each other in making the Russian River along with its tributaries and associated features important resources to the people of Sonoma and Mendocino counties and whereas pollution in the form of trash debris chemicals from industry and everyday living and sediment from construction and many land uses and activities all have the potential to degrade the quality of life and the quality of resources within the Russian River watershed and whereas the city of Santa Rosa through our storm water management program strives to protect the lands and waterways through ongoing pollution prevention outreach which aims to raise awareness of the harmful effects of pollutants to our natural systems now therefore be it resolved that I Tom Schwedhelm mayor of the city of Santa Rosa on behalf of the entire city council do hereby proclaim that September 16 to the 22nd of 2019 is pollution prevention week and September 21st 28th 2019 is Creek week in the city of Santa Rosa and ask all members of our community to support efforts to protect and enrich watershed health by participating in the many pollution prevention week and Creek week activities and to take active steps to reduce pollution and care for our environment throughout the year would you like to make some comments thank you I'm not there thank you very much so we have several events planned this year for Creek week we're going to be kicking the week off with a creek cleanup at the Prince Memorial Greenway on Saturday September 21st on Monday the 23rd we're going to be going to be conducting a tour of the underground culvert here under downtown on Thursday the 26th we're going to be doing a nature walk along Rosalind Creek and we're going to be ending the week on Saturday the 28th with a tour of the Laguna treatment plant I've provided flyers back at the table next to the door and you guys should have one in your packets thank you thank you very much great thank you so much I do have one card on this item Nicole Warwick all right yeah if you go one of that one of the two up there thank you so much I'd like to thank the Santa Rosa City Council for prioritizing our health through this prevention pollution prevention week and also in regards to the proclamation for childhood cancer awareness month it seems to me that these two proclamations are interrelated because what we're doing on the land in the water is impacting the health of our children my name is Nicole Warwick I'm the founding executive director of families advocating for chemical and toxic safety we know that childhood cancer is the number one killer of children in our nation and yet we continue to do very unhealthy practices in our communities I would like to acknowledge and thank again this council back in 2018 you unanimously decided to restrict the use of all synthetic pesticides in public spaces it has come to my attention that this is up for reconsideration that you are considering contracting again with another agency that will again be polluting our environment with synthetic pesticides and herbicides that are quite caustic and dangerous to our children's health I would like to point out the incongruence here that we can't just in name say that we support pollution prevention and that we acknowledge childhood cancer and then continue with these practices that are indeed damaging our children so I would like to remind you that these proclamations that we're making are not just proclamations in name but they are the guiding compass that guides the work that we do and helps us prioritize the health of our children to this effect I would also like to point out that it is indeed a bit more costly to do it right however in the long run it is more cost efficient for us to have healthy communities and healthy children who are attending all of our schools and enjoying the resources available to us in the city and because of that I would like to urge you to continue the ban that you have against synthetic pesticide use in public spaces thank you thank you all right 7.2 and mr. Alvarez I believe you have that mr. Reynard of all you want to come forward thank you thank you mr. Mayor I'll read the proclamation whereas September is national childhood cancer cancer awareness month a time to honor and remember the tens of thousands of children whose young lives were taken too soon as well as raising awareness to the multitude of children and their families currently battling childhood cancer who need better treatments and our unconditional support and whereas cancer is the leading cause of death by disease among us children and is detected in more than 300,000 of our sons and daughters worldwide every year whereas the epidemic of childhood cancer is spreading with one out of every 285 children diagnosed by the time they reach the age of 20 and whereas two-thirds of childhood cancer patients will suffer lifelong chronic conditions caused by their treatments and only four cancer treatments or drugs have been developed and approved for children fighting cancer over the last 20 years and whereas one out of eight children diagnosed with cancer will not serve will not survive their battle with this horrible disease and whereas innovative studies are leading to real breakthroughs reminding us of the importance of supporting scientific research and discovery moving as closer to better treatments and a cure for childhood cancer and whereas gold is the official color to raise awareness especially as we extend our condolences to the families whose children of those children who have perished in our support to all those children who continue to battle childhood cancer with incredible strength and courage now therefore be it resolved that Tom Schwedhelm mayor the city of San Rosa on behalf of the entire city council does proclaim September as childhood cancer awareness month I'd like to say thank you to everybody that helped pass this proclamation for childhood cancer awareness month it's very important that we do this and continue to strive in the right direction to preventing our future intoxications and exposures to the harsh chemicals as that gal had mentioned I took a tour in 2016 around the entire United States and most all cancer clusters that I came across were centered around some form of industrial pollutions agriculture pollution or some type of an air pollution the amount of funding that the federal government's only offering the research programs for childhood cancer is only 3.8 is only 3.8 percent and so that's that's research that's necessary to solve these types of diseases the other hard part about that is the fact that not only are we underfunded for research but how much longer do we have to research before we start looking at the causes and preventing our exposures and stopping the growing numbers annually of childhood cancer diagnosis so on behalf of all that information thank you guys for doing this thank you I have a couple cards on this item first up Matt Callaway followed by Megan con thank you very much senator city council for recognizing this vitally important plight of childhood cancer that is so very serious and I think it's a really great time to bring awareness to some of the substances in our environment that are known to cause cancers and carcinogens that children can encounter when they're in parks and schools senator's last year voted to end the use of glyphosate and other synthetic pesticides when with their current landscaping contractor and I have heard that you guys are thinking about changing the contractor to somebody else and I want to iterate that it's vitally important that you make the same commitment when you're deciding for your the new what products your new contract is going to be using and also probably more importantly putting a actual ban into place for not just glyphosate but the whole range of synthetic pesticides that can that are known to be carcinogens do as Windsor and Sonoma County has done and make a real commitment to preventing toxic exposure in with in the in a population that's most susceptible to that exposure our children thank you very much thank you Megan con followed by Anne Sealy Mayor Schwendel my members of the board thank you again for bringing this proclamation it's really important to raise awareness on childhood cancer again my name is Megan count I'm with Sonoma County Conservation Action and I've been working for the past four years to try to get synthetic pesticides out of public spaces and this followed me noticing that Roundup is being used next to the playground at the Santa Rosa Park in our neighborhood since then we have helped cities like Santa Rosa Institute full bands on synthetic pesticides that could harm children both by causing cancer and other serious chronic health effects and I was really happy to see Santa Rosa make the full pesticide ban last year as others have said I would urge Council to keep your full ban on synthetic weed killers in parks as it is now of Roundup ban is really not good enough glyphosate the active ingredient in Roundup is harmful but so is glue-focinate which is often what is substituted out for that chemical the other dozen other synthetic pesticides that are often so that are often used by cities and us told and they are billed as being safe are really not safe for human health or the environment they may have less acute effects so if they get on your skin maybe they won't produce a burn but over the long term they are the ones that are associated with the chronic health effects like cancer in a healthy environment childhood cancer should almost never happen and I realize that this is maybe a small drop in the bucket but it is something that you Santa Rosa City Council can do to help reduce a child's exposure to the toxins that do lead to cancer and other chronic illnesses so I thank you again for your commitment to public health and I really urge you to keep that commitment going in the future with your new landscape contract thank you so much thank you and see Lee good afternoon Mayor Schwedhelm and council members I'm a board member of some of the county conservation action and I am most proud of the campaign that Megan's just spoke to you about talk called the toxic free futures campaign she has had shown incredible energy in meeting with municipalities and getting support to reduce the use of dangerous chemicals in our public spaces we parents can make our own individual choices about what we use in our own yards and where we take our children but and grandchildren but if it's if it's present in schools and parks and meeting spaces can't childhood cancers will continue so please do keep up with your efforts and support your local cities and the county thank you thank you man all right mr. McGlenn do we have a fire recovery rebuild update no update this evening thank you sticking with our city manager do you have a report for us this evening yes a brief report on Sunday September 1st a large branch off of the historic oak tree in front of the Finley Community Center broke off landing in the landscape area once alerted the parks crew cordoned off the area to protect the tree and the public and Arborus evaluated the tree short-term and long-term health and concluded that actions can be taken to save the tree through true trimming lee limb links and height by as much as one third and read is reshaping to redistribute the weights and Arborus will reevaluate the trees condition next year to determine if any additional work is required thank you for that madam city attorney at your report I have nothing to report this afternoon okay council any statements of abstentia mr. Tiz thank you mayor I will be abstaining from item 13.4 in the consent calendar and item 15.2 relating to the community benefit district my organization I work for statements to Paul owns a property in that district okay thank you any others seen none great mayor's council members reports who would like to start mr. Vice mayor thank you mr. Mayor just a couple of quick highlights for the council starting with yesterday's numbing county transportation authority and regional climate protection agency meeting first and foremost the RCPA did advance by unanimous vote the emergency climate declaration it's something that we have been discussing I'm out of time it is something that we discussed at our climate action subcommittee meeting last Thursday and ultimately the direction from the the entity locally was to review what RCPA was doing and see if there was a way for us to get our perspective and language interjected into what ended up being adopted as the county-wide declaration so that everybody would be relatively on the same on the same footing we did end up being able to do that the climate emergency resolution coming out of our city council when we thought about our CPA calls for municipalities to reach climbing a excuse me carbon neutrality where we take efforts around reducing our own greenhouse gas emissions but then also take steps on carbon sequestration so that we can find that middle point a little bit faster that'll be coming back before the council as well in that meeting we also had an update from scta on the regional housing needs assessment process that is coming up. It is rena numbers are typically handed down to an entity around how much housing they need to build. We had one presenter who said that she has gone through four rena cycles. This one will be her fifth and will be by far the most awful, I think was the word that she used to describe it. Some of the jurisdictions are starting to see with the new methodology that the amount of housing that they have in their rena numbers is substantially higher. 50% increase for most LA actually had a 300% increase in what their rena number was when they started to use the new methodology. So that's something for us to begin to plan for. There's also potential in conversation around SCTA playing a role in what's called subregionality where we will have our total number as a county of housing units and then that subregion will actually be able to determine where those units go. So four places like Sonoma County that have been more focused on city-centered growth, there is likely going to be a fight at that entity if they move forward around shifting housing allocation from county jurisdiction into the individual cities. And I will remind folks that there are three supervisors that sit on SCTA, so that will be quite the fight. Happy to keep you all posted as we move forward, particularly as we finish crafting the Measure M reauthorization, but that's been the highlight from the last month. Sure, Ms. Gomes, you have a question? I have a question if you don't mind my asking. Do you know if the methodology considers the wages? Rina numbers typically show very low, low, medium, moderate. What level of housing needs to be constructed? But it's hard to tell sometimes how the decision is made for each of those number areas. And I'm wondering if you know if wages were significantly considered. For example, our city has a particular wage profile would we build within that wage profile? Yeah, I actually don't know what the changes within the methodology were. Our conversation was largely around what the positives and negatives of the subregionality conversation are. Regardless of the new formula, those numbers will still be a top-down approach. The idea is adding a level of local control and how we actually allocate those units. And I'll tell you, many of the cities seemed very excited by the prospect of Santa Rosa wanting to build housing. I hear you. So the idea, SCTA has not been the primary player in our housing in the past, if I remember rightly. They have not. So the shift at ABag from being ABag to being ABagMTC has put SCTA more in the driver's seat. Well, and there is a nexus between your transportation planning and your housing planning. And I think that that's what SCTA is trying to acknowledge. The next steps will be by next February. SCTA will have to determine if they are going to convene this subregional conversation. And the cities will have to pass a resolution to opt into it as well. So we'll have plenty of more time to talk about what the methodology looks like and what the potential drawbacks for a city like Santa Rosa could be in getting into that conversation. And then we'll obviously talk about what we benefit from being able to have a voice in that allocation. Is there any clarity yet in how monies will be attached to our regional housing needs? Nope. Thank you. Any other council members would like to make a report? Ms. Flonnie? Yeah, I had the great pleasure to attend the North Bay Labor Council Labor Day along with Vice Mayor Rogers where we saw lots of organized labor including many city employees come out and enjoy food and music served up by lots of local electives and aspiring local electives. I additionally had the opportunity to go to the Child Care Planning Council which is held monthly at SCO during the school year and was pleasantly surprised to get a round of applause for the City of Santa Rosa for leasing the Fulton Street site. Only it's the second time in our history that we've leased a site for the purposes of child care and their gratitude was, you know, very clear. So I wanted to pass that along since we don't always get good news. And then the red, the Renewal Enterprise District had a full board meeting and we got a large report from Michelle Whitman texted to us, myself and Mr. Tibbets and we'll just say that we looked through our criteria and we all are on the same page that we should be building and funding projects that have robust community services, reducing barriers for development and seeing to it that these are high quality forward-looking structures for people to live in going