are connected to the device you are currently wearing. Habba, si, ahora para los que recien, se unen la reunión en interpretación en vivo en español está disponible y los miembros que deseen escuchar en español puede unirse al canal. Para unirse haga click en el icono de interpretación en la barra de herramientas de Zoom que parece un globo terráqueo. Una vez se unan al canal de español se recomienda que apague el audio primario para solo escuchar la interpretación al español. Thank you, Pablo. Interpreter Charles on the Spanish side can we please do a mic check so I can make sure the Spanish channel is up and running? Thank you, Charles, that worked fantastic. All right, Madam City Clerk, I see a quorum of the council. Can we go ahead and call the roll? Yes, thank you, Mayor. Council Member Tibbetts, Council Member Schwedhelm. There. Council Member Sawyer. Here. Council Member Fleming. Here. Council Member Alvarez. Present. Vice Mayor Rogers. Present. Mayor Rogers. Here. Let the record show that all council members are present with the exception of council member Tibbetts. All right, thank you so much, Madam Clerk. For the public, just as a quick note, we're doing something a little bit different today. We have both our study session on the budget as well as our regular council meeting. We also have closed session, which we normally start our day with. Today, council is actually going into closed session last at item number 18. That's to facilitate greater participation from the public in the other items that are before us. Before we jump in, I just wanted to give our host an opportunity to remind folks on how to access the Spanish channel and then to remind the public on how they'll be able to participate in today's meeting. Madam host. Thank you, Mayor. Just a gentle reminder for our interpreter, Charles, on the Spanish channel to commence translation if it's not already doing so. And then for those of the public who wish to listen to the meeting in Spanish, you can join the Spanish channel by clicking on the interpreter icon on your Zoom toolbar. It looks like a globe. Once you join the Spanish channel, we recommend you shut off the main audio so you clearly hear the Spanish translation. Pablo, can you please repeat that in Spanish? Para los que recién se unen a la reunión, interpretación en vivo en español está disponible y los miembros que deseen escuchar en español pueden unirse al canal. Para unirse, haga clic en el icono de interpretación en la barra de herramientas de Zoom que ahora parece un globo terráqueo. Una vez que se una al canal, se recomienda que apague el audio primario para solo escuchar la interpretación al español.  Thank you, and Madam City Clerk, could you please walk us through how to provide public comment at today's meeting? Yes, after each agenda item is presented, the mayor will ask for council comments and then open it up for public comment. The host in Zoom will be lowering all hands until public comment is open for the agenda item. Once the mayor has called for public comment, the mayor will announce for the public to raise their hand and if they wish to speak on the specific agenda item. If you are calling in to listen to the meeting audibly, you can dial star nine to raise your hand. The mayor will then call on the public who have raised their hands. Public comment will be limited to three minutes and a timer will appear on the screen for the council and the public to see. Once all live public comments have been heard, the meeting host will play voicemail public comments. If you provide a live public comment on an agenda item, but also submitted an email, e-comment or recorded voice message public comment, your email, e-comment or voice message public comment will not be duplicated, read or played during the meeting. Additionally, there are two public comment periods on today's agenda to speak on non-agenda matters at items 13 and 17. This is the time when any person may address the council on matters not listed on this agenda, but which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council. Throughout today's agenda, when the mayor calls for public comment an interpreter will be prepared to assist anyone needing interpretation services. Those using interpreter support will be afforded additional time for your public comment as required by the Brown Act. We ask those listening on the Spanish channel but wishing to make a public comment, turn off or leave the interpretation channel entirely at the time you hear your name called so you can join the main channel to make your public comment heard and translated into English. This icon may now look like a circle with an E-S in the middle and the word Spanish underneath. You can then rejoin the Spanish channel at the conclusion of your comment to continue listening to Spanish. Thanks. Thank you, Madam Clerk. So as I mentioned at the outset we have two different sections of our meeting today. The first is going to be our review of the budget. This is actually a two-day process. So we will hear presentations from staff on this until about 3.30 or four o'clock depending on a good breaking point. And then we'll recess that part of the meeting, go to the rest of our meeting and come back tomorrow at 10 a.m. to finish up our deliberations on the budget. Mr. City Manager, you wanna give us a kick us off for item 3.1? Sir, item 3.1, review of fiscal year 21-22, operations and maintenance budget and capital improvement program budget. And we can skip ahead in the slides. Go to slide two. So this is laying out the agenda that you're going to be experiencing over the next two days. I will point out that it is a fairly hefty exercise. This process is for the staff to relay a proposed budget to the council, entertain questions from the council, allow council to provide direction to staff to think of other alternatives or other proposals that we can adopt into the final budget, which will come back for its hearing commencing on 6.22, June 22nd. Next slide, please. So I would just like to take a moment and thank the staff, especially the staff that's involved in the financial management of the organization. And that ranges from departmental program managers to administrative service officers in the department to the finance team and the budget analysts that are working with our finance director. This has been a change in process in an attempt to begin a way that we are coming back to the long-term finance and audit committee and ultimately to the council and the community earlier in the process. So we've started to institute some changes that I'm gonna walk the council through some of those early parts of that exercise so that we can start to get feedback direction as we go into