deferring some projects to later dates To making some external solutions internal solutions and getting savings through those programs You'll see that those are asterisk We're focusing on the general fund tonight the information technology is actually an internal service So they charge out to the different funds But about 75 of those savings of the seven hundred thirty eight thousand dollars would go to the general fund departments Office of community engagement Another smaller operation They did not reduce personnel But gave us non personnel savings of fifty thousand dollars to the general fund and that was by getting By reducing the choice grants So they have budgeted about a hundred ninety six thousand dollars when we look back historically to last year They used about a hundred and ten thousand dollars. So we had a little bit of Of surplus in there that we could that we could get savings from so they reduced that by fifty thousand dollars Planning economic development Was able to reduce was able to offer savings of six hundred thirty five thousand dollars by making a reduction of five fte's Um, so all of the fte's that we're reducing are in the resolution that's attached to the staff report Uh, if you're interested, but um, three of these five were cannabis related personnel that um, uh, that Are not that are vacant. So we were able to get rid of those at that point and then the other two were um We're um a buildings plan examiner and an associate associate civil engineer So again, those are both vacant positions. Um, that could result in some in some, you know, longer wait times But that's what was offered up by planning economic development police department Reduced their budget by a million dollars primarily through the reduction of eight personnel Of those two were sworn. So there was one sergeant and one officer that are vacant Some of the savings from the officer were taken back and used for contractual service for background investigations Which was some of the work that that officer did they also eliminated three community service officers I think one of those was for for graffitti and graffitti is one of those programs that's spread out among four different departments So the police chief has been working with those departments to To get that budget put in the right place So they were able to eliminate those the other two cso's that were eliminated Responded to non-emergency calls, but those are vacant. So that means that patrol officers will actually pick up that work so there may be some increase in in Times in response times for non-emergency calls The other three personnel were administrative recreation parks was able to Garner eight hundred thirty four thousand dollars in savings primarily through reduction in eight personnel There was an application specialist that's been vacant And that supported the recreation maintenance system They also were able to eliminate four vacant groundskeepers So those groundskeepers had actually been moved up to the level of maintenance worker Leaving those positions vacant so they felt they could get rid of those They also got rid of a senior maintenance worker and an admin secretary So as this stands right now, I've talked to mr. McBride The way measure m was structured It was the last three years a glimpse at the last three years with this reduction exercise. We still comply with measure m meaning that that there was a There was a requirement that you not Displace funding from the organization. So no supplanting we fit within the supplanting requirements If we take much more reduction, we will actually be threatening our status as it relates to supplanting and measure m's qualification status And transportation public works have been Weaning forward on their reduction plan for quite some time So they were able to offer a reduction of 10 fte's or eight hundred thirty four thousand dollars there And non-personal savings of two hundred thirty thousand dollars Um And i'm not going to go through all of those again. They're listed in the in the rezzo Um storm water was able to provide savings uh 58,700 dollars and that was primarily uh by looking at how they were Charging the general fund reducing that charge the general fund and moving that to uh to the water enterprise So overall this is what we looked at um with all the Reductions that i just showed you those 49.25 fte's this breaks it down In the order we just went through by department so you can see What percentage of cuts were offered by the individual departments as part of their As part of their budgets part of their general fund budgets If you add these all together that six point eight million dollars It's about a four percent total reduction in our general fund budget from these cuts Citywide statistics As you would imagine Most of the six point nine million dollars in cuts came from personnel savings So that's six million dollars the non-personal savings were a little under a million dollars for 49.2 fte's And we kind of sliced the the cuts the the personnel reductions another way here Management we reduced nine personnel And that has the the note there is one fte currently filled. That's the deputy city manager non-management was 32.25 and then the sworn were eight of those two were the um sworn police The uh sergeant and the officer that we spoke of and then the six firefighters that that comprises the uh The eight there As a matter of scale about 186 the city's personnel or management out of 1306 Long-term budget solutions as I mentioned these are really our short-term solutions This is just to get us through this year to immediately respond to that budget deficit So that we got a little more time to kind of think about this and how we're going to how we're going to Focus on the budget long term as the city manager said We not only have a deficit that we have to fix but while we do that We also have to think about how we get our reserves back up to the the mandate of 15 by policy or about 25 million dollars Is what we should have in reserves well below that We uh, we're going to have to deal with things like the the purrs unfunded liability In order to reduce our purrs costs over time and that's probably going to be a very long-term commitment We have some infrastructure issues. We need to look at Probably would not be a bad thing to have money set aside for an economic downturn Which we know will be coming at some point just to complicate these matters even more We are looking organizational structures as I mentioned with my department We're looking at internal services fleet phones and laptops How we give those out to employees and if there's any savings to be had there Fleets looked extensively at their especially at their ghost fleet and take-home vehicles and and have already made some Pretty good progress there in reducing the amount of ghost vehicles We are looking at revenue solutions. We told you that we have a temporary tax in place for six years unfortunately that tax expires at the same time that the The former measure oh expired so we're going to have a half cent additional sales taxes expiring at one time And then again as I mentioned reserves are going to be a big part of our discussion as we enter the annual budget process for for the next fiscal year And before we go to questions, I just want to repeat something that I've said a couple of times is that I I have been part of the city manager's department Group the sponsor of the league of california city is looking expressly At the issues surrounding purrs We've been and we've testified in front of purrs. I can't you can go watch the videotape. I can't say it was a very fruitful conversation But what I can say is that that's one of as you you saw that's our rising cost We need to figure out a way to start addressing and and actively paying bound some of those liabilities And one of the unfortunately one of the recommendations that the league has put together is actually to go out of sale And do a sales tax in your community expressly for that And I think a lot of times when we look at that we think it's a joke But that tells you where we sit and our limited abilities to impact That that that liability That's one of the questions I get asked all the time. That was the question I got asked prior to the sales tax You know I pointed specifically to council's commitment and staff's commitment to control costs going into the to the the renewal of the New opportunity to get through the short term with the six-year increment of a quarter cent But it is an issue. We're going to have to wrestle with I you know, I understand that there's going to be Concern Challenges in in accepting this right now, especially as as we're still working through How do we align the city better to meet your priorities? Make sure we're delivering the services that this community has expected as best we can And still manage a recovery process That I'll remind the council Some of our consulting teams are leaving as of april And we're going to have to figure out how we manage some of that internally So it's it's a lot of work. This is prepped for our goal setting session We're going to reprise this presentation some of this presentation during that goal setting session But this is the beginning of the budget process. The hearing takes off later this evening But we can't we've delayed taking action on the budget for a series of years now Including the fire interrupting us If we delay much further, it's only going to get more and more challenging The presentation you have in front of you is about taking Predominantly vacant positions and then we can start to strategize About how we build the necessary revenues to actually support what we need to do And I pointed to the half cent sales tax measure that was floated today Not not affirmed but floated on the county side Which would be able to fund a series of things on with our fire department that we will be bringing forward to in future conversations But we've got to control some of the costs so that we can start talking about smart revenue development and making sure there's revenue to meet Some of these essential service needs that we all know we want to have in this community I appreciate that mr. City manager So if I just heard you correctly because i'm also interested in hearing the other city managers So what mr. Mcbride said on slide six by the unfunded liability from 2019 to 2025 almost doubling What What can this council do to affect that number or is it just the strategy? We're just trying to pay it down so it doesn't continue to Expand so Mayor this is this a conversation we'll we'll have with the with the Budget process for the next fiscal year, but one of the things we want to look at all of the above So there's there's only a couple of levers you really have available to you with the unfunded liability You can either put money aside in a trust to address it. You can you know set up a Stabilization fund so that if you have big jumps in it in a certain year You you have money set aside to address that But you're right primarily we want we want to figure out a way to pay off the unfunded liability Now paying up a $340 million liability is going to take decades It will take a long time and before we do that we have to get We have to get some sort of surplus We have to get the revenues over the expenditure so that we have that wedge and we can then use that money to To start going after that ual we I don't want to get ahead of myself, but we are going to look at ways to do that We do have some remaining money from a pension obligation bond that was that was floated years ago And and we could potentially use that it's not a lot of money But we could use that to go after That unfunded liability and kind of get that ball rolling But and I think you know some policies on what's famously called turn back and what the council pre assigns That's been a conversational long-term finance committee committing some of those return funds To enterprises like this that it's going to be a council obligation that they're going to take You're going to take any money that might be remaining at the end of the fiscal year and reinvested in paying down those Items and really we haven't even really talked about the other issue that's huge for us Which you all will be going on tours shortly to see the conditions of the facilities that we're charged with We have some good examples about some decent facilities that need addressing But we also have some really really challenging situations that we need to get our hands around So it's not just an unfunded liability as it relates to the pension costs It's about our assets and maintaining our assets It is something we really have to start addressing Thank you. Okay. We'll bring it back to council questions council member phony Thank you director McBride and mr. McGlynn So I understand that we have I take this very seriously. Thank you for all your work and I appreciate each department coming forward My my primary concern is around this that I appreciate the effort that was spent in looking to make cuts based on unfilled positions However, not every unfilled position Is worth the same as the next unfilled position specifically The cost of not filling a position in planning and economic development Or in transportation and public works May not be as cost It was going to be a lot more costly to our future economic viability and recovery than positions in other areas and so I'm not suggesting that um As a first step we go looking to who we could lay off. I would hate that but that we not consider every Unfilled position to be of equal economic value if that's what we're talking about here So I can bring down the director of planning and economic development to have that conversation But we didn't treat every position as as equal and I I'll just remind council There's another seven million dollars to go And but we can always figure out how to actually build some capacity within the organization But we have to start controlling costs. So We're talking about what we're doing to move forward But the reality is we're going to need to take a stab at controlling costs right now And then council member I believe we can start to have conversations as we go through the budget process about what we want to try to construct Moving forward But this was an attempt As we started last summer to really live to that tenet of let's try to first do a first First approach that does not lay anybody off And and so that was what we went through in the fall. That was the agreement coming in, you know There wasn't there was concern and I and I like just like we have a staff But we asked some of these questions directly about what we're going to be able to do And that's why we want to also go into goal setting quite frankly and have this conversation and goal setting What are we going to focus on what are we going to ask staff to do because we can't grow staff Sustainably in this process. So Again, that that was the approach We did not take it as as as a light exercise to look through and try to evaluate these positions I do appreciate that. I just know that you know from my mom Who's trying to build an accessory dwelling unit to somebody who's trying to build a large manufacturing cannabis facility How difficult it is to get the permanent through the permitting process and I would hate to see us hobble our Short-term and long-term economic growth and I appreciate that you took that into consideration councilman will comes Thank you. Thank you for bringing this forward now I'm afraid I have a few questions. So I appreciate your patience as as I look at this Slide three You said some of these things I would like to Sort of clarify or reemphasize them by asking This long-range financial forecast does this include maintenance deficits such as road maintenance or building maintenance It does not council member