forward. Thank you. Mr. Rashmi, do you want to add something? Yeah, I apologize. I had one more thing and I can't believe I forgot it. I did want to thank staff. We did receive the draft determination from the administrative law judge overseeing the Jennings decision yesterday and against the objection of SMART and other entities, our staff did an incredible job on delivering a recommendation for the city to get an extension of two years to get that project built. So I wanted to say thank you to Jason and to John Fritch and to everybody else who worked on it. You all did a really incredible job. Good news. Thank you for that. Any other work, Mr. Scherr? Thank you, Mayor. Ms. Fleming and I attended the downtown subcommittee meeting last week. It was a great meeting. We were very, very well attended, I think in part because there was a times emotional and passionate conversation around parking in our downtown and a discussion around our parking program. And so we have more on that in the near future. That discussion will come before the council later, not today. Also the Railroad Square Community Benefit District Program, which we will hear more about this afternoon, which is also, you know, it's great to see the Railroad Square area coming together in this way. They've always been very well organized, but this is really going to give them a whole new way of participating as a retail center in our downtown. And so we'll see how that unfolds in the progress of the Benefit District. And finally, some good news. The downtown plan photo contest was introduced by Patrick Streeter. This is an opportunity for the members of our community to take photos of things that they like and things that they don't like and apply that to our downtown station area specific plan update. And so it is a contest and there's more information at theplandowntownsr.com. It's our website. Again, plandowntownsr.com. And that will give you more information about how the contest functions and your opportunity to, for input on what is and what is not something that you like about Santa Rosa, you could take photos of something that's in another city. However you want to get it across, it would be a, it's a good opportunity for input for the community, both the things that you like and the things that you'd like to change. And I would think that's probably the highlight of that meeting. It went over by about a half an hour, but with good reason. Great. Thank you, Mr. Sorry. Several things, since our last meeting alone, report out on our Benna Valley Senior Center ad hoc committee did meet August 29th, provided feedback to staff and it'll be coming to the entire council on September 24th. I know several of you along with myself attended the swearing in of our new chief of place. It was wonderful to see, I think there's, they said about 250 folks there to recognize not only chief Navarro, but also the other promotions from throughout the organization. So it was a great community event. Our climate action subcommittee did meet and we had four main topics. First about our evergreen analysis, we provided feedback to staff and they'll be coming back to the entire council on November 5th. And we also briefly discussed the all electric reach code. And by the way, there was many members, this chamber was almost full, about half full. So it was great to see the number of community members that are interested in a number of these items. But the all electric reach codes will be coming back to this entire council on October 22nd. So it's going to be from three to five. Feel free to go to the UFO if you want to learn more about the impacts of the reach codes. We also received some feedback about whether or not the city of Santa Rosa should establish a climate emergency. So some feedback was given to our CPA. And then also a little bit more update on our zero waste project. We gave feedback to the consultants doing that work. And again, that will be en route to the city council in the near future. Was there anything else? Okay, great. Last Wednesday, the Santa Rosa Violence Prevention Partnership hosted a seminar at Finley. Mr. Cardi did a wonderful job. Over 120 participants were there and they keep presented or presented some information on trauma, how trauma affects us all. Especially for those that are service providers who we've all experienced trauma. But then if you're trying to assist other folks with the trauma that they've experienced, how to be able to manage that. So it was a wonderful seminar. Thank you, Jason, for all the work you and your team did to put into that. We also had the first screening of last October, last week at the Finley Center. And then you mentioned the oak tree. That was the first I had seen it at the Finley Center. And it's a majestic oak. So I'm very thankful that it sounds like we're going to be able to save that one. For those of you that might be interested and haven't seen it yet, the next public screening will be September 12th at Third Street Cinemas at six o'clock. And then the final public screening before, I believe it's eventually be going on to YouTube, will be September 17th in this very chamber. So two other opportunities. We have some comments being said there. And anyway, those will be the next two public screenings of last October. And finally, last Sunday, I was able to participate in Sonoma Ready Day at Sonoma County Fairgrounds. And thank you, Mr. McGlynn. I know city staff was out there registering folks for so-called alerts handing out ready bags and those 2,500 ready bags disappeared within an hour and a half, 2 hours. So my hope is we'll be able to plan another one. But it was great to see so many concerned community members taking proactive steps to learn more about what are we doing in case of our next disaster that's going to be affecting us. So it was a wonderful event and hopefully more information will be coming. So with that, we will move to item 11.2, Board Commission and Committee Appointments. For members of the audience, Council interviewed, I believe, five applicants for the Housing Authority, Tenant Commissioner position. Madam St. Clerk, you want to walk us through this nomination process? Certainly. The members of the Board's Commissions and Committee shall be selected from a pool of applicants and in this instance by a process of elimination. For this Housing Authority, Tenant Commissioner, each Council member shall vote for a number of applicants equal to the number of vacant positions plus two. In this instance, there is one vacancy. Those applicants receiving one vote or less shall be eliminated. Subsequent votes shall be taken with each Council member voting for one less applicant than voted in the previous round. Only applicants not eliminated may be voted upon. The applicant who receives four or more votes in the final round of voting shall be appointed to fill the vacancy. We are going to initiate round one, vote for up to three but no less than one candidate. This will be done by roll call. We will start with Council Member Combs. Please vote for three candidates. I would like to vote for Patrice LaPara. Thank you, Council Member Fleming. Patrice LaPara, Catherine McAnley's and Margaret Yamamoto. Thank you, Council Member Olivares. Burton LaPara and Yamamoto. Thank you, Council Member Sawyer. Henderson LaPara and McAnley's. Thank you, Council Member Tibbets. Patrice LaPara, Noah Henderson, Margaret Yamamoto. Thank you, Vice Mayor Rogers. LaPara, McAnley's, Henderson. And Mayor Schwedhelm. Henderson, McAnley's and Yamamoto. Thank you, one moment while I tabulate. Thank you, Council Members. We are going to move on to round two. On your round two ballot, please cross out Deborah Bravo Burton. She was eliminated in round one. In this round two, we will vote for up to two candidates but no less than one. Council Member Combs. Patrice LaPara. Thank you, Council Member Fleming. Patrice LaPara, Catherine McAnley's. Thank you, Council Member Olivares. Patrice LaPara. Thank you, Council Member Sawyer. Patrice LaPara, Catherine McAnley's. Thank you, Council Member Tibbets. Patrice LaPara and Margaret Yamamoto. Thank you, Council Member Rogers. LaPara. Vice Mayor, thank you. Mayor Schwedhelm. Noah Henderson and Margaret Yamamoto. Okay, one moment while I tally. Thank you, we will advance to round three. On your ballot, please cross out Deborah Bravo Burton and Noah Henderson. And we'll start with Council Member Combs. Please vote for one candidate. Patrice LaPara. Council Member Fleming. Patrice LaPara. Council Member Olivares. Patrice LaPara. Council Member Sawyer. Patrice LaPara. Council Member Tibbets. Patrice LaPara. Vice Mayor Rogers. LaPara. Mayor Schwedhelm. Patrice LaPara. Thank you, by unanimous round three vote, Patrice LaPara is the new Housing Authority Tenant Commissioner position. Great, thank you for that process. Thank you, Council, for your feedback. And please extend our thanks to all the persons who applied for positions. There was a strong group of applicants. Okay, we have no minutes to approve consent items. Mr. McGlinn. Item 13.1, Motion Approval of the 2019 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Application. Item 13.2, Motion Contract Award, Plashing Yellow, Left Turn Arrow Retrofit. Item 13.3, Resolution, Reject All Bids, Pavement, Perative, Pavement Preventive Maintenance 2019. Item 13.4, Resolution Extension of Proclamation of Local Homeless Emergency. Item 13.5, Resolution Extension of Proclamation of Existence of the Local Emergency Due to Fires. Council, any questions? Ms. Flaming. Thank you. I'm curious to know on item 13.2 how the 39 locations for the yellow bites were chosen. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council members. I'm Grant Bailey, Associate Civil Engineer with Transportation and Public Works and Project Manager for this project. So your question regarding how locations were chosen. So we're retrofitting existing five-section head signals and upgrading them with the four-section head flashing yellow arrow signals. And that's virtually every single location that the five-section heads are found within the city. That makes sense. Thank you. And any other questions on this item? Mr. McGlinn, I have a question on item 13.3, Rejecting All Bids. Lucky you. Thank you. My question is this is, I know, not the first time since I've been to Council where we've had to reject them all. This one, I think the low bid came in 41.7% over the estimate. And what I heard the last time I think we rejected and what we're hearing now is that if we submitted it during a different time, we'd have a different result. I guess my question is, are we starting to plan ahead? In other words, why don't we do it one time at the right time versus the high-demand time so we don't have to do this process that I just got to take, I got to assume, set up a lot of staff time? That's a good question. So this is an annual project and so every year we complete the construction and then we start all over again looking at our pavement condition program to determine new candidates. And so to determine the candidates, it takes some time and then to draft the contract, it takes some time as well. So we're doing as much the best we can to get the contract out in a timely manner, but given that it's an annual project and it's year over year, it takes some time. But we're doing everything we can to streamline that process. Mr. Nutt, did you have some words of wisdom? I don't know about words of wisdom, but just to add into what Mr. Bailey stated, some of the other things we've looked at is talking to some and talking to the contractors and other agencies out there. We have been doing work under very requiring bids under a short time frame, and so one of the feedback mechanism or one of the feedback pieces that we received was if we lengthened the time that we allowed folks to prepare their bids that we might start to see changes in our contract or in the bids that are received. So that's something we're intending to change. That's feedback that we received following the bid process here. Actually our deputy director of engineering has spent quite a bit of time working with the engineering contractors association to understand better why some of our bids are coming in high and some aren't, and this is one of the ones that we thought time of year was the right thing, but it may actually be something different, something more like the time it takes them to develop the bid itself. So while it is an annual process, it does take us time to put things together, there may be other considerations that we're trying to work into this as well so that we don't run into this into the future. Great, thank you, and I appreciate just those efforts about getting that feedback loop. How are we going, because I think there's only two bids on this project, you know, how are we going to get fill in the blank bigger number and reaching out to those that provide this service? I think it's very helpful, so thank you for the information. Any other questions from council? Ms. Lynn? I had one more question about that. Sorry, gentlemen. So again, going back to the two bids, is it typical for us to only get a couple of bids on a project like this? Again, depending upon the time of year, it's not unusual. There are several contractors out there, but right now a lot of contractors are just busy doing a lot of things. So the later in the season, the less likely you are to have multiple contractors engaged. And as I mentioned, what we found out in some of the responses that the way with which we've been bidding has also been a constraint for some contractors. So as we change our processes with that feedback, we would hope to see more contractors participating. And is there any impaction due to materials costs going on from rebuild or from trade issues? We've been trying to track that, and I can't say that we've seen any specific trend. Bids have really gone up and down all year long, and it hasn't necessarily followed whether it's a small contractor, a bid contract, asphalt, concrete, or other construction. It's been kind of all over the board, and the only consistent theme that we've heard is the two-week typical bid response is not enough in this very busy environment for contractors to really think about their bids. So they're using conservative numbers that they know they can ensure completion of the project and gain what they're looking for as well as the city. Thank you. And Ms. Combs. Thank you. Thank you for being down here explaining this to us. I regularly get questions from people about when their street is going to be paved or repaved or rehabbed in some way, and I also am asked how is it that we decide which streets to pave, repave, rehab, slurry seal or not. Where do people go to find that information? Can they find it on our website? I don't believe we have that level of detail on our website. There are a couple of locations, whether the trip report provides documentation about what the level of deficiency is within the state of California, and there does have a set aside, it does have a set aside for the Bay Area. MTC also provides information relating to the quality of our streets, what the overall deficiency is in the Bay Area, and it does have a specific line item for the city of Santa Rosa and describes where we're at. We haven't identified that level of detail on our website, although there is a little bit of information. It's something that we need to continue to try to educate the community as far as what our current fiscal ability is and what our fiscal requirement is in order to achieve a certain level of pavement quality. And what is our current pavement quality? We have a pavement condition index of 61 based on this spring, which was an increase of 61 out of 100. And 75 is our goal or is our goal another number? The Bay Area averages 66, and we don't as a city have a target goal. The MTC or the region has a goal, and so we've been attempting to achieve that without having specific direction from council. So 75 is the goal. And we're currently investing about one-third of what's necessary to achieve and maintain the 75 PCI. And that includes outside funds that we receive from grants and... That is all of the... All funds that we receive that go into pavement maintenance. Okay. Is it possible to go on our GIS mapping system and see what your pavement number is? So we'll go and look at this particular issue, but a lot of the energy on the mapping side has been around the rebuild and recovery efforts in downtown. We're trying to get up to speed on a series of issues. Right now, we just don't report that out in that active way, council member. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And thank you. Thank you. Any additional questions? Okay. We have one card for 13.4. George Uberti. And George, and for any other comments on the consent calendar, I'm going to start allowing two minutes on each item. So two minutes on each item you could speak on whichever items you want. So you have two minutes on item 13.4. Works for me. 13.4 is the redeclaration of the local homeless emergency. Now, I don't know if you have an active running total of how many times we've declared it, but I think that there is a difference between declaring an emergency and doing something about an emergency. Right now, we seem to be extraordinarily comfortable declaring that, and I mean, an emergency is where someone's about to die. Right? That's the definition of an emergency. Right? We seem fine pointing at a group of people and saying, wow, you look like you're just about to die. We don't seem fine helping them at all. And my theory is that it is connected to how comfortable we are declaring it. Right? We need to get a lot less comfortable with the fact that we're in a state of emergency. Right? The fact that there is a regular agenda item where we just declare that an entire portion of our population is on the brink of death on a regular basis. How many times have we declared it? And how many times are we going to declare it before we stand up and do something about it? All right? It just absolutely has to stop. You cannot be comfortable declaring an emergency. It's the opposite of everything a leader is supposed to do and everything a leader is supposed to be. And it's shameful. Right? It has to stop. It has to. All right? People in this city, the homeless people in this city, need us to help them. All right? If they had the tools to do it, they wouldn't be on the stream. All right? They can't do it. We have to. Right? It's got to get done. And the last thing that we need to do is continue to declare it. It's the last thing. The first thing we need to do is stop talking and start acting immediately. Thank you. Thank you. Right? Before we go to Mr. Rogers, I do have one request, Mr. McGlenn. 