Okay, so it doesn't increasingly widen with the fact that it costs more to for example Two to seven times more to rebuild a road Then to fix it before it has deteriorated. That's not shown here. That is not shown here. No, okay While Another page shows purrs This page doesn't show purrs. Is that correct or incorrect? So purrs is built into that expenditure line that you see on the top So all the personnel costs are part of that is purrs and that that is built into this so the unfunded liability That's part of this the annual the annual portion of it annually not just on the other slide. Correct. Okay We are extremely sales tax dependent as a city Thanks to for example prop 13 Um We would anticipate about every 10 years or so nobody can know for sure downturns So on this slide 3 chart There is no consideration for an economic downturn In a 10-year or so period Although we had one in 2008 so our 10 years is coming I would concur with that. I don't know when it's coming, but you're right We don't know exactly when it's coming, but we're kind of do And we have not built that into this into this model. And that's what I say We're probably not even conservative enough in this model. Yeah, okay just Um, does this model show Any part of making up reserves this this forecast No, as a matter of fact this forecast shows you taking money away from reserves So every one of those deficits we're right now balancing that on on our reserves, but If I remember rightly we had a large fire that took up a lot of our reserves I'm pretty sure I remember you're absolutely correct. Okay, so this doesn't show making them up and we don't really have much left No, okay Is the new property tax that I mean, excuse me the new We just passed a tax Thankfully, thank you all for participating We just passed a new small tax For short term. Is that shown on this? This is pre-tax. So when we update our forecast for next year, uh, that's when you'll get the first full fiscal year of that tax Okay, does it make much difference in this general trend? It will so if you look at 1920 that that will And it depends on what we wind up doing with that approximately nine million dollars per year If we use some of that for other purposes other than just, you know, remedying general fund expenditures But if you used all of it towards the general fund You would you would bring um up that revenue line by nine million dollars So your deficit would decrease by you know down to nine million dollars plus with this seven million dollars cuts That would bring that down even further. Okay, so my recollection is that nine million dollars a year is the low end of the estimate For what we need just to do road repairs and not any of the other maintenance That it was somewhere between nine and 15 Million a year Are you remembering a number around there? Also? I appreciate that the gentleman's not at the table. Who knows that number? You want to just shout it for us? So if we roll in sp1, it's about 14 million dollars 14 million. Okay, so this Thank you. I between It's more than nine million If we could move to slide 21 Looking at the fire FTEs i'm concerned that we need to be Doing more with regard to community wild fire planning and protection and in particular One of the things we might want to consider doing as a council. We haven't decided yet Would be to have someone who follows up that following the Following the the occupancy permit to make sure that properties are being maintained in in that area That would fall likely within the fire department There are a number of things that might We might want to do including expanding our cope program or something similar to preparing communities for emergencies I don't I don't see how we cut fire staff and provide the kind of community wildfire support that We need to provide I'm just trying to understand the fire department's decision that we can in fact Cut six I mean I understand point seven five is is Admin, but the rest of the six are not admin So i'm happy to have The the chief come down. I will say again This is where some of these questions are regional questions and we need to start to tackle these issues regionally We're we're in active conversations about how we better have a have a Cholistic approach to vegetation management and and Those are going to require funding. We're in a conversation right now about moving our disaster council from a A series of mo used to actually The dreaded word that's come up repeatedly at jpa But there's going to be costs associated with that We we have more difficult what I can say council member without Without any hesitation. We have more difficult conversations coming right now. We're trying to Make a serious dent in in the overall structural issue So that as we get into some of those difficult conversations We've actually have some place to start that conversation. We're not disputing that But we have some tough tough places that we're going to have to go I'm just how much do we benefit by doing a cut like this And then six months later trying to find folks or positions That have the knowledge that we're seeking it just Is this a long is this really a long term plan? This is a really short term plan But you're also pointing to new positions that we're we're talking about you're talking about new Expertise, you know, we'll make sure we're making the right hires within those those areas So again, we're not disputing that what we're saying is we may have to come back and have conversations that are even tougher Then the ones we're having right now You have a specific question for me. I heard a lot there, but I want to make sure I'm answering what you're asking I can't figure out how under the current circumstances where we have a lot to do with regard to Um Wildfire support within the community training education outreach monitoring How do we cut six positions these positions predominantly fill engine company and truck company functions So they weren't out into public filling cope and and inspection type work So with these positions we had three per shift that were over in a backfill for Injury sick Retirement vacation When those positions deplete down to six to nine and we refill those positions to give some depth We were just in the process of filling all of those positions after july 1 when we were told we're gonna have to cut our budget So we put a hiring freeze the city did we said we're not hiring any firefighters till we figure out what we're doing Citywide budget we're part of the general fund. We came up with what was the easiest For the department to absorb which was the six vacant positions Knowing that we're gonna need to replace those positions We've tried three different grant opportunities for a vegetation management program Two of them have failed at this point The third one is still in play and those come with positions as well, but they will be grant funded for up to three years Okay, so we and I appreciate that FEMA resources are not clear, but I would have thought hazard mitigation funds would be Available for this particular kind of There's a long way to go in fire In the fire field as it relates to our federal and state partners You know, we still have to build a fire station. We're still trying to figure out how that's gonna work And we're still not there. So it's frustrated on many levels, but this is where we find ourselves This is particularly frustrating I'm with you. Okay. Thank you. I I appreciate that you have done what you were asked to do I am concerned that we cannot do without Six additional fire positions. So the six position where we The six positions this will not affect our overall staffing in terms of we have you said that they can't get sick now, right? No, they get sick. It means firemen can't get sick because we don't have the backup What it means is there's there's going to be more overtime is what that means and that's not cheaper It's right on the cusp. It used to be cheaper. It's not good practice though because we're burning our folks down We're very busy And we help the state a lot and we help other communities a lot We might have to pull back from that and I don't really want to do that But I have the health of my department to look at as well So we're going to be looking at some other items moving forward But in this case this this was the easiest cut to make that was available. There is no other money I I hear that we don't have another place to look within the department Moving on and thank you for coming down. I continue to be very concerned about The fact that we have a lot of work to do in order to be more fire safe in certain areas and Um Yet we must make some cuts apparently um moving on to PED We currently do not do cost recovery in that department Some cities do full cost recovery in their PED departments Was full cost recovery discussed as an option instead of cutting What I believe was a uh a plans reviewer So plan checker and a civil engineer. We are looking at again. We're looking at those revenue Issues as as part of the next step of the How we get to build back some of this as and be conscious making conscious decisions about those investments Right now. We're actually cutting some of those Those fees and lowering some of those fees to spur development So I would just I would just say once again We find ourselves in that that's that tricky situation where we're trying to make do with what we have And be honest about what we're going to be able to support moving forward and then have the conversation about You know one of the things somebody brought up to me was well I know how hard it is to add a position back And yeah, it needs to be that difficult I think we're at a point where we have this kind of structural deficit That we really really have to be asking that extra question about What does it mean to add a single position back Into the fold? I'm going to follow up. I appreciate that But one of the things that developers and builders and folks who tell us all the time is that time matters to them speed of processing matters to them predictability matters to them and And I think sometimes Paying a little extra for the cost of having the review May be worth it for them Instead of having a delay or to wait time can be money So I appreciate that and I hope that we talk closely with the folks who are Using these services about whether they'd rather have delays Or whether they'd rather pay a little more for the service and again I think that that's staff is is would be way open to that conversation And and we would be looking for that type of partner Obviously people would like to have both fast and cheap, but you know fast safe and cheap in engineering you pick pick two And the other concern I have with is with transportation and public works. This is all Personnel none of this is making up the maintenance deficit At what point do we have the conversation with our community? I mean we have a fast turnaround time for a pothole repair, but that's a very temporary Solution at what point do we have a conversation with our community about what roads are not going to be maintained? Um, we're not we're not going to be able to maintain our roads We're open to all strategies And I think that's part of where we're looking for in the goal setting is a direction that if if if We need to have a realistic conversation about what we're going to do and how we're going to finance that going forward at some point Following the path we're following now we will have gravel roads Or functionally we will have gravel roads And I don't think our community understands that that's even doing what we're talking about now I don't think our community understands that And at some point we have to have a conversation about that And I apologize that it's a difficult conversation, but We got to talk about it because we can't go this way Without having the discussion about where that's appropriate where it's inappropriate Uh, again, I want to thank you. These are tough choices We need to engage our entire community and I'm glad that we're having the conversation Openly about how tough these choices are. I don't I don't want to make any of these choices But I don't see a way to eliminate Nearly seven million dollars in our budget otherwise. So thank you for bringing this forward Vice mayor rogers Thank you First of all, thank you. Mr. McBride. Uh, I just want to say that While I know none of these cuts are easy They're only going to get harder and I think we all understand that this is the low hanging fruit And if I understand this correctly, we will not have any vacant positions Left to be filled other than folks who might leave between now and when we do the budget. Is that correct? That's that's a pretty true comment So I want to ask you a little bit about about purrs and uh, actually I also I can't get into this conversation without at least acknowledging that It would be really easy for you and for the city manager to hide behind the fact that we had a fire As an excuse for how we got to where we're at and I appreciate that the conversation has been separated into two different categories We talk a lot about our reserves and what the fire has done to the reserves But this is about structure of the organization And we would be having this conversation regardless of if we had a fire or not And the difference is that the fire wiped out our runway to actually make changes And I appreciate that the two of you have been very open with the public about that And haven't used the fire as a crutch to talk about how we got where we're at Uh, I just want to make sure that I put that out there When it comes to purrs, my understanding is that uh, you've got three basic components to purrs employee contributions employer contributions And then the return on the investment The unfunded liability is when the investment comes in under the assumption rate from purrs just being really general Purrs has been lowering their assumption rate to try to be more accurate so that that way we have more truth in budgeting And they've lowered it. I think I mean you'd know better than I would. I think it's down to six percent. Is that right? So uh, vice mayor, they actually have made a decision to bring it from seven to half percent down to seven percent Okay And they is there any in I know every time they do that it pushes more pressure on cities on counties To make up that difference in the funding gap So correct. So what happens is is is they reduce the assumed rate of return You get less power of your money over time to address that liability in the future when when employees retire That means you have to put in more money currently So every time they lower that for example when they took that down By an eighth the way they did is they took it down an eighth percent in the first year eight the percent in the second year quarter percent in the final year one eighth of a percent Reduction increases our total unfunded liability by 20 million dollars. So those even though they're small percentages They have really big impacts and we don't see purrs Changing that trajectory in their discount rate anytime soon So given the the slide on Slide three The long-range financial forecast is this assuming that they do not continue to lower the discount rate So this has that built into it So we have the forecast from purrs built into this model The problem with the way that we model this is that we know what purrs is doing for the next five years We can build that into the forecast the five years after that. We don't know what happens So we normalize it at a lower rate. So again If that, you know 15 percent annual increase continues Our picture is probably worse after year five Is that why in the graph it starts to level off rather than to continue with the yeah, it's yeah, there's I mean, we don't purrs is a is a question mark, but There it's not going to get better And you know, I