13.5, the homeless emergency, there's no presentation there. I would just ask any type of an emergency. We had a presentation for the homeless emergency, which kind of gives it an update. We have the, I think it's the proclamation from when we first declared it, and I think our situation has changed. So I know we may be changing this in the future, but if we do have an extension of emergency, if we just get a presentation in there for a little bit with updated information, that'd be helpful. So with that, Mr. Rogers, you have this. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll move items 13.1 through 13.5 of the consent calendar. I'll wait for the reading of the text. Who's our second? Mr. Oliver, as it looks like, his fingers quicker than your voice. Any other comments on the consent calendar? Okay, your votes, please. And we have six yeses and one abstention with Mr. Tibbet's abstaining. All right, not quite five o'clock yet. We'll move to item 15.1. Mr. McGlynn. Item 15.1, report. Blanket purchase order with Axon Enterprise Incorporated for the purchase of Taser 7 equipment and licensed through the MPP-GOV Cooperative Purchase Agreement. Jody Frost, Administrative Services Officer presenting. Excuse me, Chief Navarro presenting. Don't worry, Sean, I get him mixed up all the time, too. Let's try this again. Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council members. Rainer Navarro, Chief of Police, and I wanted to take this opportunity to come down for my first discussion in front of you. So thank you for this time right now. We are here to discuss the request for approval for our purchase order for our Axon Taser 7 equipment. And I wanted to give you a brief overview of what that equipment is and provide any opportunities for you, for any questions. So our, the Taser 7 is actually a brand name. The official term for that type of equipment is the Conducted Electrical Weapon, or CEW. CEWs were developed in the 1970s and they were basically, they were developed to provide less lethal options as opposed to other weapons and make those less lethal options available to officers to help minimize injury. CEWs can be used effectively up to about 21 feet and allows officers to create space in different incidents to allow an added layer of safety. CEWs actually fall within a, in our use of force options under the medium level. So to give you a quick background, our use of force options are divided into a low, medium, and high. And CEWs are in the medium level similar to batons, OC spray, and canines. And so it's actually in the medium level. And the thing about CEWs is it provides a less lethal option that allows for quick recovery. So if you look at OC spray, OC spray can impact an individual for some time and sometimes up to an hour where you have to deal with providing water to the individual to try to clear the eyes out. And then with other options such as batons, you have the potential of potential major injury. And so CEWs allow for a quick recovery time after a five second burst. It allows a person to come back and allows an officer that time to take somebody into custody. We have been using CEWs since 2003. And our current ones were purchased, we purchase them about every five years or so. We purchased the X26 model back in 2008. And then we have the X26P model, which we purchased in 2013. We currently, the two models that we have, the X26 is no longer supported through firmware updates by the company. And the X26P model is going to be unsupported as of December of 2019. The lifecycle for these pieces of equipment are about five years in length. The CEWs, they were originally purchased from Taser that Taser has now become axon. And again, we have, these CEWs are compatible with our current evidence storage program and docking stations that we use with our body worn cameras. So it is the same company, so it allows for a little bit more ease for our officers, allows them to be more efficient to get the updates for the equipment. The firmware and software updates are done remotely with this new system, negating the need to actually turn them in for these updates. So we have, what we'd like to do is recommend the approval for the contract for the CEWs that is used by patrol. It's currently being used by patrol. It equates to about $60 a month for each officer. These units will be under warranty, so under the new purchase, the old ones will be returned and will have new ones that will be under warranty. They'll have the ability to be updated. And so the updates, really what that allows us to do is make sure that technology is, you know, it's up to date. So similar to other technology, everything has a lifespan. We kind of equate it to a cell phone. We all have cell phones or smartphones, and they have a lifespan. And sometimes they just stop working if you don't, you know, if you hold on to them too long. What we don't want is to have a piece of equipment that is not readily available for an officer. And so the need to purchase new equipment is imperative. And so we currently have departmental policies in place to address the use of CEWs. That includes medical response after each application to make sure that people are medically cleared prior to being booked to make sure everything's okay. Again, the benefits are that we have an additional less lethal option when interacting with subjects within the community that are hostile and who may be a danger to community members or to themselves. And it provides us with devices that are less likely to malfunction, and it allows us to keep the technology updated and allows us to be more efficient. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thanks, Chief. Thank you for that presentation. Council, any questions? Ms. Fleming. Thank you, Chief, for your first presentation. Well done. I do have one question. What is the duration of the warranty on these CEWs? The CEW warranty is five years. So would it be reasonable to assume that these devices are meant to be active? Usually we purchase them about every five years. They give us a warranty for five years. That's basically the deal. Five years. Yes. And so these updates will allow us to keep track of if there's a malfunction and so to make sure that they're working properly. If they're not working properly, we'll be able to return them to the company and they will provide a they will either fix it or provide a new piece of equipment under this warranty. All right. Thank you. Ms. Gomes. Thank you. And again, congratulations. It's a pleasure to see to see you in particular here today. Thank you very much for today. I have two questions. With regard to replacing them roughly every five years, do we have a replacement plan or have we budgeted to replace these every five years? So we have been we've been working on replacing them every five years. We are working continuing to look at our budget and make budgetary decisions based on the equipment that we need. And so we are looking out and seeing what we need to do in five years from now. Thank you. And my second question is I thought I heard you say that we do have a use of force policy that includes CEWs. Where do I find that on our website? It's a very good question. We have our all of our policies are accessible through the Santa Rosa Police Department website at SantaRosaPolice.org. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Mr. Eisenhower. Thank you, Mr. Eisenhower. Happy to have you here for your first presentation, Chief. I hope we'll make it a little bit difficult for you. I did have a question. You used the analogy of the cell phone. I think that that's actually a good way to think about the updates and the ability that we'll have with this technology to have updates in the field and not necessarily when you have to turn them in. But one of the things that I do notice with my cell phone is sometimes it gets an update and it stops working properly. And whether that's planned obsolescence and designed or whether it's just a bad update, how are we going to make sure that officers who are going through that process in the field have the weapon actually tested before they're in a situation where they need to rely on it? Yes. So each officer tests their equipment prior to their shift. So we do have a system in place where, number one, they're going to be updated on a regular basis. They're tested prior to the beginning of shift. And we go through, in the last five years, we've had over 2,300 hours of taser-specific training. And so we include our training of our CEWs into our defensive tactics and de-escalation techniques. And so when we do those, one of the common things that we do is to check our equipment and make sure that things are working properly. Right. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay, I have one card on this item, George Uberti. So I had the good fortune of witnessing some members of the Santa Rosa Police Department use these weapons. And if I could pick two words to describe that interaction, it would be completely unnecessary. Completely unnecessary. As you may be familiar, I used to work with people that have special needs, right? I've taken quite a few months working with people that were, number one, very large, number two, very unhappy and willing to be violent. At no point was I armed. And at no point did I need to use force against them to hurt them or, you know, in any way. It's just unnecessary. Now I'll hear you on less lethal options, right? Sure. Let's step away from killing the people we're supposed to protect, right? Let's step as far away from it as we need to. Because that man was a danger to nobody. He was an old man, 150 pounds soaking wet. He had a stick in his hand and he was out of his mind. All right? He wasn't standing near anybody. I was sitting right there reading a newspaper. He wasn't a danger to me. And there was nobody else there for him to be a danger to. Right? The police were a danger to him. And accordingly, he was injured through the use of a taser. Right? Why are we spending our money on this? Right? The warranty is out on them. I don't hear that that means that they don't work. They seem like they work fine to me. Man fell over, you know? Good chance he crapped his pants. Every time we use one of them, we have to get an ambulance coming out that's expensive. It's unnecessary. It damages the people we're supposed to be protecting. Right? There are plenty of non-lethal options that don't involve weapons at all. I can give you the name, one of them, Oregon Intervention Systems. Right? These are called planned physical interventions that you can use. Right? You train people to use. They're preventative in nature. They don't injure anybody. My point is this. Right? If you are a public servant, right? If you're serving the public, then what you do is assume risk. Right? That's what makes being a police officer a job that is worthy of respect. Right? You put yourself in harm's way. Your job is supposed to be more dangerous than others. Right? So if what we do as a city is spend money so you can hurt us rather than assume risk on our behalf, then what are we doing? What is your job? It's not protecting us. Right? It's hurting us so that you're protected. And that's wrong. Right? We shouldn't have a department of that. Right? It's exactly the opposite of what the police should put. Let's explore less than lethal options. Let's explore options that meaningfully give people with who are in danger. This man had mental health issues. Right? He needed help. He didn't need to be shot with anything. All right? Thank you. Council, any additional questions? Seeing none, Mr. Olivares, you have this. Thank you, Mayor. I move a resolution of the Council of the City of Santa Rosa Proving a Black at Purchase Order with Axon Enterprises, Incorporated Scottsdale, Arizona, for the purchase of Taser 7 equipment and applicable licensing for a five-year period under National Purchasing Partners Cooperative Agreement contract number VH11630 in an amount not to exceed $666,491.40 and waive for the reading of the text. We'll motion a second in the final comments. Your votes, please. And that passes unanimously. Thank you. All right. We'll go back to item 14, public comment on non-agenda matters. I've got one card, Maji Osuji. I wanted to tell you, Sunday morning I woke up in a great mood because Sabbath was over. And then there was a 73-year-old at my door crying because Highway Patrol took his car. They took his car when it had broken down in the 90s. He said he could fix it really easily in daylight. And they took his car. They said that it was ruining the property values of his house is what the Highway Patrol officer told him. So he told the 73-year-old man with cancer and heart disease that he was ruining his property values by being in his car when he didn't even intend to park it there. So it's an AFE car, as someone that age would have. And I was really upset about this, wondering why about 60 of them have come into my house that are way older than me to tell me these stories, hoping that I'll tell you. A lot of times I don't want to come tell you the stories. Because I get too upset, I'll just scream. I would just scream probably. But I walked through the flea market at the Vetch Hall and I saw this picture. And this is the native woman who's gathered sticks going into a teepee. And I bought it. I bought like 12 of these for historical photos. Because I'd rather live in a teepee. I know he would too, Nick Carter's native, although he looks black to you because people don't know the red star in his eyes means. And that inspired me to think about this photo quite a lot, which I'll give you a copy of. It's not really a poem. It says, sometimes in a cold place, the trees drop branches for me all hot summer and fall so I won't be cold in the winter. And if I don't pick them up, massive tenders build massive fires. I'm part of the ecosystem. I'm sacred to this forest you kick me out of. My sister arrested for sleeping. My brother arrested for a dog poop too near him. My grandfather crying because highway patrol yelled at him while taking his third lost car in a year and that he, a 73 year old, was bringing on his property values he built on stolen land. Sometimes I want to turn my back on you and hide in my teepee, but I can't because my religion and my instinct is illegal. Thank you. Do we have any other cards on this item? 14. All right. Mr. McGlynn, item 15.2. Item 15.2 reports Santa Rosa Railroad Square community benefit district resolution of intention. Raeza de la Rosa presenting. Actually, Rafael Rivera, economic development specialist with the, our division will be reporting on this item. Good afternoon. Distinguished members of the city council, honorable mayor Schwaitham. I'm very delighted to be here this afternoon. So I'm here to talk to you about the community benefit district in railroad square. The item before you, the item before is the community benefit district petition result as a, as a resolution of intention to establish an assessment district. This is the first of two city council driven steps for the potential creation of a second community benefit district in our city. The second potential item will be the resolution of formation and hearing, which is scheduled for October 29th. Should the council choose to initiate the ballot process and should those ballots show adequate support for formation. I'm going to go to, I'm going to spend a little bit of time with this slide because it has a lot of background and there's a lot of enthusiasm and energy behind it. So I got to give you some, some deep specific details. So just to tell you how we got here, the interest in creating the assessment district stands from the concept of levying assessments on real properties within the proposed district to fund physical improvements to individual properties, attract new customers and increase business sales. The assessments funds, maintenance, special events and activities and other special benefits within the district, revitalizing the area, creating jobs, attracting and retaining businesses and reducing crime. The formation of our first community benefit district in Santa Rosa, which by the way has been very successful so far, seemed very appealing to the property owners and business owners of the railroad square area, which is the downtown sister area. I like to call it that. The, for, do that in, in the fall of 2018, the railroad square association worked to gauge support within the community for a new special benefit district for both the Santa Rosa railroad square property owners and business community alike. The city of Santa Rosa tapped the services of New City of America. Again, those, that is the consultant that helped us form the first community benefit district. So we knew all along that we're hiring somebody with tremendous expertise and knowledge. A survey was created and circulated to all property owners to ascertain the level of support and interest for the establishment of the railroad square community benefit district. The support for the concept of the new railroad square was overwhelming. The survey tallied the support based upon the property variables that would assess in the ultimate funding of the special benefit services of the district. Those property variables, then this is very important, include the parcel's lot size, linear frontage and building square footage. Since the initiation of work last fall, and we have participated in all of the meetings, the railroad square community benefit district steering committee, formed by property owners, business owners, like including Mike Montague from TVACS, worked diligently to outreach property owners and build a level support for the new community benefit district. The steering committee met multiple times, reviewed various iterations of a management plan and finalized the boundaries, the boundaries, services, costs and terms at a meeting held in April of this year. However, not all the support was there, so the committee took some pause between the months of May and June, but in on July 10th, 2019, and then again on August 11th, made final adjustments to a new plan, a little bit more of a reduced plan, including less properties and such. With the enabling ordinance and adoption in March 2018, our consultant was able to release the petitions and move us forward into where we are today. The district formation requires a submission of petition from property owners in the proposed district representing more than 30% of the total assessment to be paid by the community benefit district. In August 2019, just last month, the petition packets, including a summary of the management district plan, which I believe is in your packet, and return envelope were mailed to each property owner within the proposed railroad square area of the community benefit district. The petition return deadline was September 6th. Property owners representing the minimum requirement of 30% completed the petition, meeting that 30% threshold needed. As of this morning, we were at 31% of the petition percentages, and that still doesn't include the city's portion or lot. So I'm going to talk now a little bit about the proposed community benefit area. If you're familiar with railroad square, which I assume you are. It's a beautiful area, very rich in history of our city here in Santa Rosa. The proposed area consists of approximately 18 square blocks, 92 parcels owned by 58 property owners, including a parcel owned by the city of Santa Rosa. The following include five different benefit zones within the proposed railroad square community benefit district. Three of the benefit zones are geographically based. The fourth is land use based, reflecting the unique nature of residential condominiums throughout the district. So if you can see on that map, there on a slide, zone one, which is the green area, those are the core properties, and that includes that extends from the north of Thur Street from the 101 freeway on the east and the railroad tracks on the west up to A Street on the north. There is a benefit zone 1A, which will have a reduced cost, and that is for office related building square footage, if office is used in the predominant use for that building. Zone two, the orange area, which are the two to the south, are the two large hotels south of Thur Street and east of the rail tracks. Zone three in yellow looks kind of greenish there on the screen, but looks yellow on my screen. Those are the parcels west to the rail tracks north of the east, north and east of the Santa Rosa Creek and south of Sixth Street. And then zone four, that includes all residential condos in zones one and three. Annual assessments are based upon the allocation of program costs and accessible linear frontage plus lot or parcel square footage plus accessible building square footage and in the case of residential condominiums by actual building unit square footage. Current and future residential condominium owners are assessed differently since condominiums include actual building square footage that are not necessarily on the ground level. Therefore, linear frontage and lot size are not relevant to residential condominiums. I'm going to now go to slide three, and this talks a little bit about the first year annual budget. So again, as I mentioned, the months of May and June, the committee took a little pause. They needed to kind of downsize the area a little bit to gain that momentum and build on that support. So the total first year of the assessment revenue is proposed, the calculation of 233, 122, 233,122. It's important to know that the special benefits funded by the district will not replace the city's funded general benefits. That's really important to note in. That obligation does not go away. And we have experience with our new downtown community benefit district that it's created a great partnership because we're constantly communicating and working with city staff as well as employees of the newly formed DAO in bringing improvements to our downtown. So the special benefits to the parcel owners are over and above those general benefits provided by the city. In looking at this chart, if you take away the 19% for program management and administration, contingency and reserves, 81% of that money will go towards programming. Examples of the programs include civil sidewalks or civil sidewalk operations, steam cleaning, beautification projects, maintenance of existing and public news spaces, private security, maintenance and attractive appearance of the district. District identity and marketing and placemaking would include website development, social media, holiday and seasonal decorations, branding of railroad square CBD properties, banner program, public art displays, connectivity to downtown, smart and surveying as a gateway to Santa Rosa. Finally, slide three. I'd like to take this moment before we go ahead and make the recommendation. I want to clarify that this resolution of intention does not yet obligate the city or any property owner to this assessment. The ballot, like the petition, need to be tabulated based on the weighted value of the parcel assessment to total assessments. They would be tabulated in a public hearing and we would need a simple majority. We're looking for a 50% or more to get to pass it and get us to the resolution of formation. It is recommended by the planning and economic development department that the council by resolution authorize the city manager to sign the center of railroad square community benefit district petition and forthcoming ballot, receive and file the district petition results and state the intention to form the center of railroad square community benefit district and to levy and collect assessments within such districts, district approve the management district plan and the engineers report set in motion the balloting by directing the city clerk to mail ballots to the proposed CBD property owners and schedule the public hearing for October 29th, 2019. Okay, that concludes my presentation. If you have any questions. Great. Thanks, Rafael. Questions? Mr. Vice Mayor? Thank you. Two quick questions. One, if you could go back to the map of the districts. So there's quite a bit of a smart property that's there. Have they been engaged in this conversation? Yes, they have. They have been. It's an interesting area. Yeah. During the months of from the fall of 2018, the surveys was mailed out to not just where the areas that are highlighted, but even beyond that, and the response was overwhelming with the desire to create a community benefit district. So the boundary was actually a little larger than what it appears at the moment. However, I can say specifically too about the smart property. So in to what Rafael is speaking about, the initial outreach was to smart and to engage smart. However, the property transferred ownership in July. And so it shifted to the contact was at the time smart was not able to obligate the property to any additional fees due to the contract, the real estate contract that we're in. Yeah. And I guess that's actually exactly where my question was going to go is we've had a development project that has languished for lack of a better way to put it. And I just want to make sure that any additional fees or assessments that we're putting on that the eventual owner and developer is involved in that as well. And that's not going to impact that project. That's correct. Okay, great. And then if you could go to the chart, that's the percentage breakdown. 18% for the management and administration seems a bit high to me. I know typically inefficient government programs were usually around three or four percent. How does this compare to the CBD that was done for courthouse square in terms of amount of the funding that goes towards administration? It's comparable. Okay. Right. In fact, the railroad square association is looking for the possibility of a partnership to reduce a potentially reduced program administration costs if they work, for example, in coordination with the DAO and some of the contracts that they have available. Excellent. And at that point, nothing that we're doing today would prevent them from changing this split if they were to be able to reduce that. No. No. Great. Thank you. Ms. Collins. Thank you. And thank you for the presentation on this. This is actually a pretty exciting development. I'm really looking forward to seeing this move forward for railroad square. I am a little confused about a couple of things. And I wonder if we can look at the map, which I think is slide three. Is the area that we're talking about just the green area? It says the proposed area is bordered by and then names some places and those streets would eliminate the orange and the yellow. So I just want to make sure I understand based on what I'm reading, which areas are included? Yeah, well, it's the entire area. Everything that is orange, green, yellow, and blue are all included. So the bordered by statement is not really accurate in terms of a border. It's almost as if it's a little different from that. I found it a little confusing. So it goes up to but not under highway 101. So the parking that's under highway 101 is not included? That's great. The parking under highway 101 is owned, those parcels are owned by Caltrans and do not historically participate in assessment districts. Okay. Thank you. And I guess this is a question for the city attorney perhaps more. Do the private security firms that are hired by entities like this need to follow the policies that have come out of lawsuits like the Boise decision, legal discussions like the Boise decision? This particular neighbourhood has a significant impact of homeless people. And I know the DAO talks to us a lot about managing homeless population in the downtown as well. When they hire private security for civil streets, do they have to follow Boise decisions? They will have to follow constitutional limitations but they are not going to be subject to, for example, the preliminary injunction that the city has entered into. So we're sort of setting up a system, a secondary system here where folks can hire security that doesn't have to meet the same obligations as the city police department does with regard to homelessness. I think that's getting into some details that probably isn't appropriate at this time but we'll certainly work with Raisa and Rafael to address that issue. So the next slide then that we are essentially authorizing or not this kind of breakdown for the use of the funds. So it seems to me that once we see something like civil sidewalks that includes the hiring of an independent security system that opens this conversation. Right, so that's what's proposed. For example, right now in the downtown community benefit district area they use what is called ambassadors. We were very, very clear with the downtown action organization that any interactions with people on street have to abide by the city regulations that we have to abide by. So specifically, well it's part of the training. So specifically in relation to homeless there was special training that occurred with their ambassadors on homeless interactions and what the rights of homeless people in the area are. In addition, the downtown action organization works closely with the, I forget what it's called, but the homeless organizations that we're all working or whatever the host or write all of those. So first calls they do, they do not take on anything that would be considered something that would be in the realm of police and they also bring in like Catholic Church and the other host organizations that work with the homeless so that there's a seamless interaction. Does this entity also have that agreement with us? Not at this time. This district is not yet formed but we would anticipate similar to what we did with the downtown or the courthouse square area merchant or association that they would have to do the same thing as well. The trainings were very sensitive to that. Can we make our decision contingent? There isn't, there is no there there yet. I would say I think if I recall this came up during the courthouse square, the downtown action organization and we I believe we're not able to do that at that time so we were proactive in addressing your concerns during the formation of the board. And I would concur that this is not the time that we can put the condition on but the history with respect to our other community benefit district is that those were addressed at the point that the organization was stood up and at that point those details are worked through. But at this point there isn't a mechanism for making that conditions. Excuse me, I didn't mean to interrupt. I would ask that staff bring this detail forward at the appropriate time. Yeah, noted. Yeah, yeah. Understanding that this is a serious problem in the area. Perfect. We made note of that. Thank you. Yeah, that's good. Ms. Flaming. Thank you very much and great presentation Raphael, right? So you guys did a great job. I have a curiosity and then a question about the contract. One is if you go to slide I believe it's slide three where you have the parcels laid out. You did make mention that the city owned a parcel. Could you point to it or let us know which one it is? It is the one located. What color is it? It's green. It's a green, okay. It's one of the green ones, one of the big green ones. Yeah, it's actually blue. It's that little one across from, it's the depot park area, the California Welcome Center. Oh, the one that gets flooded our little pool downtown. No? I'm not familiar with that but it's the parking lot across from Smart. Okay. They have the depot building. Yeah, yeah. Does that, so does the city then get a vote on that? This is just out of curiosity. Yes, the weight of our vote is 1.45% and it's one of the actions that you're acting on tonight is giving the city manager authorization to sign it. It's going to ask to our proxy as so. Yeah. Our supreme authority on this will be Mr. McGlynn. Okay, well, we will hopefully entrust him with that awesome power. I'm wondering if, because I was not here when we went into contract with New City America and I'm assuming that the council entered into the contract with New City America for both the downtown action organization and as well as this community proposed community benefit district. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. I'm not sure how much the contract was for. Can somebody tell me? The initial contract I believe was for $90,000 and we did bring it to council and then amended it to incorporate the second formation and I believe that was $80,000 if I recall correctly. And does the, if the community benefit district is formed will they reimburse the city for the cost of the contract? We did not include that in part of the management agreement, so no. Okay. Thank you. Any additional questions? I just have a clarifying question for the city attorney regarding Boise decisions. Isn't there discrepancies between public property and private property? Yes, there is. In other words, I don't want any miscommunication that if it's private property and there are some behaviors that are illegal, the private property owner is not bound by Boise or any other injunctions that the city of Santa Rosa may be currently experiencing. Yes. There's a distinction between public property, private property, public officials and private officials. Great. Thank you. Do we have any cards on this item? No. Alrighty. Mr. Sawyer, I think you have this item. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to introduce a resolution to council the city of Santa Rosa, authorizing the city manager to sign the petition and forthcoming ballot. Receiving the district petition results, directing the city clerk to file the district petition results and stating its intention to establish the Santa Rosa Railroad Square community benefit district and to levy and collect assessments within such district pursuant to local enabling ordinance. Article 5 to Chapter 6-56 of the Santa Rosa City Code relating to the establishment of community benefit districts and appointing a time and place for hearing objections thereto. And wait for the reading. Second. So we'll motion second any additional comments. See none. Your votes please. And we have six ayes in what an abstention that being Mr. Tibbets. Thank you. Mr. McGlynn, Item 15.3. I'm sorry, Mr. Nutt. Item 15.3. Item 15.3 report, parks measure, initial and long-term priority plan, Jen Santos, Deputy Director of Parks, presenting. Good afternoon, Mayor Schwedhelm, Vice Mayor Rogers and council members. I'm Jen Santos, Deputy Director for Parks. And we're here tonight to talk about measure M. I like to call the parks measure to reduce confusion with the other measure M's that are out there. As a brief overview, I wanted to take a look at what has happened with the parks measure in the last year. Last year council did, by resolution, support the October 2nd, in October 2nd, supporting measure M. And the county placed it on the voter's ballot in 2018 in November. It, of course, passed. And it went into effect April 1st, 2019 and expires March 31st, 2029. As a reminder, it's estimated to generate 11.5 million annually county-wide. The city itself is estimated to receive about 1.9 million annually. The measure has a maintenance of effort requirement, which allows funding to be used for parks supplemental and does require us to keep a baseline commitment of budget equal to the fiscal year 2015-16. This is, I apologize, directly copied from the measure, but I wanted to be really clear that this is not in any order. But we have six items, essentially, that the county's allowing the funds to be used on. Maintenance, of course, at the top. Improvements, specifically for athletic fields, playgrounds, restaurants, picnic areas, and other amenities. Expansion of parks for bikeways, public guard, and recreational and historic facilities and trails. Planning and development for bike paths and trails with connection to schools, community spaces, and regional trails. Providing recreational, educational, and health programs for the community. And, last but not least, reducing fire risk. And one thing we've done initially, we've been working on this a while, but this is an initial way of helping us determine how to figure out our priorities and what the reporting and transparency items would be. So, the first two items are looking at making the determination for priorities, specifically community outreach. We really want to find out what does the community want and need from the city to use this measure on. So, we are looking at developing that citywide outreach program with our communications team. And then to maintain that citywide outreach effort ongoing. And, secondly, we'd like to hire a consultant to look at our deferred maintenance needs within the park's districts. We have, it's something similar to what facilities did to understand where our deferred maintenance is and what is the worst first case scenario. And we're looking for that consultant to give us some priority recommendations similar to what the facilities assessment did. And, last but not least, there's always our reporting and transparency. We will be working with the Board of Community Services recommendations and going back to them at least every six months. We've brought this to them already once before and we plan to go back again. And we're looking to receive council's approval annually during the budget process. And as part of the measure, there's a citizen's independent oversight committee that will be looking at this annually. They report to the county parks and the county parks as a baseline for us to look at the measure. I think it turns to the county supervisors who then comes back to the city councils individually. So just a little reminder of some of the existing funding sources we have in parks as a baseline for us to look at the measure. Parks projects are traditionally supported by the park development impact fees per zone. There's four quadrants that support the general fund, occasionally, as well as grant funding. And FEMA could be considered a grant in this case. Recreational program is generally funded by the general fund. We have specifically, of course, Measure O, which supports neighborhood services. And maintenance for parks and recreation is general funded. And we do have deferred park and recreation maintenance that is not necessarily associated with a specific funding source at this time. We know that we have preliminary early rough drafts of about $49 million in deferred maintenance needs. That's, of course, preliminary. We are looking to hopefully have a consultant help us with our understanding our true needs. And just as a reminder of the cost of doing business, I added in here sample project costs for projects. Bear Park, for instance, was $13 million from acquisition, design, and construction. And Prince Gateway, similarly, when the spray grant was updated, it included a new restroom. So that's design and construction at $1.1 million. And Coffee Park, we're still looking at an estimate a little bit under $5 million. And we hope to have some more information soon. But I just wanted to put that out there as a reminder of those costs. They do get high. And of course, the timing can be tricky on some of them. They do take time. So looking at our initial plan for the first two years, we thought, what could we do the first two years? What we really want to do is fund the portions of the fire damage parks that is not being funded by other sources. And those would be Coffee, Rincon Ridge, for Ridge, Nagasawa, and Francis Nielsen Parks. We are hoping to have more information by the end of 2020 on how much those costs would be. We have an estimated funding of items covered by FEMA, for non-FEMA covered items, I'm sorry, around $3,450,000. So that's what our expectation is right now. That is definitely a moving target with FEMA. But we know that there's a need there, and we would like to commit some of those funds to that source. Secondly, the consultant deferred maintenance recommendations. We would like to hire a consultant, put together that RFP as soon as possible, and get that out so that we can start to learn what our true deferred needs are in the city right now. We have a guesstimate. We really want some accurate information. And we estimate that need for that contract to be around $250,000 to $350,000 based on the facility's needs assessment that was similar. And I'm going to continue on. I'm going to go off slide here for a minute, because I've been working really hard with our communications team. And we're going to cover this topic, but I want to just go off a little bit. We have put together this initial community outreach plan, which is the core of what we would like to develop along with our fire-related projects, our deferred maintenance. The outreach is just as important. We really need to develop that plan. And so the communications team, Jason Carter and Adrienne Martins and our marketing outreach team, we've all been working together to strategize about how to do that. And we've come up with something that might be helpful for you in September and October. We plan to gather input on engagement opportunities to include in our outreach and engagement plan. We're obviously here today at City Council to receive hopefully some feedback from you on what sort of strategies and things we should be doing to collect information from the community. We have met already with the Board of Community Services that has made a recommendation for your approval for this initial and long-term plan. We planned, I've already got a plan to meet with the Community Action, Community Advisory Board, I'm sorry, on September 24th, and the Partnership Policy and Operations Team in October. Jason Carter has identified at least 50 groups we can meet with. It's very ambitious. We will see how we can do that. And that's what we're going to be doing over the next couple of months, is making those determinations of how can we strategize and meet with these folks in the most effective ways. We'll be developing that outreach plan for specific community events. We did this similar in some of our grant applications where we met specifically with groups who were already meeting in communities. It was very effective to collect meaningful feedback. We will also hold seven community meetings at least to make sure we're covering each district, but also covering each quadrant of city, which is similar to how we collect funds in the park development impact fees. We're going to strategize and hopefully receive feedback from you about tactics and reaching certain audiences that we definitely want to include. I'm happy to see all the soccer folks here today. Hopefully we can meet with them as well because I know there's a need for soccer fields as well. We also want to make sure that we're hearing the community. We will be developing metrics to make sure we have heard the community and that we are circling back with them. Are we strategizing the right way? Did we hear you? Did we make sure that we have shown you that we've heard you? And so we'll be strategizing those ways of how we interact with the community over the next couple months. In November, we plan to produce an outreach plan, launch the plan, which will include a website where people can go to receive information. Since this is a citywide initiative, we really want to allow people to understand what this is all about, understand what sort of information we need to collect, and provide that opportunity for folks who may not be able to attend any meetings or any other opportunities. But that plan is to create an overarching plan that we can implement in January. We also want to develop, through that process, the types of educational information we should be providing to the community. For example, in some of our other parks, we often include park adjacent maps. What do we already own? How many soccer fields do we have? How many pickleball courts do we operate? Things like that. So the community can provide meaningful feedback. And also some of the information we've been thinking about is what sort of funding sources do we already have? And where can we make connections to use funds together to better strategize and provide the city with what they needed? I know since this past I've heard a lot of anecdotal information about folks who can't wait to see a difference in this. And so I'm actually really excited to go out and meet with the community and find out what they need because even outside of Measure M, we needed to do this as a city. We actually don't have this information. So it's a really great opportunity for us to hear from the community on a citywide basis. And so then in January, we'd be looking at launching into the actual meetings more strategic and definite information on the website for getting specific feedback on questionnaires and things like that. We already have the six items that the county is allowing funding for. And we'll be developing over the next few months the other questions that we should be asking to help us collect that meaningful feedback and make sure we're getting a citywide, a real true citywide effort and especially meeting underserved communities. So I'm going to just circle back and make sure I didn't miss anything on that because that was a lot of information. So essentially we're looking at developing and strategizing that program in the next few months with a launch in January. And it's difficult to launch something going into the holidays, so we really are looking at launching something in January where people are refreshed and ready to restart again and think about their parks. And that gives us that time to prepare that meaningful strategy for outreach and start meeting. And as I said, meanwhile, we, this team, this community, this communications team will be meeting with our partners to understand if we are asking the right questions and what sort of questions we should have starting here tonight. And so that was the first two years, the initial plan, the remainder of the years we're looking at coming back with all of the information we have collected in the community, city council, board of community services, and cab and different places where we've been and coming back with an analysis of what we have found and receiving feedback, especially from the board of community services. They traditionally do hear many of our needs and wants in the community, and it will be helpful for us to hear from them and give us some priorities on, and give us some direction on whether we're hitting that long-term, that short-term initial study that we've been doing. So we are going to analyze all the data from the first couple years, and then we're going to come back with this long-term plan of what we would like to do. And so we're looking at something initially in March and April of 2021, maybe some initial feedback from that website. And then we're going to look to come back every year annually to the board of community services to update that, because we will be continually updating the long-term plan based on the feedback we're receiving from the community as well as our city departments and partners in city council with a strategy to come back to council every year during the annual budget process. This allows us, like master plans, to be flexible. Master plans are working living documents, and we hope that this initial long-term plan can be a working living document that will help us respond to the community and allow us some flexibility to provide the community with what they need or desire as we hear from them. So the next steps for us are to develop that outreach plan. Of course it's a little bit repeat here, but I just want to make sure that is our next step is develop that outreach plan. We've already started meeting and we'll continue. I hope to get some good feedback from the CAB in September and to start that process of hiring our consultant to understand our deferred maintenance needs and we will be required obviously to report to the county annually and we'll be receiving a county auditor's update annually and we'll be coming back to the council annually during the budget process to get feedback and updates. I thought that was going to take longer. Essentially our recommendation is of course that the council by resolution approve the parks measure initial and long-term plan to provide for recreation and parks uses as defined within the Sonoma County measure M. Thank you. You're open for comments I'm sure. All right council any questions? Flaming? Thank you. Great presentation Jen. Thanks. I have a couple of questions about how we are going to engage with neighborhoods I see that you have identified that you're going to engage with eight neighborhood associations and in my experience neighborhood associations tend to be more connected groups of folks than the general public so I'm wondering how we're going to get to the less connected groups of folks. We'll be working with I'll be working with Jason Carter and Adrian he has identified about 50 groups including underserved communities that we can connect with and we are trying to strategize to make sure we are reaching members of the community don't often participate who are underserved as well as the residents who do like to give us their feedback regularly. Yeah those are the easy ones to get huh. Right. So the other thing that I noticed and I think it's on slide six is that you identify the fire affected parks and I'm wondering if there's a way that we can enrich this selection based in addition to being fire affected but also based on population like for example Coffee Park has a fairly sizeable population near it whereas I'm not certain that Rink and Ridge for Ridge Nagasawa or Francis Nielsen have the population centers that would justify us initiating our precious funds in that region. Yes we can certainly look at that I know Coffee Park had the obviously the the most damage the highest cost to repair the park whereas Rink on Ridge for Ridge and Francis Nielsen our neighborhood parks they do tend to serve a smaller group than the community parks such as Nagasawa but we can definitely look into would it be possible without being onerous on staff time to bring us back a breakdown by at least we'll just say the the four parks that are in Fountain Grove to bring back a cost assessment because if you come back and you tell me it's going to cost $10,000 to fix the the the water system at you know for Ridge you know that's not a lot of money to get a park operational whereas I'm wondering if you know where I'm going with this is have we looked at initiating new parks to match all the new building that we're doing in the southern part of the city? Yes we do we rely on the general plan essentially as developments come through and either require the in lieu fees or the park development of park itself and since the city since the county we annexed it into there we've been really working hard to make sure that we are providing those parks in the spaces where the general plan has designated it is a process of looking at development as it comes in and what options we have for funding something in advance of development so we look to partner with developers sometimes or look at what options they might include for us I know it's kind of complicated but it is it is a complicated process but we do we do have an equal plan in the general plan that provides an appropriate amount of park space and we heavily rely on that as well as our folks in planning and economic development when subdivision developments come in right because when this comes back around it would be great to see mentions of parks that are going to be meeting the needs of our population centers as they grow and as far as I can tell Fountain Grove is not growing at a real fast rate the other thing that I was curious about is and this is a really tough question and I won't be at no it's it's I'm not expecting to be able to answer it is what I'm proposing and I'm not even