think one of the things that's made it You know easy to digest in when we have conversations is that when when purrs came to existence The model was to have Two people working for every person in retirement and where we sit now is exactly the opposite There are two people in retirement for every person working And pressures on cities are exactly the pressures. We're facing is you're now collapsing organizations, which actually Doesn't help purrs in the long run. There's a real issue here That politically needs to be taken taken a look at the state is once again Helping itself out of its issue But somewhere along the line Municipalities have to be helped. We're not the only ones in this Situation at the testimony I was in right before the fires It was it was exactly this conversation that communities were having I can't even have you know, they were talking about their inability to hire public safety Folks because they could not afford to hire public safety folks At all and so these are the types of conversations that are impacting the communities around the state and frankly purrs position right now is we're strictly a custodian and and While that may sound good It it it actually is fraught with issues for municipalities Something has to happen In the on the state side to start to address municipalities and our struggles To maintain service levels for our communities as we as we face these challenges So we're we're talking a lot about the the seven million in cuts that we need to make to get within Where our budget needs to be for this year. We've also talked a little bit about A council policy to build our reserves back to 15 percent In the event that there was some form of a natural disaster That's 25 million. Where do our reserves currently sit? So we're working on our new forecast for the february 21st goal setting meeting But just doing rough math when we started the year we had six and a half million dollars as of july 1st We've probably gone through at least two million dollars since then if you think of the increased outweighs for the e and y contract and some other Things that the council has passed over the past fiscal year. So we are We're depleting now What I haven't added in there is that we are actually starting to get money from fema and cow oes So so far year to date we started getting money in uh, november december time frame So I think so far we've gotten about three and a half million dollars in general fund reimbursement We've also gotten some backfill from the state for property taxes. So we've got two million dollars in there So I haven't factored all of that together yet, but we probably on net have probably grown our reserves a little bit So some of those kind of things are going to help a bit, but again We're talking about going from somewhere around five million dollars to getting back to 25 million dollars That's not going to totally do it for us and and and again um One of the things to remember is When we one of the things I shared with the council at the very beginning of the recovery process is If you're getting 70 cents back on each dollar Expensed in your recovery that's considered a major victory You don't get a one for one return on the dollars you invested To help your community recover. So even when we're talking about things that we're going to get back We're going to get back a share of that not the full share of that investment Because there's local match requirements, but there's also As I as I mentioned before things that the the federal government will discount because You know, the you know, there are things like tracking where vehicles went during the fire If we can't demonstrate that those vehicles were actually in service of the fire They are technically not eligible for reimbursement And that's that's an issue a lot of communities face How do you track a particular vehicle and demonstrate that that vehicle was deployed to only do there were the The the disaster work that it was intended to do to get the federal requirement Yeah, I understood so setting that conversation about reserves and dollars coming back in our side Which I know we'll talk about more when we have the actual budget full budget conversation Have we had conversations with our bargaining units about these potential Eliminations of positions and the impact that that will have on existing staff Or on staffing levels Well What I can tell you vice mayor is that the plan that you've just seen has been shown to the bargaining units So they've seen everything that you've seen Whether I have not had conversations with them on service level impacts So I get the impression from your answer that it was they were shown but didn't Didn't have any type of sign-off or much input into the process It was it was informational. It was informational. But again, we we our mine council that's been since october We went through this process since october We've had Repeated conversations that i directors have had repeated conversations with their teams about these implementation issues Go ahead. If I may may I follow up on that? I just want to confirm whether that is also true with the wellness program We have a wellness program that will be ongoing for Sworn officers or police and fire Um But we have had a wellness program and I have to say I've been Pleased to take part in that wellness program just as a disclaimer there The we've had a wellness program for miscellaneous employees. My understanding is that that's 150 thousand dollar cut Are the are the union representatives of the miscellaneous employees informed about that and And have they been engaged in that conversation? Um, I I can get more detail on that but again, this has been a conversation ongoing since october We've had their conversation repeatedly Um, we've informed we had a sit-down meeting with the wellness provider. It's specifically about this Issue as well. So we've had plenty of conversations Whether it's whether everyone is completely satisfied with that conversation. I can't comment on right now I'm sure I will have any I have my mailbox will be full tomorrow All I can say is I was the one of the original champions of trying to bring this program in But in in in the painful conversations that we've had We we need to actually ask some of these questions and one of the questions was Is there a direct correlation between the program and any other cost benefit that we have and we cannot That's one of the ones where it certainly seems as if there should be a cost benefit that that makes that one a wash But I appreciate your You're getting any further information you have to us. Thank you So mr. McBride you mentioned that uh fire service levels Could be or would be sufficient With this this cut in the interim What does in the interim actually mean does that mean? Once we have another station that's up and running we'll have to increase our service Yes, this yes outlook so from a financial perspective, this is just as I mentioned a half step to get us to june 30th I I I know that there's there's going to be Demand for at least two more fire stations additional firefighters that we're going to have a trust in the future And that means we're going to have to figure out Maybe where Or we're going to have to make policy decisions as to where service levels are cut elsewhere to meet that need or if that's the desired And you know, I'll just say that the nine additional or extra firefighters I don't like using the term extra because we use them every day But those nine firefighters that's another station. So when we do have the ability to build a station We've got the nine people to plug in We're going to have to you know I'm going to fight for more people because I need more people for my department just for the health and As busy as you are We got to look at ways to put maybe squads in service to help with the call volume or are running an additional type one Engine to help with call volume. We used to do that in the past when we had extra people We won't have that capacity now that we're we're dropping these six. So for me, it's a short-term Fixed to a long-term problem. We're going to have to be looking for more firefighter positions down the road And in addition, you know, the department is in a study on service level provision and that's coming back to the council In in the near future And I understand you mentioned that the county is looking at a potential sales tax around fire services I just as a comment I'm always very concerned about sales tax. It's a really volatile Funding source and when it comes to something like fire service, I don't really want us to get in the business of yo-yo budgeting Where in some years it goes up in other years. We have to make really painful cuts of Finding officers or firefighters that are no longer necessary So I think it'd be important for us to put out that concern early to the county that they should potentially engage The the city council on that conversation So so I understand based on today's feedback that there will be an opportunity to engage in that conversation Which I know that the chief and I are very excited about that the engagement opportunity now exists instead of just advancing to To putting something on the ballot, right? I've just got a couple more here I do want to echo the comments about planning and economic development I look at it as more of an investment than a cost to the city I would be interested when we bring forward the budget for you to bring Call the more difficult cuts that we would need to make in order to maintain Or increase some of that service level to move things through the system faster as an investment You mentioned with the office of community engagement that they typically have a hundred and ninety thousand dollars for the choice grants But they usually only spend a hundred and ten thousand on the choice grants The cut that's proposed here is fifty thousand That doesn't even bring us down to the level of what they normally use. Why wasn't that looked at a little bit deeper? So I think again, this is a first step and this is the exact guidance You know, we do have some grant making opportunities that we do to support community programs When we go through the budget process, those are the types of things that could be You know, we're in a particular fiscal situation We're no longer going to do certain types of sponsoring programs we've done in the past and maybe reallocate that resource To something like planning and economic development. I think staff would be open to that conversation right now Again, knowing that we're in sort of a flux state They took a hit that they looked at where there could take that particular reduction and identified that reduction You know, not not matching one for one but trying to get to that space of that $50,000 hit But I think if you want to if we want to explore those grant making opportunities, the city does it's not a huge amount of money We could look to see and reinvest those in other ways We just didn't want to take those programs out in this particular cycle We'd be looking to do that in the more full budget cycle Understood and then my last question Seems since I've been on council we've been getting by with a parks director position that is shared with another director position It seems to jump every couple of months to a different director. It's your turn to run parks that Those call them savings of having not had that position filled seem to be ongoing until we actually Fill the position Why is that not included in this budget reduction? So it's it's not again I we can we'll we can illustrate that a little bit more for you But I don't I don't think it's a one for one and we're trying to do some realignment conversation as as the As mr. McBride Um Alluded to and I'm hoping to bring that forward pretty soon So that we can sort of have a conversation about that particular position and what the what we might consider In a management structure to meet the our obligation around wrecks and parks that may not be that position But often we're promoting people to fill that position temporarily We have to increase it, but we're accruing some savings those savings could be applied through a Council policy at the end of the year to again, maybe pay down pension obligations Etc and so forth, but they're not really as long as the position's there They're not really ongoing savings because eventually the ideas you're going to fill the position and those obligations will kick in And I completely understand that and I would never want to sound like i'm not advocating for having a wreck in parks director but Given that it's been over a year since we've had one If the intention of the city manager is to not have one for another year Perhaps that's one of these positions that we're cutting that we could instead fill until we make those structural changes to have a director And I understand Mr. Alley's Thank you. Before I get into some of my questions. I just want to clarify the comments related to the choice Grants that these are not just for funding community Programs they are towards our effort in violence prevention So it's really an extension of the work that we're trying to do there are others I think that we that would do fun programs and I think that's what you were talking about But but I think I mean I've been on councils since 2008 and I think we've made these john and I have Both been on for that long and have made decisions like this Over time obviously going through the recession and trying to put this Into perspective getting a complete picture Today we have a snapshot of where where we are and looking at where we're going But we've also been someplace too And we've gone through some of these significant cuts before and I would argue that we are no longer at the point of low hanging fruit We're actually climbing a ladder and getting a fruit from up high in the tree And it's difficult and in a certain sense. I feel like it's kind of like the cart before the horse We're making some big decisions here and then later We're here from the community on some of the important things to them as it relates to our future budget as well So I guess to start in trying to get the complete pictures Do we have a sense for where we are now as far staffing levels? Going back a number of years. I mean, I know we can go back to the last fiscal year But historically going back during the recession and and I know we we made significant cuts We've made significant service cuts as well Parks is always a good example of where we had to make some significance in the past and the impacts there So i'm trying to put things in perspective Because I think this this is for me is going to be one of most difficult times in making these decisions as far as continued cuts So i'm trying to get a better perspective on where we've been and where we are today and how we're planned to move forward So do we have a sense for where we are not for exact numbers, but I know we reduced over time With various departments. So do you have a sense for that right now? I don't off the top of of my head we can get something like that for you You're talking about how many fts that we've cut since the recession Right because it goes to the full picture because we've cut a lot and I know Some could argue that it was fat. Maybe it was maybe it wasn't but it was There were positions that were cut there were services that were cut But there's also been some restructuring that's that's gone on as well to augment some of that And and it sounds like we're talking about doing more of that as well and going to uh, councilmember Fleming's I'm coming earlier A vacant position is not a vacant position a vacant position. They're all they're different right And and I don't want to make an assumption that with the nearly 50 fts that we have today That's that's just extra stuff sitting around. It's