necessarily directing that when we authorize affordable housing do we lose the the tax the benefit the cost per door benefit that we would normally assess in the regular housing development that is a really good question that I do not have an answer to I wasn't expecting you to council member we'll get back to you with an answer on that okay so essentially where I'm going with this is um I would love to hear what our plan is for making sure we have equitable parks across the city great thank you Mr. Sorry thank you mayor um I'm curious and it may be difficult to answer this as well because when developing a plan this is a very aggressive plan I think it's great the community outreach is so vital and you know clearly we'll make a make our decision making better at the end of the day because our community has lots of great ideas what I'm curious about is what can happen sometimes when we do a lot of community outreach is that popularity contests can pop up and if the consultant says that we should be spending some money over here in in a and the community because of its love for its parks and particular parks and at times says we really want spending money in b um have you worked out how because I worked out how you're going to deal with that and I think it's really really important when we're doing community outreach to give the community a real sense of what's of their what's realistic and what their expectations what can they expect from their input because if we tell them that they are the how important their input is which it is and then we don't do what they necessarily what everything that they ask us to do we've kind of set ourselves up for failure so I'm just curious if how that how it will work if if they if those if the consultant and then the community kind of butt heads over priorities well we we do think about this in other similar projects I mean measure in this kind of unique for parks but with park master plans something that we found successful not to repeat this but something we found successful in getting folks to give us feedback who normally wouldn't so we're really hearing folks is to meet with members in their own community at their own meetings versus having huge giant meetings with consultants and things like that which we will do some of that but we also want to reach out to disadvantage neighborhoods and neighborhoods that normally wouldn't reach out or wouldn't I just met with somebody a group recently on Rosalind who knew nothing about Rosalind community park after 10 years of of being out in the community asking folks about Rosalind so we're really trying to strategize this is a statewide strategy from state parks to reach out and we hope that those as well as our transparency about timing of things and what we can and can't do as well as providing the good information up front on what sort of funding we have for things and how long things take I'm sure you all know how long things a master plan can take so a new amenity in a in a park that is not master plan that way will take longer so hopefully providing some of that information as well as providing the consultants information from a city perspective will help us collect the group information that we can return to the to the board of community services as well as the city council to make our recommendations for that based on what we're receiving so we hopefully don't expect the consultants be giving or providing any feedback on that sense we hope to combine it as one unit and I will take your also your recommendation your interest in having that equality as we develop as the communications team develop our plan councilmember sorry you know I mean that's part of the reason that that deputy director Santos has has this put together this program is we want to understand clearly what the community in Santa Rosa wants to how they want to invest parks monies we know that it's going to take us some time to understand those concerns and how they may overlap or how they may be not the same how they may be different in the meantime we want to be able to utilize the funds over the course of the first two years with things that we know are are likely coming down the line stuff projects that we know we can and should be investing in and so that's why the program that you see is a one and two-year proposal with the three through ten year really being on the base will being based off of this research of this community outreach program and if we find that they're differing opinions that's part of that I mean that's part of the good and the bad right we want to understand what all the different components are and then it's up to us to collectively develop a prioritization on how we utilize that 1.9 million dollars is a great great fund for the city but it's still only 1.9 million dollars and it doesn't go it won't go city-wide and so we do have to make some prioritizations and this will help us create that level of strategy even if there are some differing opinions so I think that's why Jen has put together this this proposal that has these two distinct pieces to it thank you I appreciate that and I think breaking it into the short term in the long term makes perfect sense and we'll learn as we go as well thank you mayor if I could just I had additional information for council member Fleming's question at this point affordable housing projects are not exempt from our park impact fee program and so they would be contributing like every other development and they would be then distributed into those four districts or quadrants that we collect in to develop new parks or new amenities miss combs thank you very much and and thank you for what I consider to be an excellent presentation so I think you did a really good job I appreciate it um I guess I'm following up on the equity question um are it doesn't look like we're prioritizing by area that is under park and so I'm interested in that um attached to that is sort of the detail question of are we using the half mile walk to the park or the quarter mile walk to the park some groups nationally recommend one number over the other and I'm wondering where you're falling on that great and um we will definitely take a look at the under park areas we we know and identify where those are we absolutely intend to visit those neighborhoods in a variety of different ways um and then um I'm sorry can you repeat your question whether we were using the quarter mile oh yes I'm so sorry half mile walk to the park we we do uh tend to start our analysis and where the general plans recommendations are for a half mile for neighborhood parks and a mile for our community parks but we realize that those are just numbers in a plan we really do reach out as far as we can usually in a community park like this it's quadrant wide so we're looking at nine to ten thousand mailers every time we meet with the community for a community park so we really go way above and beyond to try to make sure we're including as many folks as possible and we obviously with a citywide initiative like this we would uh be looking at a huge strategy for making sure we're including folks uh citywide and on equal basis per quadrant and per district will you actually go in a park and ask people in a park yes some of the um you know that's a little biased because it's a person who could get to the park go ahead no I appreciate it we you know I love what we do and part of what we do is coming up with these really fun ideas of how to engage the community and we have been thinking of things uh like um an active participation in yoga or something like that where we can bring people to the park to remind them of the resource they have in their community and ask those really pointed questions about the measure and again it's for me it's it's a great opportunity to get this outreach with this amazing team we put together because some it's the information we've been really been needing in the city for quite a while okay and in in the old days and I don't know if we're still doing this or not we included some school fields in our list of available parks is there a plan to coordinate with school boards I can remember a number of years ago driving around and taking photos of the locked school fields that we were counting as park of accessible parks but I think that may have changed we we do still have some school parks they haven't been as successful as maybe they had been originally intended in the old days but we do uh that is on our our list already to engage with the the schools we have in the community in the city city-wide as well as parent leadership groups and groups like that thank you and uh I look forward to hearing from the soccer community who I suspect is here to talk to us about that any other questions from council I've got a couple here um how were you you talked in about the different quadrants and the other sources of funding how does the downtown fit within a quadrant and approach since there's three different districts comprised of our downtown how does that work right the the quadrants for park development impact fees if you think about highway 101 is a line and then highway 12 is another line so most of downtown maybe not real world square but downtown falls into quadrant three uh the northeast quadrant and so we've got a little mix of all the quadrants happening downtown depending over that highway drops okay and so um does benna valley golf course fit into the the ability to access any of these funds for some of the challenges that with deferred maintenance that we have there yes they do and I have I hear from them regularly but yes absolutely that the community group that uses benna valley golf course will have the opportunity that's something we initially thought of is going to the groups that already engage in recreational activities with the city already so it's an it's an easy place for us to start and get them involved in there it is part of the quadrant okay and then as the groups in the process and I really um I'm very appreciative of the public process that Reckon park did with coffee park and what I really appreciated uh having been at several of those community meetings then when we did the park master plan here some comments were made that you know I don't like everything here but I love the process because unless you can find that magic plan that everyone loves I've yet to see one of those so I do appreciate the more opportunities we have people to give us give feedback and I hope many or if not most hopefully all members of community recognize we're not going to be able to please everyone with whatever you come up with um so in light of that there's seven different bullet points on the attachment that is the guideline so in the conversations are you saying where we we want to at least touch all of the bullet points or we're going to focus on a couple of the bullet points how do you see managing that conversation I think well what we've done initially with the team this far is talk about that how can we find out some initial information and that's an easy place for us to start is trying to understand where does the community fall with those items is there something that is rising to the top is there something that is more important than others we have obviously our anecdotal information from our groups that we hear from all the time but we really will probably start that with an initial survey with additional questions as well as some information because we really don't want people to take the survey without hearing the information that you've heard tonight at least some of that so they can really provide us with meaningful feedback and not just a random selection so we really want to get that out there first just as a first touch base and see what is important to the community and then drill down a little further and so then Jason this may be more a question for you just with the recent reorganization of the recreation parks where we have two different portfolios so I would imagine both portfolio staff will be working together versus just your portfolio versus that that's correct while Jen will be leading the effort to establish and manage the expenditure plan for measure M she'll be working and coordinating with recreation specifically as well as the maintenance team in an effort to ensure that all of the input is placed into the prioritization program great thank you for that okay we have several cards on this item first up would be John Quinn followed by Rachelle Cooley Cooley for taking this matter there you go I might turn on you're good now thank you for undertaking this evaluation of our parks thank you mayor vice mayor city council member like to acknowledge some of the soccer community that's here I am president of Santa Rosa youth soccer league we represent thousands of families in this community and one of the things that I wanted to make you aware of is we are underfielded for soccer fields for these programs that we use to serve our youth in the 90s people looked out and said you know we're underfielded and they they worked over a period of years to start building place to play out well you know that was built out in the first decade of of this century and the population has grown significantly since the 90s and there have been no other kind of active recreation developments that I'm aware of in the city so I think you know we're getting further and further behind every year to solve the needs for active recreation in this area you really need lighted all other fields in that portfolio because you know the kids in this community don't stop when it starts raining they want a place they can can recreate in the winter months here and as you were well aware in the worst times of the year it gets dark at 440 and so if you got a kid who gets out of school and can make it to a practice or some gathering at four o'clock doesn't give you much time for outdoor recreation so I would say you know you've got to have that combination of lighted and all weather fields and lighted all weather fields to meet the needs of the community and you know this is not unique to soccer there's other sports that would like some access to these sorts of facilities as well their their major expenditures they take a lot of time to plan and develop and build but you know times of waste and we've recognized this problem for the last 20 years and as a community we haven't done anything about it our communities to the north and and uh Windsor and Hillsburg have done something about it run up park has done something about it uh Petaluma has done something about it and Petaluma you know they're between a they're like a third the size of Santa Rosa and they have four lighted all weather soccer fields we have zero in this community you know run up park has got some Windsor's got lighted fields and and I believe Hillsburg now has lighted all weather fields so we are not serving our community well when we don't do something to address the needs of youth that need active recreation thank you thank you rachel cool followed by linda pru hi my name is rachel and i'm here to support soccer as well um i was here in 2000 and in front of all of whoever was at the podiums there and we voted for place to play i'm here to say that place to place still not finished it's been 20 years my kids are all done and out of there now and new kids are here and i'm just wanting to say that that park i know it's in a quadrant and i understand that part but it's a useful park it's a different kind of park it's not a community neighborhood park it is a park for everybody i myself at 62 still play soccer and play there in the summer for a tournament so it's it's useful for the community it needs to be finished it needs to be supported um we travel a lot outside of the area to do our soccer tournaments i'd love to just be here and not have to do that and have people all of the people that we play against want to come to the wine country and you know we don't have any place for them to play so we go to sacramento and the south bay and we go to every place else but here we should have that kind of money that kind of hotel tax here that kind of money that we spend elsewhere should be here and that goes for the kids the kids families because i was one of the parents we go everywhere and we want to go everywhere and we don't spend that money here so i'm going to give my time up to my new friend here okay hello my name is isaac astia we would like to let the city council know that soccer in the united states is booming and is here to stay here in santa rosa since joe beluzo started with 600 boys in 1970s it has now grown to over 4 000 youth players spread across five soccer clubs in many more uh recreational organizations the city arose so occasions building six soccer fields at place to play in the 2000s but it's time to finish the other two fields even like them like them like other cities in the country have instead of renting lighted fields from local high schools which is extremely difficult to do or traveling down to petaluma santa rosa youth adults and like deserve all weather fields with lights like smaller towns that then santa rosa already have or like city of sinoma who has agreed to fund with measure yeah measure m a great solution would be turf galvin and lights since they already have lighted tennis and soft ball fields hotels like la cuenta poisoned to be finished poised to be finished next year who would be a position to substantially increase the tax good thank you so much uh linda pru followed by a fia hensel good evening uh i'm here representing the southeast greenway campaign this evening and i'm really proud to say that during 2018 southeast greenway campaign volunteers worked tirelessly to help