not they're there for vital reasons those positions are And yes, there's value to those. I know that in the the proposed cuts for example with housing And community services were probably going to kill nrp now with the elimination of that Community outreach specialist. So there's pieces that are missing. So Can you go through the process again? I know October this started but in today's world october was a long time ago and coming June 10th is a long way away and all that's going to happen between now and then too But what was the process throughout the city departments in coming to these numbers? And are these the original numbers that were proposed positions or has been changes and in how you came to these final numbers? Yeah, so as you can see I can find it So you can see that there's The cuts in the in the different departments vary all over the place And and that was a conscious decision originally what we did Around august or septembers is we went out to the departments and we asked them to give us 10 cuts Just give us cuts across the board and we knew going into that It's just not realistic to make those cuts in every department There's no way that we're going to be able to cut 10 out of safety budgets. That's just not going to happen So we took those back We vetted them out with with the city manager's office We vetted them out with all the departments and we asked them to provide us with with what they could realistically do So, you know like the office of community engagement It was their proposition that the easiest cut that they could make was $50,000 in choice grants We went back with police and fire and we reduced their targets substantially You can see fire we cut by two and a half percent police would cut by 1.7 While we went after departments like the city manager Is a smaller department, but we could get 12 by their reductions and reorganizations As far as vacancies It's it's not a It's not always the most strategic method to just call vacancies because in my department I gave up an accountant that I could probably use especially with with With the FEMA work that we're going to have ongoing But we just we went through and selected those cuts that were the least painful and Made the least external service level reductions that we could do and and that's how we came at them And that's one of the reasons that we went back with the long-range finance subcommittee In november to talk to them We showed them the entire list of what was proposed by the departments and what we had not taken and I think we got We got uh buying that they were comfortable with the choices that we made Was there an evaluation process within the departments? Once the proposed cuts were made In the reason I asked that is that sometimes you can cut a position here, but it impacts in the department there So was was that discussion had as far as how all of these Interacted and impacted each other So this this entire plan that we're putting out before you tonight was developed in conjunction with every department in the city at The table so all the directors were at the table to to decide what we could and couldn't cut Okay, thank you. That's all I have Thank you. The only question I had and mr. Oliver has mentioned it on slide 12 housing and community services Does that position mean the end of neighborhood revitalization program Yeah, dave going housing and community services What we imagine as a department is we would rely on the office of community engagement to help the nrp program On a on a very specific basics and neighborhood meeting So it doesn't necessarily end the program But to councilmember oliveris's point going back in time after the recession We made reductions to nrp from a full-time Inner department effort to a limited part-time effort In inspections and others So those inspections will continue and if we have a neighborhood that we want to Set up a neighborhood meeting for do some promotions or Whatever the we used to do we would rely on the office of community engagement So there would be fewer of those engagements In suddenly for the city manager when you do come to council with that reorganization plan Would you be able to address because I know past council is a very valued? I think the community is really value or nrp program how that would work. So so again, we we It'll happen through reorganization and the budget process. I want I want to make it clear when we get into the budget process We're going to talk specifically about each department and what you what council desires and what the community desires to see about That and then we can get into a conversation about what we need to build that capacity So we're limping along in some areas and I think nrp is a classic Conversation and we've probably dodged that conversation a little bit. What's our expectation out of nrp? How does that interrelate with community engagement? We're going to be all in to have some of those conversations as we go through this process But we needed a starting point to engage in that conversation So yes, it's someone's going to be realignment. Some of it's going to be in the budget process What do you what do we what are we trying to get out of this particular program? And what's what's a level of service that we can have or do we need to stop providing that service because it's never It's actually not achieving what we had it had entailed in the first place But each department will be prepared to go through that conversation with the council. Okay. Thank you Do you have a follow-up question, mr. Tibbets? Thank you, mr. Mayor. I should have gotten my questions out earlier Um, I do have a couple of questions. One relates to a conversation. We had mr. McBride On the staff level about looking into the parks and recreation budget at the status of the lake ralphine dam its purpose And I guess legitimacy for being on the parks books versus the enterprise fund and the bpu We ever ever follow up on that I did actually follow up on that and i'm hoping someone here can answer that better than I can but um, yeah I was told that it absolutely is a parks function. So that it cannot be moved to the enterprise as it's been related to me It's not a storm water or water situation. It's actually a while. It's a dam It's actually a recreational facility and it's not as it's currently Is it's currently constructed is not an easy switch right over to enterprise to take the enterprise Concern but we followed up that we continue to look at it, but it is not purely a A water resource conversation now what I will say is we're starting to with some court cases out there look Very closely at storm water and what we might be able to do about a storm water enterprise fund Long term I raise that because there has been some court decisions. I'm in some conversations with staff But unfortunately if we start a new enterprise fund, there's going to be rate players associated with an enterprise fund But that's one of the conversations that we're we're exploring when we talk about revenues how we might Move something out of a general fund department to its explicit purses in in for example storm water And right now storm water is one of not just here in our community, but across the state is one of those Orphan programs that's not fully owned, but there's been some court case That are making us Assess what the viability of moving it into an enterprise function would be okay Well, thank you both for looking into that and a follow-up question is Did anybody start conversations about looking at the depreciating facilities that we own and and looking at the long-term plan potentially turning these Cost liabilities for maintenance into something that we can engage A real estate entity to sell off for profit to offset budgetary losses So so i'm not sure it's a wash and again usually when you sell a property You're talking about a one-time investment And that's one of the questions that if we do get into sales of property We're going to want to consult with council again. How exactly are we investing the proceed? But there's an item that you're going to hear right after this Which is actually part and parcel about how we're using especially in the downtown core our resources and Addressing trying to the public private partnership is the Is the vehicle we'd like to explore to address exactly that meet council's goals about housing But also look at our facilities as they relate to downtown and how we can get in a better more sustainable operating model But i'll be honest.  It may actually be more difficult for council to Take themselves out because it's usually laid out in the contract terms This is how much you're going to invest in maintaining this facility But we need to explore that option and that's the next item on the agenda council member. Okay Thank you, mayor One more brief question. Thank you. Yeah Following up on my colleague council member olivares's question I I recall pretty clearly that recreation and parks received serious cuts in oh eight and had not Moved forward with uh being reef those positions being refilled in fact I think it was only a year maybe two ago that we got six park maintenance workers back And it looks as if we're cutting six or seven or eight now Did anyone do any kind of analysis as to What the long-term cost of losing those positions is I can think Again by not having a maintenance worker It usually costs more to fix something after it's fallen apart than to maintain it over time Um They also provide eyes on parks So the parks maintenance workers tend to be much cheaper than for example a police officer who might have to go out When we looked at cutting Uh, the parks workers. I appreciate that while we had a lot of department heads around the table that one wasn't Going to be there What could Did anybody look at what the long-term cost of the loss of those? I can't I can't say specifically we were looking at the long-term cost, but we were Conscious of the fact that we were wanting to make sure we weren't making some of the decisions that had happened in the past Because we don't think that those decisions were sound and we are evaluating How we service our parks and you heard the commitment here earlier We want to make sure that council understands where exactly the threshold is on the measure in conversation That's why we're not proposing deeper reductions in the recreation and parks department because we have to understand And that's one of the other things that you all are going to have to make a recommendation shortly Similar to the other recommendations that you make about who might sit on the oversight board for measure m That's that invitation is coming going out to all of the cities as we understand it pretty shortly But there is a concern there But that also plays into how we address our facilities. We're trying to alleviate what's been a common occurrence which is Folks say this is part of the facility I deal with and this is the part of facility somebody else deals with We're a city. We're all generally funded in in these areas We should be approaching problems Holistically not dividing them between areas of concern because there were some Unfortunate conversations that even happened on this campus about Whether this was somebody's responsibility or somebody else's and we've been making movement to try take that holistic approach to all of our facilities And to your point council member making sure we have eyes and and and and we're actually looking at a program right now To create ambassadors in those parks Even with by realigning responsibilities within those park systems Right. I appreciate that That was a department that I would say was Was pretty anorexic when we started this process. Thank you. All right. Want to move to public comment here We'll start with Dwayne DeWitt followed by george uberte Hello, sir. My name is dwayne. DeWitt. I'm from roseland I wanted to thank all of you for the hard hard work you've put in on this I think it's very important that you follow what mr. Mclinis said that you need to control costs now And you also need to manage our workload with existing staff I'd like to give you a recommendation If you'd listen to it that you could actually save money within your existing structure You have a community engagement department, which I feel has actually become Less cost effective and actually more burdensome I was one of the first members of the public to try to Be a active person with the community involvement task force Which has since become the community advisory board I believe you should just do away with it I believe you should also do away with the community engagement department You have between seven to ten members of various Departments that operate under what's called marketing and outreach I believe marketing and outreach in each of those departments Could fulfill your open government task force ideas They could work together within your existing structure. No one would have to be fired The community engagement people could be transferred laterally into other situations And the violence prevention partnership That can be a way that you do the community engagement The funding is there through the measure O and you won't have to tap in to some of the funds that are so I'd say stretched right now. It was admitted that your reserves are down to five million dollars basically So if you get rid of community engagement department, that's a million dollars right there That can help We need to do some of these new more innovative approaches to things because the same old stuff isn't solving the problems that you have I'd like to see you Help to have the parks be even better by keeping parks maintenance staff and hiring more Chop at the top. We don't need so many management people. We need more people taking care of our parks and our roads The public restrooms that are out there the different things that the community interacts with You waited on fulfilling a promise To annex roseland for 20 years saying you had to wait and make sure you got the money to have the police to do the different stuff Well, nothing's better out there right now Except the police are trying to answer calls The roads are going To gravel is one of the council members mentioned So you're in a really difficult time I'm hoping that you'll take this as a member of the community who's tried to have community engagement And understand it's a serious proposal You don't need that department It's just a waste of time and money And you can put it under violence prevention partnership where it's funded with measure o we'd all be better off Thank you for your time. Thank you join george uber tea followed by peter rumble Oh, this is this is delicious um So A couple of phrases that jumped out to me making sure there's revenue And the importance of predictability. I feel like there is a job That you wouldn't you wouldn't have to release any staff you would actually maybe be putting a staff on Hiring one job. I and I think I heard you guys talking about the right position You know, it's not all jobs are not equivalent Right, there's certain ones that are more valuable than other ones certain key positions Starts with an a rimes with an auditor right Because all of these cuts. I mean, I was delightful powers either accumulating or diminishing. It's a basic law of power that's independent of any Structure of power itself So to hear you guys diminishing so much to watch you deflate was lovely for me It was like a check and a balance almost But those numbers I would like to have a little bit more faith in that's what auditors are for We're talking about the right position. We're talking about not letting anybody go Right add somebody add somebody who's going to work for a living And who's going to ensure that the rest of you work for a living Right, that's what auditors are for. That's what we need one of them for now Another thing now. Here's another way that you can save money without letting anybody go Right. It's called other pay right now I have I mean, I think I I'd say I have no idea what other pay is But I think I have every idea what other pay is which is pay for no reason If you're an administrator in Sonoma county in 2018, I downloaded the salary schedule myself while I was looking for a job And uh, it if you are an administrator in Sonoma county in 2018 For no reason you get a one time lump sum payment Of 16 000 dollars 16 000 and change six three thirty nice something like that 16,000 one time lump sum payment now it strikes me that we could do away with I think there would 160 something like that Uh, but you know personnel costs 76 One time lump sum payment of 16 000 dollars for For what What did you do to earn that money our money you took it from us? Why do you get to have it? I've never had a job that just hands me 16th for no reason Right, that's got to go away. That's got to stop personnel costs are going up 76 percent. We're spending on you I for what I'm seeing you today. I saw you deflate. It was beautiful. It was gorgeous Uh, right. There's another area. No one has to get fired. You just have to not take another 16 000 dollars from us for no reason Right, um things of that nature right keep pushing in that direction. It's the right way Thank you very much Peter rumble followed by shivan brady Good evening council members. Um, I remember sitting on the planning commission and complaining one night How difficult it was and somebody related to me. Well, it's a hard job, but at least you don't get paid And so, uh, I really do not envy your position. I know that it's difficult Both for you as well as for staff to come up with their best recommendations I would echo councilwoman Fleming's point about certain positions really being an investment and keyed into Your priorities going forward and i'm talking specifically about the positions in planning and economic development with a priority for Generating economic activity to fill the coffers both of the city as well as provide paying jobs and housing opportunities and supporting industry new industry In our city. We really need positions in that department and I say that knowing that It creates a Difficult and even a harder decision to make Throughout the and other places in the organization, but we are talking about critical positions to support our community Our business community or economic activity and positions that are revenue generating that offset their costs and so I really want to encourage you to Consider those things and consider how those positions Benefit and support your priorities In this year as well as going forward So thank you very much Thank you, peter shaman brady followed by nick caston Good evening. Our organization applied for a retail cannabis business license on april 20th 2018 on june 26. We've received a letter of complete list review from the city of santa rosa The city of santa rosa's retail use application process on august 23rd The department of planning and economic development recommended that the cannabis subcommittee by motion select us to move forward in the c up Entitlement process By unanimous motion from the subcommittee the project was recommended and on september 25th. We submitted our materials for design review We are compensating the property owner at $15,000 per month bringing us to around $200,000 in property fees by april The technical studies and associated labor costs for the application are growing to be more than $100,000 My intention in summarizing these costs is not to victimize ourselves But rather communicate what resources we have committed to this process And also express concern about our ability to maintain funding to see ourselves through the c up process Additional delays will require funding that may be difficult for us to secure At which point we may need to abandon the project in a recent press democrat article We saw that the city of santa rosa has tripled its quarterly tax revenues this past year cannabis business tax has brought in more than $720,000 in revenue over the last two years and most of these cannabis businesses are just getting off the ground I urge you to not cut vital positions in the planning and economic development department Especially the development review coordinator building plan examiner city planner associate civil engineer and program specialists Budget and positions should be established By prioritizing the core services of the city Not through arbitrary selection criteria such as a position is simply currently vacant Vacant positions can easily be more vital than filled ones The position in the economic planning department support the process of businesses and housing permits The industry and local residents need these positions for timely processing of their applications Every month that it takes to process a permit is thousands of dollars for the permittee These positions are essential to the healthy growth of our local economy and are vital to the revenue of the city And the santa rosa's housing success Thank you for your time. Thank you Nick caston followed by tom woods Thank you, mr. Mayor and council. Thank you for your service and for going Incoming every single week for these meetings and for taking the time to listen to our concerns I also want to take a thanks staff I know that it's a difficult job from city manager all the way on down to go through this process and talk about the real Folks they're providing services in our community And I think they've done the commendable job both in communicating with us as well as moving to the point that we're at today With that said, I do want to speak Towards the core pd positions that have been mentioned by previous speakers development review coordinator Building plan examiner city planner associate civil engineer and program specialist supporting the economic development programs are vital When you approve those positions, it wasn't to dedicate them to the cannabis industry It was to anticipate the additional workload for that department for cannabis These are positions that support every aspect of our community from housing through to non cannabis and cannabis positions Raising all boats. We have a strong economic engine here While we're the 25th largest city in the state or the 10th largest by gdp as of 2016 2017 And a report just came out today that I read on economic development board talking about how we have the 18th largest Economic engine for a large city of our comparable size in the country That's something that is because of the actions that you've taken because of the leadership of the city manager And creating the planning economic development department that's led very capably right now The biggest problem with these positions is that they're also hard to fill None of them have large pools of people where you can just go out four months from now Reprioritize them in the 2019 2020 budget and then have people knocking down the doors to fill them It's likely that you might have to go out for multiple hiring attempts Starting now to hire them likely they won't be filled until the next budget year anyway It's important and vital to move on these positions today. So you can get the trained people in as soon as possible Let's also talk fees But reducing the impact fees to spur housing is a different conversation from talking about Recost recovery on services provided to us and the clients that we help facilitate in the city We should have a healthy conversation around what fees are right for those service positions And not confuse it with the conversation around impact fees which provide different benefits to the city And lastly, I know this is a tough route to go But prioritizing decisions based off of their value to the city and its goals Instead of whether or not the position is filled or not doesn't mean that you're talking layoffs You can have transfers between departments You can hire people for the fact that they're going to fit well within a team and you already know them And you can train them up So don't think of this as layoffs or no layoffs think of this as important positions that need to be filled And you may even already have the talent and the other departments where they need to be cut from to fill those positions Thank you for your consideration and please support the ped positions Thank you, nick tom woods Thank you council for giving me this opportunity to speak to you. My name is tom woods. I represent team series local 665 tonight I'm also a homeowner in the seat of santa rosa And what we're talking about here is very important to me The planning and economic development department Those those jobs 75 of their salary is covered by the fees that are collected by the You know the work that they do And that does even begin to cover the increase in revenues having those permits approved it seems to us that Councilwoman Fleming and councilman rogers were right on the right track there when we're talking about these jobs having a value Being worth more than you're already paying for them. I don't think that we should cancel these jobs and Lose the revenue that the city needs Thank you. Thank you. We'll bring it back to the council. Uh, mr Do we have any additional cards? Go ahead devra Thank you very much. Um devra to verus um In talking about infrastructure some things have come up that are rather interesting that i've Found out from friends that i know overseas Um, and what has been discovered are the radiation effects from fuka shima And the fact that cesium is a problem and it's called the wigner effect and it eats away at our infrastructure And so does hydrogen sulfide and hydrogen sulfide is certainly a product of the geysers up on our hills here And the city of madera here in california. You may be aware of them They're losing their wastewater treatment plant because of the concrete being eaten away by the tests that they've had From the hydrogen sulfide the city council is sitting in a position where they're saying they won't have a city Without a wastewater treatment plant because the concrete is already down to the rebar So as we look at what is operating on the hill here the geysers, which was initially started by PG&E again Rothschild and we look at the fracking or the injection of the wastewater treatment That's occurring from the santa rosa wastewater treatment plant We have a very volatile situation that is going to cost more money that isn't being factored in To the environmental ramifications of the hydrogen sulfide Everyone sitting here should be very worried about the hydrogen sulfide Because it's moved around in the atmosphere and it can sit in low-lying areas. It's absorbed in our bodies It's excreted through our urine Which is why the madera wastewater treatment plant has failed already And I also am sitting here Wondering why i'm here And why i'm wondering that is we're in a vacuum here The mayors go to the city of mayors The mayors are coerced by c40 cities anyone who needs to look up c40 cities should C is in cat four zero cities Find out the funders of c40 cities You're going to find out funders global funders the international bankers goldman sacks All of the microsoft's all of the control corporations Throughout the world and there's a global meeting of mayors of which our mayors are sent to we pay To have our mayors go to these meetings and take on global agendas that you don't even know Are occurring And it's really alarming As I sit here and I look at we've been hit By climb they call it climate change, but we know it's climate control We're we've had we're digging up out of a war zone here with the promise of more to come More to come. Thank you. Thank you David. Mr. Sorry. You have this item Thank you mayor before I Introduce the item and at least for for discussion and final discussion I did have a couple of things I wanted to mention It has been brought up not only by council members here, but also um some members of the public Are regarding the um the potential for False economy in in our record are our Planning and economic development department. I remain concerned about the Messing with that engine and I know that we have some really important And difficult decisions ahead of us as we as we start to really grapple with The recommendations that are here before us tonight When I was first elected in o4. I wish we had had a A management team that was willing to take on what our management team is taking on now Both in finance and the city manager Had we started this 14 years ago? Had we talked about purrs? More clearly 14 years ago. We wouldn't be as bad off as we are now admittedly Going through these economic downturns. It's going to happen and it'll happen again But right sizing this organization and making them the necessary changes to make sure that it's functioning well it is and is Has the the right number of employees Doing the right jobs in the right positions is a very difficult task to do On you know after the fact and that's what we're trying to do right now And I honor the effort of not only of this council being willing to take on this difficult task But the management and his team mr. McGlynn and his team The entire team in trying to come up with As painless as possible, but very painful changes to our organization So i'm very i'm i'm pleased to hear that there is a concern about revenue issues. Thank you for that mr. McGlynn Um, I know the service levels are going to be reduced None of us none of us wanted to be doing that but I I don't see any any other way out Um other than reducing services because It is people that we're talking about and the people provide Extraordinary service here in the city of santa rosa. This is hardly The same old stuff. This is um unique In many ways. Um, I'm not sure that this city has ever gone through The this kind of reorganization and it's very painful But I am concerned about both sides of the balance sheet We really need to make sure that as we make these cuts that we are not reducing our ability to For income or for revenues actually is what I mean to say So, um, I remain concerned about cuts to our public safety departments for obvious reasons That's why they call it public safety And I do I am concerned about the cuts to the planning and economic development department Because it does represent in my opinion the engine and we've heard tonight Some good reasons to be very very careful and surgical When we're talking about these cuts recreational parks has been a has been victimized in the past and The fact that we have to deal with what's referred to as a maintenance of effort. I think that's what it's what it is called with measure in m Is going to be in us. It's it's going to be a an interesting conversation because Of the nature of recreation and parks it is it is often um A point of argument as to what what and I say this with our interim director sitting sitting right here in front of me People question whether or not it is a core service of the city To provide recreation and parks I'm I love parks. I'm a park guy Um If I had to choose between a maintenance Person for out for our turf and a police officer I think you can tell about my comments where I would go I don't want to have to make those kinds of decisions, but I fear that we will be making those kinds of decisions Regarding Has a effect almost every department in this city So with that I'm going to introduce a resolution of the council of the city of santa rosa amending the city classification and salary plan by eliminating certain Positions and authorizing the city manager to implement these changes to the fiscal year 2018 2019 budget and way further reading Have a motion on the floor is there a second second Motion to second What do we have further comment we'll start at that and work our way around Thank you, mayor So it was