pass measure m to support the parks that we love we canvassed we distributed signs and staffed phone banks and so tonight we're really pleased that the council is considering a plan to use these funds and we want to thank jen and the parks division staff for preparing this excellent plan as you know in july the city council approved the general plan amendment eir and rezoning plan for the southeast greenway now we're entering a whole new chapter of this project appraisal negotiations and fundraising just to acquire the property but once the property is in hand our community will have a great opportunity to plan and to develop this 47 acre greenway which addresses several of the goals that measure m was designed to meet creating parks trails bikeways public art and recreation planning and developing those trails to connect to schools community spaces and other regional trails interestingly there's an opportunity to decrease fire risk through starting with intelligent design and management and then finally improving the trails along the three creeks that flow through the property protecting natural habitat and water quality so we're excited about these possibilities of the future as a well-established community group the southeast greenway campaign would like to take part in the community outreach and engagement process to plan for the long-term use of measure m funds we look forward to working with the city and the larger community to envision and to realize a really positive future for santa rosa city parks thank you thank you the hensel good evening mayor schwedhelm and council members my name is the hensel i live at 1354 e lupa avenue in santa rosa linda just mentioned some aspects and attributes of the greenway and for many of you you've seen us following this process for years we will continue to fundraise for this ongoing planning and development portion of this particular project and we fully anticipate the ability to utilize measure m funds along with the many planned projects that are already lined up in the queue definitely honoring equity the rec and park department was a different entity when measure m was drafted since that time the department has been folded into public works and transportation i have to assume this was seen as a cost effective measure which means consolidation of services questions arise from this consolidation how was the public assured that measure m funds will be used for parks initiatives in today's proposal particularly if there is an overlapping of services will measure m dollars be replacing some items that were prior expenditures it was interesting to see that cbd for courthouse square talked about those above and beyond existing budget items and the additional dollars something to consider will there be a clearly delineated parts and rec budget is a question since we hadn't anticipated this consolidation a few years ago when we worked on this measure this plan holds the potential to be visionary and while it outlines catch up of deferred maintenance which is badly needed i hope that visions and projects can move along in tandem we love our parks and we want to be sure that 1.9 million dollars will be used for items outlined in this plan and much more thank you thank you to you isaac did you want to make any other comments or are you good with you're good great all right those are all the cards we have here any additional questions from council yeah i i would mayor and i thank you isaac for speaking to us it takes courage to get up there and make comments but i would have questions about soccer fields and where it seems like we're lagging behind this is not the first time i've heard that we lack fields out there not just for kids being for adults you know we're looking at a at a sport an international sport that's really really increasing popularity and i hate to see us falling behind i think that we're missing some big opportunities in not pursuing some opportunities to really enhance the number of fields that we have and the conditions of the fields that we have so i hope that we're paying attention to that and we and that is included in our plan and outreach i'm sure during your outreach process you'll hear a lot more about it so please pay attention to that and move forward thank you yes soccer holds a special place in my heart so i absolutely will be working with the groups all the recreational groups that we have especially soccer and we have a really great opportunity with a place to play to complete that so i'd ask the council if you have questions for staff because what i would entertain is if you want to make a motion get a second and then if we want to give any specific other directions regarding the attachment so do you have any questions for staff no just a comment so do you have any questions okay this is your item mr. tib would you like to make a motion and we'll get a second and then we'll have any remaining comments sounds good so i'll move a resolution of the council of the city of santa rosa approving the parks measure initial and long-term priority plan and wait for the reading of the text so we have a motion by mr. Tibbets in the second by mr. Oliver so let's start on this side what are their comments or is further direction would you like to give staff yeah i was going to save my comments until later date because when i was looking at the priorities plan i do appreciate that that the priorities are clearly with strengthening and enhancing the parks that we have i mean i can't tell you how many people i talked to in this community that appreciate the parks that we have they're funded by a development project that development project did not carry that park to its full potential and i think we have an obligation to all the neighbors throughout the neighborhoods in the city to make that the priority but i also understand and recognize that we're deficient in many other areas we have an amazing campaign championed by a lot of dedicated people in the community who no doubt have expectations this council will support a final product of the greenway similarly all the young people in the audience and all the soccer players throughout the city who want to see enhanced fields and more fields to serve a greater number of players and on that latter point i just wanted to ask you or put on your radar jen's that when you're meeting with these community groups is to meet with santa rosa city schools because i had a meeting with the superintendent and the president of the school board with a local soccer group that has a lot of cross pollination with santa rosa united and there's a lot of underutilization of their fields and when we look at the cost of putting in a new synthetic field even though that's probably cheaper than grass in the long term i think that if we want to really maximize the dollar and deliver soccer fields to the community we need to work better with the schools to maximize both our output and utilization of those fields so i hope you'll speak with them i'll be asking about it when this item comes back to the council in the future thank you miss line thank you and once again thank you to you and your staff for a great presentation i want to thank the voters of santa rosa and sonoma county for supporting this measure and i want to note that it is a regressive tax that means that people who are lower income pay a higher percentage of their income towards this tax in particular and with an eye towards the public commons that's a philosophy that i hold that applies to schools to our libraries to our parks and to in general our public spaces that we make sure that they're accessible to each and every resident wealthy and and not wealthy and that especially keeping in mind that this is a measure that is funded by the least amongst us and that it's a priority to make sure that we repair parks that were damaged in the fires but it's also a priority to make sure that we take care of our the least amongst us and it pays us dividends we know that in libraries and we also know that in schools and of course in parks that where we have these services we end up saving a lot of money down the road and i'm sure that's why you do it and i'm sure that's why everybody's here because we love our common spaces so just want to put a plug in for for equity and for the civil rights that that it brings when we do think these things in a mindful way okay thank you mr. Holmes any comments mr. Oliver's any additional comments yeah and i apologize i started with a question i ended up with a statement the last time but but i'll continue with statements i just wanted to say that recreation parks is one of those things that touches many many regional initiatives whether it's a cradle to career partner sonoma health action our violence prevention partnership touches so many things you look at the benefits and i'm preaching to the choir because you know this but i just want to reiterate that that this is so important the benefits that a community can get from our parks and recreation are tremendous from so many different aspects so i fully fully support this and i hope that we do continue to engage our community to really get the information that we need to continue making progress in these areas so thank you mr. Sawyer any comments mr. Vice mayor thank you mr. mayor i want to just also appreciate that we're not having this conversation in a vacuum i know it was mentioned what other cities have and i think it's important for us to be comparable but we also know for example that the fair board is looking at their own proposal to put in a youth soccer facility that has multiple all-weather lighted soccer fields as well so while not santa rosa city land it is still going to end up being if they move forward with that proposal within the city limits so i don't want us to lose sight of what other folks around us are doing as well and how we play into that as a larger entity i'm comfortable with the direction that you've laid out for us to go at least initially and i'm really curious to see what the consultant will end up bringing back to us in terms of deferred maintenance and in terms of prioritization particularly after talking to the community it's not sexy to say that you're going to fund operations and maintenance but part of why we find ourselves where we are is because we do have this habit of putting forward grants and money into capital expenditures to build something and then not have the budget to be able to maintain it long term i think councilmember tidbits is right when he talks about making sure that we're keeping the promise to neighborhoods around santa rosa by keeping those parks up to date and keeping them well maintained and usable for folks not just moving on to the new shiny object that is going to sound great when we do our community input meetings particularly understanding that most grants that we can go after aren't going to fund operations and maintenance this is a funding source that we can particularly use to catch up on that deferred maintenance and use that as leverage to pull in additional grants to build something new so those will be my comments going forward and i look forward to seeing what the consultant comes up with but for now thank you for this proposal and i also want to thank you for this presentation i also want to recognize dan conger who actually will be sitting on his appointment by the board of supervisors on the measure oversight and i recognize dan you won't have input as to what we do but i think it's very important i appreciate you being here to hear these comments because you'll be in meetings that we won't be in and you can share what you've heard here what you've heard from us and the comments from our staff so i appreciate you being here um my interest i love the community input but uh i want to go back to the pavement condition index discussion i had earlier so if pc i right now san rosa 61 berry want to get to 75 that's a nice goal i would like to see that with our parks you know i want san rosa to be known they've got the cleanest parks the prettiest parks we want i want to be known for having parks that you know the standard of excellence what that means because it's not as clear as a pc i but that's what you know it goes into some of the other comments that my colleagues have made about the maintenance how do we get it so that we're not scrambling how do we get it so that everyone loves going to our parks in other community members will be saying you have to go to san rosa because what they're doing is the right thing so i i'd much rather do a fewer things well than expand a resource yeah we have parks all over but we're not we don't have the ability to maintain and have it rock star status so that's the direction that i would like to go and i think it fits within our attachment a in that so with that we have our comments we have a motion we've got a second your votes please not surprisingly that passes seven oh thank you so much and thank you all for coming in providing your input and this is not the last opportunity for input mr nutter you stand in the chair for 16.1 i have a feeling uh my boss will be coming down shortly but if you'd like me to go ahead and introduce while he's working his way down um item 16.1 is a public hearing uh tefra public hearing for a tax exempt bond issuance by the california municipal finance authority in an amount not to exceed 66 million for quail run apartments at 10 18 belview avenue frank kasmof program specialist and steve malikian jones hall presenting thank you mr uh mayor and uh council members this tefra public hearing is for the future issuance of tax exempt bonds in an amount not to exceed 66 million dollars for acquisition and rehabilitation of quail run apartments located at 10 18 belview avenue the issuance of tax exempt private equity revenue bonds must be approved by the governing body in whose jurisdiction the project is located following a public hearing this is often referred to as a tefra public hearing because it is held in accordance with the tax equity and fiscal responsibility act or tefra of 1982 as set forth in the internal revenue code quail run is an existing affordable housing development with 200 multifamily rental units on 10 acres the site is comprised of 10 two and three story residential walk-up buildings and one community building on two parcels there is a mix of one two three and four bedroom uh units departments were constructed in 1999 on this uh aerial the site is outlined in blue it's a triangular shaped parcel south of belview and a rectangular shaped parcel north of belview avenue that is the southern tip of san rosa on the east side of highway 101 and this is the same site from a bird's eye perspective the city's involvement with quail run dates back to 1997 with the issuance of a tax exempt bond in the amount of 12,850,000 for site acquisition and construction of the project which was completed in 1999 there were additional funding sources for that project as well in 2011 the owner paid off the bonds with a new loan but the bond regulatory agreement continued to restrict the income and rents for 80 units at 60 of area median income or am i until 2016 when it expired in 2014 a couple years before that time the housing authority of the city of san rosa provided a loan the amount of 350,000 for eden housing a non-profit affordable housing developer to acquire the general partnership interest in the property eden also became the property manager the housing authorities loan started a new 55 year regulatory period with the housing authorities terms under this regulatory agreement 199 of the units are restricted at 60 of am i and there's one unrestricted unit for the resident manager rents are calculated at 30 of income level and adjusted for household size and tenant paid utilities this regulatory agreement remains in place through this process eden housing is recapitalizing the property to finance the 88 million dollar acquisition and rehabilitation of quail run apartments the rehabilitation portion of the project is approximately 20 million dollars of the total cost with much of the other cost associated with the acquisition by a new owner a limited partnership eden will remain with the new ownership structure as the general manager and the property manager through its affiliates the primary funding sources for this project include the tax exam bond which is the subject of this public hearing as well as a new allocation of tax credits the maximum bond issue will be 66 million dollars eden has selected the california municipal finance authority or cmfa to be the bond issuer cmfa is a joint powers authority authorized to issue the bonds and the city has been a member of the joint powers authority since 2010 the primary purpose of the recapitalization is to rehabilitate the 20-year-old property major work will include replacing the existing the exterior stair towers achieving compliance with accessibility standards in five percent of the units as required as well as in the path of travel community buildings in common areas such as the pool and playground also includes installing new roofs waterproofing balconies replacing old and inefficient hot water heaters refrigerators and dishwashers with new energy and water efficient units installing energy efficient led lighting replacing the air conditioning air conditioning units in the community building as budget allows the project will also include in unit improvements such as replacing countertops and cabinets replacing flooring windows siding and doors and hardware the tax exempt revenue bonds are a major part of the total financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of this affordable housing development an issuance of the tax