discussed By a few council members to include the planning department and to keep that engine humming is this resolution including those positions It does for the time being and I'm what I'm what I'm looking to do is to be able to move forward Because I know that we will be having further discussions where we will be going into more depth about especially with our Goal setting and budget process Where we will be able to make adjustments To these recommendations, but I think we especially our finance department needs to be able to start someplace And so if we give them this opportunity to start then they can because the next recommendations on our budget will be employees that are sitting in seats in the city and that is going to be A real and as I said before This is not the same old stuff that we've done in the past We're going to be talking about bodies very important people that have worked for the city And and given their heart and soul to it and those conversations are going to be very difficult So this is just this is a it is indeed an interim step It's the it's the beginning step in in trying to move forward with our budget And part of that will be our goal setting and really we'll start to have that more in-depth conversation So I see this as a way to move forward But I don't see this as the end of the conversation regarding these various departments No, I I agree completely I'm just glad to hear that we are going to include the planning positions for the the reasons that you mentioned It is an engine that is humming is as council member Fleming Said it is also a source of investment and income for the city And I really want to lay out a clear example both for the council and for the public When we were looking at the tax rolls for measure and the affordable housing bond It was absolutely stunning how much revenue comes in on new construction in this community And that is something that every resident needs to be aware of because I think we're going to be faced with a handful of choices down the road Continue to do additional sales tax measures, which as vice mayor rogers pointed out are incredibly volatile in our yo-yo budgeting Or we are going to have to continue to make significant cuts, which we're beginning to do today Or we can really look at development as a financial resource tool And just as we had the urban threes community come in and say this is what high density Within the ugb development does this is the profit it generates I think every project that gets presented to the planning commission Or on appeal to the council needs to be presented with that type of report Is this something that is going to be a net negative for the city or a net positive for the city So I just want to put that out there and also talking about what it means to cut the planning department positions I am also in agreement with councilmember olivaris that it does feel as though We are a little bit ahead of the horse here But I am willing to continue because to me the writing is on the wall 30 plus years of Of hiring and and different financial decisions puts us in a bad position that we're going to be dealing with for the next Five to ten years With that said I will look forward to the subsequent conversations that we're going to have And I'll be looking at some other departments as well I agree with councilmember combs that there's a ripe opportunity to be educating our public On disaster relief safe zones preparedness Something that is going to continue to happen in this community well into the future And I don't want to let that window of opportunity pass us by But uh, those are just a few thoughts that I have um, and thank you councilmember soyer for including planning councilmember flumming Yes, once again, thank you for all your hard work And I don't want to throw a monkey wrench in your thing But I do think that the cost of some of these cuts is more than the savings associated there in And that we have to really be careful not to You know capital flows to certainty. We see that with the stock market. We see that all over the world I think that we need to give our investors our business community our mom and pop shops everybody some certainty when it comes to planning and economic development and I just can't in good conscience Feel that one of these positions is is not is not the same as the next one It's going to cost us more money and it's going to cost us more development dollars And it's already very difficult to get development up here in the north bay Was there a question in there or just was that just comment? That is my my opinions Okay, councilmember combs. I'd like to make a substitute motion. I think I think that's the correct phrase And Essentially, I would like to make the same motion the resolution of the council the city of senator is amending the city classifications and salary plan By eliminating certain positions, but I would like to amend the positions that we are eliminating Um, I think for six months Till we get to the next budget We need to continue to support those persons who we should have in our Planning and economic development department. Uh, I think we need a planner. I think we need a plan's examiner I think we need an engineer Um, so I would suggest that Uh, particularly since we're going into um The longer range planning that we're going into I would like to make the motion that we retain Three of the five planning and economic development positions And I would like because quality of life also is what attracts people to our area and is part of our economic engine To maintain four of the eight parks maintenance positions Um, if I've done the math, we're still cutting Uh over 6k Uh, so I'm I'm asking for a substitute motion. I'm looking for a second that we move forward, but retaining three of five Ped and four in r&p I'll offer a second So, um, madam setting attorney my understanding is we take that motion Yes, you take that motion vote on that motion first Okay, so question. I don't know if it'd be for staff or for Councilmember combs my understanding of those seven positions you mentioned are vacant So you're proposing we hire someone or try to hire someone For six months and then we'll make another decision. We currently are I would say using in somewhat excess um individuals who are contract employees In that department and I think that I would rather have The employees hired that we need to do the work in that department And that we look at whether or not we would continue in the future In six months we look at whether or not we continue to use contract out employees as opposed to employees who understand our long-term needs Our long-range plans Work with our station area planning work with our With our community builders Rather than shipping it out of the region So, yes, I would suggest that we continue the process of hiring those three persons and that we look at cutting contracting out I appreciate we need a right size. I have not said all five, but I do think that we have three key positions there That will serve our cannabis industry and our building industry and our future general plan work So i'm offering a substitute motion So mr. Alvarez we'd like to comment on that substitute motion Comment on the substitute motion now Mr. Sauer I would want before I would be willing to support that I would need to know what that does to our overall plan And what what decisions we might have to make So if we were to make those decisions So again, it would mean that you're not cutting that portion out of the budget There's no guarantee. We're going to be hiring those positions Because of the the current market conditions what I would say is You have some real conversations to be having about what revenue is actually coming in from cannabis your your Your current tax structure around cannabis. I would be recommending that and I've had conversations with the director It's not a staffing issue It's actually because one of the other issues is now you're you're leading into you didn't hire the city attorney That is the cannabis attorney. So I just I would say I don't know how to respond to that We brought forward these things we're doing I think the staff is doing yo persons work bringing things forward and sometimes it's not about additional staff It's actually we go through a process the process has timetables associated with scheduling issues associated with it It's more than just adding an additional staff member and those are the conversations we got into so I'm not I'm not sure to how to respond. We would obviously if council goes that way We would start to to work on those issues, but I'm not sure it's going to deliver Specifically what council thinks it's going to deliver in terms of output Because there are these courts this is why the departments met across the board Because we didn't hire the cannabis attorney And now we're going to be hiring other other employees to do other work doesn't mean it's going to be Moving any faster in the city attorney's office Again, but there are also just plain scheduling issues, which is a lot of what we face in terms of How frequently we're having meetings and how quickly we can schedule a particular meeting around an item I don't think I'm putting words in your mouth. Am I too many so Again, I'm not I'm not sure what the dividend I We will proceed. I mean it's a it's a hit We want we brought for you what we thought was the best place to begin the subsequent conversations It council's free to amend it. I'm not sure what it does I don't know. I can't answer that question councilman Any other questions, mr. Sawyer No, I I did want to say that I Don't believe that we should be getting into a discussion now about which ones to carve out and save I mean, it's that could be a long discussion if we're going to be hitting down that path So i'm not going to support this of this motion By smith rogers I just need a point of clarification on the original motion Uh council member Sawyer, were you motioning to Save those positions by asking the city manager to bring Additional cuts to other positions or were you asking him to save them by not reducing our budget as much as has been proposed? I think that that what's going to happen is a is a fairly creative discussion about Both of those things that you just mentioned because I we I We need to be able to have The kind of conversation we're having right now about what we're going to keep and what we're going to let go of During our goal setting and our and our and our budget discussions as opposed to doing it Now I mean, I fully expect there to be changes In these recommendations when we really start to drill in and make and and come to grips With the with the decisions that we're making. I'm not comfortable making those decisions tonight without having that in depth longer Conversation about what we feel is important especially with and David Gue and being able to sit down and talk to us also about what his plans are in that department to make sure that we don't Start messing with that engine So or compromising that engine and I don't believe we're going to be able to have that kind of cover conversation tonight I look forward to it and I think it's in the it's in it'll come soon But I'm willing to go forward with this knowing full well that we have an opportunity in the future to make changes to this To these to these various recommended cuts and personnel not and I and I appreciate that I think When it comes to the the motion and the substitute motion, I think we I agree on the planning and economic development positions trying to find a way to bring those in I also think that we're going to have to make difficult cuts and Whether we do it tonight whether we do it in june or whether we do it next year We all see where those budget projections are going and so when it comes to recreation and parks I would love to save those positions and maybe perhaps when we do our full budgeting We'll find a way to find the dollars to bring somebody back But I don't want to create an expectation That we're going to save positions that we ultimately are not going to be able to actually have And so I would rather us go Further than we need to go and I don't even think that's the right way to phrase it To make sure that we get to a point where we feel comfortable and then if we end up finding additional dollars Looking at where we've most been impacted and I think it'll be wrecking parks and talk about those positions as well So i'm actually I will uh not be supporting the substitute motion And weirdly Supporting the the original motion because I actually I want to make it clear that I think that those positions should be funded But that we need to find those dollars somewhere else Mr. Tibbets. Yep. Thank you, mr. Mayor I just want to follow up on what you said mr. City manager about touching base with The planning director as well as the city attorney's office because obviously it sounds like the intent of the body is Not necessarily to tell those departments which positions should get funded, but rather What is the right mix of of hires to create a greater level of output? So that's where i'm coming from In this discussion Also, i'm i'm in line with councilmember rogers that as we do that we also need to look at further cuts in the budget as well It's a it's a very tough thing to have to say but we've got to start writing this ship at some point And if that's what this council is going to do, I think it's what it's what it should do Councilmember combs. I will not be supporting your substitute motion with respect The only reason being is that I I don't think we can be signaling to departments that we're going to go out and make temp hires essentially And then only to potentially reel those back in in the future If this new sales tax revenue comes in and it's higher than normal, which I do anticipate it will be a little bit above projections As well as when we get our our budget report, then we can maybe go back. That seems like the appropriate time to me to look at Staffing up in these other deserving departments like parks and others I I will withdraw the substitute motion if it's all right with my seconder Because I can count But I I do think we are being penny wise and pound foolish And particularly councilmember following do you have any comments? With this Can you repeat that mr. Mayor? Do you have any other comments and yeah, the last thing that I'd like to say is let me get clarification really quick from The city attorney does the second have to also agree to withdraw the motion Or with council members combs made the motion her interest in withdrawing that motion Does that drop this discussion on this? She can withdraw the motion. There will be no motion then on the table if the second wanted to Initiate the substitute motion herself. She could do that councilmember flimmy yeah, I I too can count And we'll withdraw the motion I would like to say this in regard to the planning and economic development positions Which were my primary interesting keeping? The point here to me was this was that we haven't hired these people I've heard that it's difficult to hire them and that by simply not foreclosing on the option of hiring them That we might find somebody that we could hire in the interim and not slow down our engine I understand that this is a balance and that it's an ecosystem and that one thing can't function well Without the other and I want to respect that I just want to make it very clear that These things as you know take so much time and that It makes me sad and I'm concerned for our business community our redevelopment community. I'm very concerned about making This assertion that that one position that that not having a layoff is a greater value than Our our future economic viability Okay, going back to the original motion. Does anyone else have any additional comments based on the motion