exempt bonds will not have a fiscal impact on the city of the general fund all the financial costs of repayment of the bonds are the responsibility of the borrower lastly cmfa shares 25 of its issuance fee with the host jurisdiction the city shares estimated to be 18 thousand dollars it is recommended by the housing and community services services department that the city council by resolution one approved the issuance by california municipal finance authority of tax exempt multifamily housing revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed 66 million dollars to finance the acquisition rehabilitation and associated costs of quail run apartments 1018 belview avenue and two to appropriate the city share of cmfa issuance fee approximately 18 thousand dollars to fund 2295 the housing compliance fund for affordable housing purposes we'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have i'd like to as mentioned for steve licking from jones hall the city's bond councils here with us also travis cooper a financial advisor with the california municipal finance authority is here and andy madera eden senior vice president of real estate development is also here and the latter two i believe have cards to speak under the public hearing as well thank you great thank you for the presentation council questions mr tibis thank you mayor so just to be clear we when we get these bonds issued we're the ones that are carrying the notes that correct we're the ones incurring the debt liabilities no we're not uh incurring it we're actually we're actually not issuing in this case when we do issue we're a conduit and we we don't have any responsibility for the paying back those loans anyway i'd like to actually invite mr malik yeah thank you i'll thank you i'm steve malik in with jones hall the city's bond council and i think there's really two questions there the first is in this instance the city is only holding the public hearing which is required by the tax code the actual issuer of the bonds will be the california municipal finance authority however when the city does issue these kinds of bonds the city has no financial responsibility for them the the obligation of the borrower in other words the multifamily project owner they have no financial impact on the city uh city's general fund or any other fund of the city okay and mr kazemov is this kind of the standard operating procedure for these affordable housing developments is to basically let the depreciation run not really do much maintenance set-asides and then we get these entities to issue debt to repay over the course of the next 20 years well i'm just looking at the 66 million kind of going you know that's a that's a heck of a lot of repairs how much was set aside from the project while recognizing that the affordable housing is not exactly a lucrative business to be doing maintenance set-asides it's a good question the typical initial period for financing and for affordable housing is about 15 years and at the end of that it's a tax credit period there's an eligibility to basically redo it re syndicate and and have recapitalized the project to capture these funds to go on to the next the next term in it so they do have and they they typically do have a budget a capital reserve to do you know standard upkeep and a lot of times after 15 20 years there's major upkeep that goes above and beyond that and so this is that this is a process that will we have seen and will continue to see in the future with projects that get to be 15 years or older okay thanks miss gomes thank you this one is a little unusual i think i've seen conduit bonds here before but not one where we're kind of not really involved except for providing the hearing so this is different from the conduit bond yes it is the city's role really is just to consider hold the public hearing consider the resolution and then the city in effect steps away this the housing authority still has the regulatory agreement on the property which i believe goes for another 50 years and so that the housing authority will continue to monitor the property but with respect to the bonds the city's involvement really is only tonight so if i'm reading the resolution correctly section two in section four pretty clearly state we have no obligation if there should be a problem with the boundary payment that is absolutely correct and following up does this restart the 55-year obligation well there will be a different it won't restart the housing authority's obligation that started in 2014 for 55 years but there will be a new bond regulatory obligation as well as a tax credit regulatory obligation both of which would run 55 years okay so it still would have to have some level of affordability for 55 years from this point even though we're not specifically saying here because it's only been like five years since the last time right it will have a 50-year overlap and then theirs will carry forward from when they they started and can you explain the $18,000 housing compliance fund for me well that's a place where we're recommending so cmfa gets an issuance fee to to defray their cost and to and and you know for their cost but they share some of that with the city or the host jurisdiction right and so that money comes to you you can put it wherever you want we're suggesting that it goes into affordable housing and in particular this this particular fund the compliance fund and if you and i guess what i'm asking is what's the compliance fund i just don't know what that is okay we'll invite megan bassinger the housing and community services manager to explain thank you so much it sounds like a good idea good evening i'm megan bassinger housing and community services manager the housing authorities compliance fund is an administrative fund that we used to staff the center as a housing trust and this is the group of employees that performs compliance monitoring on the city's affordable housing portfolio thank you any other questions okay uh no mr schweig this is a public hearing so i will open the public hearing i do have three cards you don't have to fill out a court card but we'll go through these first first up is mr george uberte followed by travis cooper right um what i see is that in 1997 uh 12.85 million dollars built this entire complex of 200 units now you adjust that for inflation and it's 20 million right now 20 million is the proportion of this 66 million that goes to rehabilitation i believe we all saw the list of rehabilitation we're replacing water heaters waterproofing decks you can build an entire complex for 20 million so 20 million for rehabilitation costs unaccounted for and then we still got what another 46 million that goes where right uh now this is you know i understand what you guys are going to be out 18 thousand dollars city santa rosa you're just holding a hearing i get that right but this is 66 million dollars that we're exempting from taxes rather than any kind not going to benefit the general public at all right uh in fact it says specifically here in the agenda item that you provided for 60.1 adopt the resolution approving the issuance of bonds by the cmfa for the benefit of santa rosa quail run lp right so a private company is going to benefit from this public's not going to benefit from it no tax revenue generated often right 200 units that are already there right 66 million dollars i mean i mean it's an 88 million dollar project all together right so that's if you break that down by 200 that's 440 thousand dollars a unit right now if we're finding a way to get 440 thousand dollars uh for the cause of affordable housing we can just build it from the ground up i mean 20 million gets you 200 units doesn't it i mean it did in 1997 it can do it right now right this will add zero units it'll add nothing i mean if you haven't got it yet my voice in this public hearing is for strongly disagree right this is not the best way for the public in general to use affordable housing funds right this is a waste of money i mean just the 20 million that's out of this 88 total project cost just that already that set aside for rehabilitation there is absolutely no way that it can be accounted for by rehabilitation costs i question the Santa Rosa public housing authorities ability to monitor this competently because i don't i don't see 20 million going to rehabilitation it just doesn't happen with the rehabilitations that are listed here right you can't waterproof 20 million dollars worth of decks it's not going to happen all right uh and then we still have another 40 million dollars to account for this is ridiculous right i mean this is an absolutely ridiculous proposition an eighth grader could do the math and tell you that all right um for what i can put forward of this public hearing right absolutely not i mean if there's anything that we can do to stop this we should do it let's build houses please thank you travis cooper followed by andy madera the honorable mayor members of the city council um my name is travis cooper i'm with the california municipal finance authority i just want to introduce myself and thank you for holding the public hearing and all the work that um frank has put forth to get this on the agenda and to just address a few of the questions um by the previous speaker the thing to remember with this public hearing is and the loan and the debt itself is this is essentially a private loan between the developer and the bank um the teffa requires that a public hearing be held um and that the city council approve um the cmfa as an issuer but at the end of the day it's taxing them dead it's a private a private um loan between the bank and and and the developer um so here happy to answer any questions if you have them great thank you andy madera good evening council members again my name is andy madera i'm senior vice president for real estate development at eden housing we're a nonprofit that is 51 years old this year we acquired a quail run to preserve it so that it maintained as an affordable housing asset for this community when we retained acquired it four years ago we knew that it was going to require a substantial rehab and recapitalization and so since we acquired it we basically have been accumulating funds from the operation property itself we have been investing into the property in the five years that we've owned it in order to address immediate needs and so if any of you have been out there we've actually done a significant amount of work to address immediate health and safety issues that were occurring at the property particularly in regard to um in regard to the stairs where there was substantial damage due to the weather the way that the plan now is to do a substantial rehab of the property to really preserve it again for affordability for the long term this is uh generally speaking it is a low-income working population at the site in addition to the housing that we provide we also provide services as well so our budget as part of the rehab will actually allow us to have a staff member on site to work with the residents and to work with the resources that are available in this community to make sure that we connect residents who desire services with those that are available some of the confusion i think about all of these um these uh rehabs is that we are actually better off when we maximize the size of the tax exempt bond because the bond is tied to the calculation of a federal low-income housing tax credit so the larger the not the uh the tax exempt bond the more subsidy we're actually bringing in from the federal government it's not coming from this community it's really coming from again from the low-income housing tax credit there's the primary mechanism mechanism by which we develop affordable housing these days at the end of the day when we actually finish construction and pay down the bonds the permanent debt that will be supporting the outstanding bonds will be about 25 million that 25 million will allow us to actually leverage an additional 30 million roughly in tax equity that comes from an investor that investor is typically a bank that is investing really for purely for community reinvestment at purposes um and are really receiving very low return on their investment we are in the process right now of negotiating with investors to get the best deal for this property if you wrap up your comments please yeah and again i'm happy to explain any more of the uh sort of esoteric nature of this property but the goal is really to preserve it as an asset for the residents thank you those are all the cards uh you need and have fill out a card if you'd like to address the council on this item please if you could please identify yourself and step up to that one please identify yourself and address the council hi i'm i'm pat Mitchell is this public open time are we addressing an issue on the agenda or is this open yes no no this is on the item item 16.1 about the okay all right i'll speak later then sorry would anyone like to address the council on this item seeing none i'll close the public hearing bring back to council do you have any additional questions for anyone miss flimmy i do have a question about the 18 000 in city match it says that it won't impact our general fund but that we are it seems that we don't um we aren't on the hook for the bond we don't really have a say we have to hold the hearing and we have to pony up 18 000 no actually um or they're paying us they're providing you're giving us 18 000 that seems like a better deal just want to clarify okay any other questions miss combs you have this item thank you and i appreciate uh you're bringing this forward to us this is an opportunity for us to preserve affordable housing in our community the three p's for uh affordability are protect tenants preserve existing affordable structures and then produce new housing so uh we're doing a good job uh in this point in pre helping preserve affordable housing without using any of our own city dollars and in fact it brings in a little bit not for nothing uh so thank you very much and i'll i'll move the resolution of the council of the city of santa rosa approving the issuance of qualified residential rental project bonds in an amount not to exceed 66 million by the california municipal finance authority in accordance with section 147 f of the internal revenue code and the joint exercise of powers agreement relating to set authority and waive for the reading of the text do we have a second we have a motion and a second by mr oliver's any additional comments see none your votes please and that passes unanimously thank you for the presentation franken megan thank you very much right item 17.1 the response to the grand jury since i see our water director here does council have any questions about that written correspondence see none also the final map do we have any cards for item 18 and for another public comment on an agenda items pat michel i think the mics turned off there you go we can hear you okay all right sorry last lost track of the agenda there um okay first of all i want to thank the santa rosa the city for the our grass got cut on uh on lano no one is in danger of a collision there because they can't see because of the grass that got cut a few days ago and i wanted to thank you for that i also want to remind you about the cypress trees on walker avenue on max grafts uh property and uh i sure hope you guys are planning on cutting them down you do own that property uh they are a fire hazard potential fire hazard and uh kind of scary all right and the other reason i'm here i hope you have a copy of these maps there's two maps the one i'm not going to be talking about the one on mark x marks the spot you may have seen that one already i'm talking going to talk about this one that shows the districts and the property that santa rosa city owns laguna treatment plant and where else uh could a compost facility go santa rosa city owns the property in green on lano road it may not show up green very well on your paper um regarding i i'm assuming you saw the press democrat today in the article on the proposed um compost facility and greg is quoted is uh well is the statement is that his house is several blocks away but it's only 528 yards away from the proposed um compost facility and it's direct his home is directly downwind um and uh there's 61 plus residences that would be impacted on the walker lano toad block um includes um meadow lane it's a one mile block okay one mile walker one mile lano and then todd and meadow lane very short little sections and these there are 61 residences or more hard to count it's rural residential and there's houses behind houses so can't always tell um and uh so i live on walker avenue and um we're downwind from the proposed treatment facility reacting to this news my neighbor bill expressed it well there will be a dem demunation and diminuation in the value of our property i am downwind of the proposed facility and the facility would would make my house uninhabitable and worthless the city of santa rosa would be um be liable for the demuniation sorry i put in an extra vowel there um in value it's a legal term and it would be tens of millions of dollars all of sabastopol would be impacted by heavy increase in truck traffic on highway 16 and highway 12 gases escaping from compost emitted into the air are known to cause cancer we have young children living on walker are you willing to risk their lives please find a different location i know it's difficult but it's possible and needs to be done thank you um george you can speak of items not on the agenda but you can't talk about 70.2 we've already covered that we just went through there okay you did not see anything uh we'll adjourn the meeting