that mr Sawyer made seconded by vice mayor rogers mr. All there's Thank you. This is on the original motion made by councilmember Sawyer And I do have some concerns about that and I think we do need to hit the brakes on spending but Imagine what the conversation would be like today if we were coming in here today to meet to add 50 50 positions I think it would be a very long conversation trying to justify what they are and how they interact And here we're cutting nearly 50 50 positions with not a lot of other information. I think is lacking For me. I don't have a complete picture of where we are But we do need to hit the brakes We I hear that there's going to be a potential Reorganization within the city manager's office. I don't know what that looks like and I don't have that impacts us in the future I know that in a couple of weeks you're going to be having a goal setting session And we'll be setting goals for the future that could impact what kind of staffing we need what kind of service we're going to provide We have a budget process that's going to start this spring as well very soon And we'll be discussing possibly more cuts as well My my recommendation is this I think that the city manager has the authority to freeze hiring from the city right now Without taking any formal action with the resolution Continue forward with the reduction of maintenance and operations budget proposals that were brought forward I mean initially that's that starts the savings. We don't have to fill those positions. They're vacant now I get that but I think he has the authority to freeze hiring right now To get us through these discussions and again I think it's important to have the complete picture of where we have been over the past 10 years or so when we're heading because it completes it So it's still going to cause the same savings. I don't see Any reason why we would have to take that formal action today and why we can't still hit the brakes But still have these discussions to help inform us as we move forward and make some of these decisions as a whole We'll consider next year's budget as well Is that in you know the form of friendly manner or miss? Yes, I mean with that I would make An alternate motion in that but I don't know how to word it yet But but but I just to clarify it's it's it's I guess I don't know that you have to authorize him to do because I know he has the authority to put the freeze on hiring Freeze the hiring Make the necessary Reductions that he needs to make now with maintenance operations budget and also to monitor our spending from from day-to-day process We've done that before as a city where through the direction of city manager We've had to really watch our spending very closely But I think it'll go forward as the opportunity to have these broader discussions that are putting some value on these positions That we're talking about today and get the information that we need to make those final decisions Mr. Sorry Thank you. I understand we're counseling. We're all the versus it's coming from and what I'm curious about is whether Not finance would be able to move forward Given the free given the freeze that the city manager could place on hiring and firing Well, I'm not firing necessarily. I mean things happen Um, so so I'm gonna I'm gonna step in it becomes My concern is it becomes confusing. We we run up to this point Again, it's not about not having future conversations. It's not about value assessment We just keep coming to this point in this conversation And to to quote you councilmember saw you we're not Declaring where the starting point is I think that's what we're talking about We come to a starting point. We go into those conversations and goal setting We know we're going to have to build things back in and we're going to have to figure out where the appropriate revenue If we don't do that then it's back on staff They have to maintain the books as if those positions are open It creates more work for the organization to continue to do that I'm asking that's the reason we brought it for the recommendation Let's level set where we are everybody understands that and that's one of the things the council has Where has this gone in the last six months, you know, because it's been ambiguous. It really is an impactful I mean we we have to have that conversation about what we're going to build back in That's why staff has brought it forward as this clean slate Now we can get in a conversation about rebuilding otherwise We have to maintain these this this other staffing structure while we get into these conversations They were running scenarios against it. It's going to create extra work I'm not saying that any of this is perfect But I think staff's position was we clean this slate now We get in that conversation about what it's going to take for the organization to rebuild these types of investments If they want to consider it and those some of those conversations have come forward tonight You know, what would it take to legitimately get a full cost recovery? What's the impact to the business community? Would they be willing to pay for it? Right now the conversation when I sit down with somebody is well, you got the positions on the books Just hire them. You're the city manager. Just hire them. Keep hiring that position. That's part of the conversation Now we're talking about rebuilding it at the end of the day. Again, it is council's decision I'm just telling you why I believe to to council member sory's point that we've brought forward the position So we can provide some certainty and a starting point when we get into the to the next series of conversations This is where we sit These are the authorized fte's and what are we going to do strategically in this conversation to Ask some of these very important questions moving forward Did you have a clarifying comment mr. Alves? Yes, so what I'm hearing is that holding vacant position costs us money to have them on the books And I I guess I don't understand that but the thing is I don't see the clean slate yet Because there's missing information for me to make that decision and until I have that clean slate that can't move forward on And that's why I don't see the difference between going through this formal action Or having you or having us direct you to freeze positions until we have that further discussion Vice mayor rogers Thank you, mr. Mayor night I'm just trying to follow here. Was that a Friendly amendment to the original Motion either either friendly or new however you want to take it but Or I guess I guess I would ask I would ask the original motion Well, I I feel confident In my original motion because I feel that the there is an that there is a desire on this on the By the city manager to allow us that freedom to analyze and be more surgical about those cuts And they'll have having those conversations and that we don't And that it that it does actually because this because of this interim step that it does Start with a clean slate slate that we can change as this body can In any way we choose So I'm confident that we still have our flexibility that we will during the council goal setting and and the budget discussions as well I just I think we're I think we we have the same freedoms to make the changes that we need to With the original with the original resolution I understand I'm kind of moving in this direction with the freeze of firing firing freeze But I think that um We can we can still have the opportunity to make those changes that we that we feel are important for the health of the city and the organization subsequent to tonight So then I suppose and that would be a second another motion then a sub-subliminal motion So just sort of tracking this Restate your motion then Well, I guess the best that I can I guess I'm making a motion that uh, we authorized the city manager to Initiate a hiring freeze within the city of san rosa And to proceed with the uh, recommended maintenance and operation budget Reductions that were proposed to us this evening Uh I suppose that's enough But but really the whole idea is to put the brakes on to afford us the opportunity to have our discussions Within our goal setting and and potentially even into our next budget But it could be resolved as early as our goal setting and also to get clarity on the restructure within the city manager's office And was there a second from councilmember combs. Yes, I I want to clarify Um, I'm understanding the freeze There would seem to be a second piece to that. Yes, there was some non there was some non staffing Pieces to this from the different departments that were not personnel that Seem to me seem reasonable unless there are some there are council women that you do not believe are It's hard for me to give up the wellness program which served our community pretty well during the fires providing stress reduction But I For the sake of moving us forward I suspect that I wouldn't have the votes for that piece. So I would I would I'll just keep the second as it is. But again, I am sorry to lose that That support morale service for our employees And mr. Mr. Mayor may I just Ask for a little clarification. So this would be a substitute motion Is that correct? That is correct And as I understand the freeze that you were talking about would be a freeze of the positions that are listed in the original resolution not of not a Complete free hiring freeze across the city that is a freeze of the 49 point whatever it was positions that were recommended today. Thank you Back to mr. Right of clarification a freeze until what point? Well, it went back to the information network that I believe that we're lacking It's getting clarity on what's going to happen within the city manager's office with that position Is us getting beyond our goal setting to have some clarity as far as what direction we're we're heading because we could make decisions during our goal setting that's going to Probably want to cause us to reverse some of the actions we take today or reconsider some of the action We took today where the other option was to do it by resolution And making it formal that went coming back to amend that resolution I appreciate that. I just wanted to make sure that we were all clear about the the nature of the freeze, right? Thank you. I'll be supporting that. Thank you by some of these rogers uh So my I made quite a few comments before So I'll try to be a little bit briefer. There was a discussion at the long-term finance committee back in december where We did vote unanimously to bring With this package a cut for our compensation as well On the city council is comparable to what we've asked other departments to do Don't get too excited. I think it was 40 dollars per council member per month is comparable to The cut across the board that that we've been doing here. I would expect to see that in the budget as well Let's be clear. That's because we make less than $10,000 a year. That's that's correct And you can all thank uh mayor corsie for voting on that on his way out the door I also Really wanted to make sure we've talked a lot about numbers here, but there is One particular position that is filled that we are moving forward with eliminating And it's not difficult to figure out who that is within the organization And I thought that it really should be at least mentioned That it is somebody that we all really have come to respect and rely on who did incredible work for the city And I thought that we needed to at least acknowledge What an impact that that cut alone has to the organization? and Understanding that there will be more and that doesn't mean that we don't value Folks who have done a lot of good work for santa rosa. So I just wanted to make sure we mentioned that as well Mr. Tillis well said vice mayor, um, I I'd want to comment on Council member Sawyer's motion and just express my support for it for a couple of reasons one is I believe what we're doing here today is what is always looked upon us to do and that is to essentially Help direct the culture of the organization And the fact that we are going through this clean slate exercise right now. I think is not only important from Setting the tone for the next decade of city hall But it's also important for our ability to obtain more money Correct me if i'm wrong But as I understand the budget process when we issue these positions that money gets issued to the departmental budgets That leaves the general fund that goes to them and now if they don't fill it It comes back at the end of the year as turn back. Is that correct? So if we're sending that money out We are reducing our credit rating in the eyes of our creditors If they see that we are especially also not doing anything to correct our reserve situation The fact that this organization has a reserve of five million dollars What happens when that rogers fault earthquake crack happens? Which we have an 85 chance of happening supposedly any day now So even when we do have a conversation about turn back over the next few years We are going to be faced with an even tougher decision of do we dedicate this to the reserve fund and protecting the residents in the event of disaster Or are we going to fill these positions? So I think today we have to send that message. We have to send it clearly I'm happy to join in solidarity is is meaningless as it may be or meaningful as it may be But um, I'm very passionate about this one and council member sloyer. I'm with your motion So bad just a few comments. I'd like to make i'm not sure where this is Well, it's actually going to go but um, this is like deja vu all over again Although some of you are on council when we went through the cuts I was a department head when we went through the cuts and I remember the difficulty and You know asking employees and the managers. Okay. I need one of your arms Which one do you want to give me you're left to your right? Well, I want them both In some of the discussions that I hear here These are a series of unfortunate difficult decisions and no one's right. No one's wrong and we're just all trying to figure out What's the best interest Of the city and there's kind of like three different spheres I always like to look at you know that you have the community and the public What do they expect of government? What does staff want because staff has different opinions about way to provide the best service and then electeds What do they want and that ideal situation is when we can layer all three of those and we're all in complete alignment But with our diverse community, that's quite the challenge And so I think we're just starting that conversation about you know in each and I know Mr. City Manager, you're asking each of your department heads to prioritize What's the most important delivery of services for the city of san rosa? um, I am in agreement with mr. Oliver's is Uh Additional motion, uh, just from the standpoint just that last bit of information I want to see the how the reorganization of The departments what that's going to look like because that's the missing piece for me that how does this all fit in here? Because I would hate to say we've removed these now all of a sudden we get more information about the restructuring What's that going to look like so I think this buys us the time And I don't think it's going to be That long we have February 21st and 22nd and then shortly thereafter I'm you know anticipating hearing your presentation by then that'll be the information that all have So that I can make that best decision So with that is everyone Go ahead. This is pretty fast. Mr. McBride What does this do to your endeavors in the next number of weeks if we don't move forward with these empty position cuts How does how does that affect your next steps? Well, it just means that my next steps include this conversation plus what we have to do in the future So I mean this really does nothing to move us forward. So it's It's a non-event financial Thank you Last minute rogers I guess I need just a little bit more information. How does in Walk me through what the difference is between uh holding the positions vacant and Doing a straight elimination for the next three weeks. How does that? Not equal the same thing Well, you'll still have the savings from those positions. So is is council member tidbits mentioned you'll have you know turnback From those since that since they've been vacant for the entire year They're vacant now But it means that we don't remove them from the from the actual budget If you if you take this action now, we actually reduce people's budgets by that six million dollars that we have in personnel Costs those actually get taken out this position and get eliminated So it's that that's the difference. So this is this is still within our budget now The difference is where that money resides in the meantime Is that in the meantime it still resides within the departmental budgets knowing that it's not going to be spent It gets turned back at the end as opposed to at this point We eliminate it and take those dollars and leave them In our general fund. Is that correct? Correct But in effect It doesn't change the X's and O's of how much money we have and how much money we're going to spend when you look at the organization In the aggregate. Well, again, I think Yes, absolutely, but it becomes a more complicated story to tell folks that this money is being held But it's in a departmental budget and that's what I was driving at is that When you when you grab the money now today, then when we get into those conversations It'll be about you that money is returned to the technically to the reserves because we'll be pulling it out of the budget Now to pull that money back into play you're going to go through that conversation of putting it back into play Now we have a more complicated story to tell. Well, the department still has this budget The money's frozen. It's sitting over here. I'm not saying that that's the perfect reason not to do what you're contemplating I'm just saying when we get into those conversations Even conversations with the public it becomes very difficult to sort of say well, we didn't really take a cut We're holding the conversation. We're holding those budgets to this amount It totals this It is it in the fresh start conversation It will be easier to have that conversation with you because we'll say now the resource has been pooled Now we're talking about what we're adding back into the conversation and where that's coming from against those reductions And I understand that and I think my message to the public would be These are the cuts that we're making after goal setting If you don't show up and say that we've got it wrong for what we need to do for this city And again just I want to manage goal setting too There you still have to go through a long list of items that are sending in your suspense file The current goals the projects that you've assigned to staff So I don't I don't want to make it sound like we're going to solve all of those in the day and a half There's also we have to have a conversation about what you want to do visa v districts Because that's been a pressing conversation the council hasn't had yet So that's a day and a half. We're not going to be able to get into the detail What we what we can use the goal setting is a launch pad into the formal budget process But I don't want to make it sound like We're going to be agendizing budget decisions during the goal setting I think you can start to use that to launch into the formal budget process And I can appreciate that mr. Seaman because again that piece of information I'm missing is what does the reorganization look like And I just have a hard time because I'm of the belief that yeah, this is on hold or just make the assumption These are gone and the last thing that you know get my thumbs up is let me hear how you're suggesting We reorganize that's just the data piece that I think I need to make before I make this big decision again I I understand that whatever way you go you all vote we will move to it I'm just saying why staff brought before the proposal it did I appreciate that. Okay. So the motion before us Is pretty uh to paraphrase hire freeze with additional budget reductions. Is everyone clear on what they're voting for? It was the proposed reductions that for maintenance and operations budget the non personnel Recommendation that they made today So all of the 6.8 million dollars was not personnel cuts Okay, so your votes, please And with that we have five yeses and two nos with councilmember tippets in sorry or voting no That's it on this item Okay, um council is going to take a 15 minute dinner break when we do reconvene We are going to first take the public hearing and then we'll come back to item 14.3 So as soon as we're done with our break public hearing item 15.1 Okay, why don't we reconvene this? Council meeting as I mentioned prior to the recess we're going to take the next item out of order We'll start with our public hearing item 15.1. Mr. City manager item 15.1 Public hearing fiscal year 2019 20 budget priorities Honourable mayor members the council So the purpose of this public hearing is to gather public input on our budget priorities for the upcoming fiscal year budget 2020 we'll get public input on the council goals. We'll be doing gold setting on february 21st 22nd For anyone who would like to provide written public input they can submit it online at www.srcity.org slash budget comments Uh next steps goal setting as I mentioned will be in february 21st and 22nd Departments in city manager will develop budget with public priorities and the council goals in mind And that will happen beginning in february following goal setting After that we'll have a council review of draft departmental budgets We plan on doing the first budget workshop in april and then two budget workshops in may Following that the draft budget documents will be available to the public And then on june 18 2019 If all goes well, we'll bring forward the budget for budget adoption This time Asked that we open the public hearing on budget priorities Thank you, mr. Mcbride. We will do just that and I also do want to comment I don't necessarily want to apologize that so late in the evening get these budget priorities But as you heard the robust discussion the council had with the budget discussion or the second budget discussions from our initial Discussions in october very challenging time. So i appreciate you sticking with us and we're anxious to hear what your thoughts are So we'll start with greg ferron followed by mike turgeon Good evening mayor and members of the council I'm maybe the only one here who's going to propose something to the budget that actually doesn't cost anything I'm hoping it could cost you something, but um, let's Listen to me and see if you agree with me. I'm here presenting something that uh, actually uh, john lowery put together You know john he was the executive director of burbank housing and probably is responsible for more low-income housing in this city than anybody So when he said suggested to me that he had another idea I read it and i'm supportive of it. I sent it to all of you today But i want to just reiterate to the public what it's all about Currently when we develop housing We charge you charge Impact fees based on the unit So a three or four bedroom house Gets charged the same as a studio apartment Now a lot of us want smaller housing built We want a lot of infill. We want a whole lot of things that aren't big houses and we think that The impact on the community and the affordability of that unit that studio apartment Which in the case if you have an even amount of of development fees It's sometimes up to 25 of the cost of the unit when you have a studio apartment When you have a five bedroom house, it's like three percent So it's an unfair tax on people who want small houses You want to build a lot more houses. You want high density projects with smaller footprints So do we? So we're asking you to take a serious look at john's proposal Fully authorized by the legislature fully as much as the ad use and the jdu's Encouraged by everybody in the state Uh and implemented by a whole lot of other local governments and you for other things commercial Schools, they're all looking at square footage Not number of units So please in your budget design consider directing the staff to implement this as soon as possible and I believe it's going to stimulate a lot more housing And you'll get more fees This is going to be revenue neutral or it might even get you some more money if we got excited about building small unit houses Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you Mike turgeon followed by diane wheeler Thank you mayor and council and we highly appreciate your commitment this new council To follow in continuity to the previous council and so it is a real pleasure to address you tonight The difficult conversation we just had on the budget and the Stunning figures that we're all aware of and there will be very difficult decisions to come Obviously Are being had because of the fire that occurred 15 months ago and the Climate action plan that has been in existence since 2012 Is even more important than it had been when it was instituted It had for various reasons been sidelined and the Ability to hit its goals were sorely lacking as we saw from the october study session last year And so we're here tonight as friends of the climate action plan to Help and support the council in Um helping there be a subcommittee that can help the get the climate action plan back into a Priority status in all the other things we heard tonight We haven't heard this injected into the conversation. And so that's what I and others are here to speak about tonight It's not necessarily something that's going to cost money to Put into a higher priority Uh, we've had conversations with council persons who have said very eagerly that We are willing to do research willing to do public advocacy and they Have been very grateful for that. And so we have an entire Climate community that is willing and able to function as staff in some fashion So we're here to advocate and I particular would like to see that if money cannot be Directed toward staffing as it seems to be a real problem toward Implementing the climate action plan There can be creative ways to elevate it to a priority that should be In the mix as as we have been discussing tonight. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you Diane wheeler followed by George uberty Hi, uh, I'm Diane wheeler and thank you all as well for the late hours your days as long as as ours um Recent reports such as that from the intergovernmental panel on climate change And the u.s. Government's fourth assessment on climate And as well as numerous global scientific organizations have made it even more clear recently how urgent the climate crisis is And how dire the future is if we don't meet radical greenhouse gas emissions reductions goals in a few years From now I asked the council to allocate funds where possible and i'm in full awareness I sat through 14.2 and I really We pay attention and we feel you we feel the whole community. This is a hard time Nevertheless, I asked the council to allocate funds To the creation of a subcommittee on climate to focus on solutions and implementation of those solutions To drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions Through our use of resources energy transportation buildings And to move climate to a tier one priority so it can be in a better position where funds can be allowed um To reach or even beat our greenhouse gas emissions goals in the few short years that are available to us to do so The cost of not meeting the goals Is far higher and more devastating than spending this money now where we can thank you Thank you. George uberte followed by peter rumble How you doing guys? I do appreciate the late hours. I think we're all getting maybe a little cranky Um, I'm hearing a lot of the need for compromise and I'm hearing a lot for the need for goal alignment um You know, I think one of the few things that I've said in the past that I'm happy to repeat is that a city is not a business Right, but clearly a city needs to set forth the conditions under which business can thrive or what is it doing here? Uh, you know for that reason I've also been an advocate for public art Right for public art for situations in which citizens can participate in non monetary exchanges Right now. It's my belief that um, you know when you guys talk a lot about tourism tourism dollars But when people are doing the things that cause tourism to thrive, right? They're not sitting around going Oh, man. I've got all these tourism dollars. I gotta go spend Right, they're sitting around going man. I would like to have fun I would like to go have an unmediated experience of some kind I would like to do something that isn't neatly set out for me already Right, and when people gravitate towards those things right when they go and they live their lives in an authentic way That those are the things when you think about those kinds of destinations hawaii things like those those are the things people want to do Right, so you want to generate tourism dollars stop trying to sell people these packaged little cages of an experience Right, they don't want that nobody wants to we don't want to buy products We want to have experiences now you set up a set of conditions in which people can do something That's authentically real something that's vital Right, you set that up and business thrives around it. That's how tourism works all right You know, I that's for the same reason i'm an advocate of public art I think some of the art that we have in this this deliberately meaning it means nothing it advocates for nothing It signifies nothing.  It's it's oppressive. We don't like it Right, we know that we're better than that We know that we're capable of producing beauty and if you allow us you give us the tools to produce I mean you could you could get better art for free From the high school I mean people are dying to produce art they'll do it for absolutely nothing And if you let them do it other people are going to want to come and see it and that's where tourism dollars come from All right, we need to stop trying to turn a city into a business Okay, because it's not All right, it just isn't right. They're different for a reason Right, if you stop trying to turn a city into a business then you're gonna see business thrive because it's not going to be confused about what it is anymore Right and neither will we everybody can be a little happier if we clearly set our boundaries Thank you very much. Thank you. Peter rumble followed by kevin conway Well, I think that I'd convey Budget priorities as being keep on doing the fantastic work that you're doing You are making great strides on housing and downtown investments and economic development And keep that momentum going keep the foot on the gas because we're starting to see the fruits of that labor And we are here as an organization to help in every way that we can possible. So just tap us as a resource and thank you for what you're doing Thank you Kevin Conway followed by silvia gayago Good evening mayor and council members. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on budget priorities I'm concerned that the enormity of the climate crisis has put us in a sort of paralysis And I say this because the cap implementation team has not been meeting And not only have they not been meeting They haven't even set the dates for either of the two meetings that they're supposed to have this year And that's a shame for our city a city that once led the way on this issue But I admit that I understa