the next budget year figure out what programs the council wants to support and in addition deal with our long-term structural issue proactively. Next slide, please. So one of the things you're gonna see here is and the departments will specifically talk about the impacts that are going on within their organization but this is a list of additional needs requests that are in the budget right now. There is some flexibility obviously to look at these individually. There are things that departments have asked for that you will see that are currently not funded. Some of these are either a one-time cost or have an ongoing cost. And that's one of the things that we're trying to flag for the council moving forward because it's ongoing cross creep up. It becomes really, really hard on the organization to figure out where the revenue offset is going to come for these particular costs increases. And I'll just point to one item that is currently in the budget which is the mental health collaborative pilot program but really doesn't have an identified resource to it to sustain it past that initial pilot phase. That doesn't mean there aren't opportunities but what we're going to be looking for from council and the long-term finance committee as we get into the next year is where is that resource going to come? How are we going to go through a process to identify that resource and bring back that conversation both for the council and the community earlier than it has ever happened before within this organization? We're really shooting to launch those conversations with the mid-year budget update as we go through and flag these ongoing costs and identify a resource to or alter our compact in what we're funding moving forward. So that's an example of one item that right now is in the budget, has no long-term, doesn't have an ongoing revenue source associated with it. So we need over the next year to build to that revenue source and that allocation to sustain that program moving forward. So it's both a flag for the community, a flag for the council and a flag for the departments involved in how do we sustain that activity? One, and I'll give you an example of something that is missing from this as we go through this enterprise and we discovered that we had creatively figured out a way to fund some community engagement programs that are currently not in the budget. And I suspect the council is going to direct us at the end of the study session to find an appropriation to cover those about $150,000 worth of costs. Currently they're not in the budget. As we went through the process, staff had find creative ways to take one time funding and fill that hole in the budget. What we need to do is start flagging these ongoing costs and these costs increase moving forward and identify where the resource is going to be. So we're not caught in that situation. So again, I suspect we're gonna add to this list as we go through. This is a list of staff recommendations. It isn't the final list. You will see other needs as we go through the presentation that still need that are not funded and council may have questions and assigned tasks to the staff to look deeper at those particular items and propose how we might move some of those items forward. Are there any questions about this particular slide before I move into the next slide in the deck from council? You're not seeing any hands, let's keep moving. So the next slide is a slide that we are moving forward. One of the real challenging items for the staff to manage was hold, as you know, in the long-term financial plan was holding $5 million of a treated positions open for five years. These positions have been on the books in the department and it's a mixture of positions and services. And again, the departments will talk specifically about impacts when they get to their presentations. But this is one of those places where this is part of our proposal to eliminate these positions and then this funding in the budget. And we probably will need to reference back to this as we go through the presentation and its totality. The one thing I will call council's attention to is that there were already five positions eliminated essentially when we rolled the police department back to baseline. So that essentially eliminated them. They remained on the books, but they were unfunded and there was no resources. So we will be rolling those off as part of the proposed budget. However, what council will notice is that there is about, there's only $3.46 million worth of savings accrued here. We are proposing that on 610, the long-term finance committee, look at it and look at a program to figure out where the additional $1.5 million of savings that we can accrue over the next year, begin that process and bring back to council a plan on 622 that would address how to accrue those savings. Again, those savings don't need to be from personnel costs. Those can be from ongoing recurrent costs in the conversation and staff will be bringing back that presentation on 610. Following on that 622 to authorize and figure out how we can move forward with additional cost savings in this budget cycle or at least by the time we reach the budget process next year. And I'll remind council that is part of the critical compact to achieve the fiscal sustainability that was forecast by management partners, $5 million of savings over the next five years or so. And then in addition, a limitation on additional hiring as well as exploring other revenue and cost-saving measures. So right now this is the proposed reduction scenario and just for you to understand, there are still out there an additional $40 million 47 vacancies beyond these 21 that you're seeing here. 19 of those are general funded positions and it's about $2.5 million in general fund. The reason we're not proposing that is that those vacancies actually inordinately hit one department about a little over a third of that hits the community and development and engagement department. And because that is a while it's not a full cost recovery and it's a revenue generating part of the operation, we do not feel comfortable moving those particular positions forward as a part of the compact. But there is still 47 vacancies and 19 of those are in the general fund but we need to figure out a process to identify additional cost savings within the organization over the next year. Any questions on this slide? Council Member Spledo. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. McGlynn, do we have a slide that has the actual FTE totals? For me, this is somewhat out of context where police where you're losing six-position firefighters five, do you have the totals somewhere in the slide show? If we don't, we'll go consult that. If we don't, we will have something during the course of the presentation, we'll bring it into the conversation. But I will review that with staff. It's a lot of slides, I'm not sure it's there, but if we miss it in the general introduction, we'll get that into the conversation as soon as possible. Because that would be helpful for me to put all of these into context. And then will we be having the impact of these cuts once the departments actually make the presentation? So will we hear from Chief Navarro what are the impacts of these six positions? Yes, yes. All right, then I'll save those questions for Chief Navarro. Thank you. And we'll probably have to reference back to this slide, but absolutely that's part of what they will be presenting. Thank you. All right, I see no other hands. Next slide. So we wanted to start with a conversation, just getting to the council. The measure O baseline calculation, just as you're entering that conversation. As you noticed in the proposed budget, all three are over.  You will see that there are embedded cost escalations in each of those agencies that are mandated and that we have little control over. And one of those things that is impacting the entire organization is pension costs continue to rise. So unfunded liability. So I believe the figure you're going to see later in the presentation is about 75% of our costs, our personnel costs of those 75% personnel costs about 17% of that 75% is undefunded liability costs. So almost 20% of the agency's personnel costs are regarding pension and pension obligations moving forward. Any questions on this slide? Next slide. As part of our regular presentation, we also bring back to council a demonstration of where we are in terms of the increasing obligation that council mandated as part of the resolution against real property transfer tax. So this is building 5% a year. The current amount that needs to be budgeted for homelessness and affordable housing services is 40% of what we're projecting is a $3.5 million real property transfer tax revenue amount. That would calculate out to 1.4 million. As you go through the budget, you'll notice that actually in the proposed budget, we are at 4.1 which is still larger than what we're projecting as the 3.5 in terms of real property transfer tax. But this was, this is an agreement that the council had to present this on an annual part of the budget process. And there are the details. I'm happy to answer any questions. And if I'm not expert enough, I can call on Alan to answer any questions that might be necessary here. And I see a question from council member Fleming. Yeah, I hope this is not too far in the weeds, but I'm curious to know have we taken into account the unusual conditions that the real estate market is in when we have our projections on, or are we basing it on actual recorded and assessed properties? I'm basing it on a couple of months ago that might change in real time. That might increase a little bit, but it would still be well below. But that might, depending on where we close the year, there might be additional revenue coming in in that area council member. But right now, this was based on, I think it was a couple of months ago, was the last figure that we had and we projected out from there. But yes, the real estate market is incredibly hot right now. Well, right, I mean, but it seems that, I guess what I was going with it is that it seems that transactions are down, but costs are up. So I'm not sure where that's gonna shake out in terms of actual dollars in our coffers. But as you see, it's significantly over last year's budgeted amount. So it's almost $750,000 increased. Okay, thank you. And I will say it is very helpful to see this chart with the year over year actuals leading into the budget because that is one of the questions that we received from the public pretty frequently is you budgeted for this much, but how much did you actually end up doing over the course of the year? So I wanna appreciate this slide. Next slide. And I believe at this point, I is my pleasure to introduce the Chief Financial Officer for the city of Santa Rosa, Jan Mazik.  Good afternoon, Mayor Rogers and council members. Before I jump into the presentation, I just wanted to take a moment to thank the budget team. I am a novice at this and they have really done a lot of effort on the budget. And I wanted to be sure that you know just how valuable they've been to me being you and coming into this process. Next slide, please. So the citywide expenditure budget is comprehensive and includes operational as well as financial activities. Enterprises within this fund include parking, transit, golf course, water and wastewater as well as storm water. The citywide budget, within this fund there are also some special revenue funds as well as debt service funds. In the proposed CIP for the upcoming fiscal year, you'll note that it's doubled the amount that is in the current fiscal year 21. Reflecting investments to be made in the sub-regional treatment plants that will be carried out over the next year. If there are no questions on this slide, I'll move to the next slide. Are there any questions? Next slide, please. This is just a representation and graphic form. It indicates the allocations on a percentage basis to all funds included in the citywide expenditure budget. Next slide, please. Next slide. So this slide is intended to do a couple of things. One, certainly highlight what fiscal year 21 which is a current year we're in would look like in a pandemic with pandemic considerations in mind. And it was juxtaposed with 2019-20 actuals which was perhaps the last normalized year of operations. Our expectations for finishing the current fiscal year and that of comparative performance against the adopted budget might have appeared comparative and conservative. I think for budgetary reasons, we usually tend to err on the side of caution. So revenues I think proposed for the current fiscal year might have been a little bit conservative. And I think you see indications of that because performance across broad categories has have exceeded revenue performance expectations with the exception of hospitality revenues via trans-TOT revenues and parks and recreation which were really decimated as a result of cessation of most of those activities. Other activities across the board performed exceptionally well. Sales, tax, utility users' tax and other taxes outperformed what might have been expected. From an overall performance perspective, we're projecting to end the current fiscal year with an across the board increase of 4.7% ahead of the adopted budget for fiscal year 21. Are there any questions? So, Jana, just to, I wanna make sure that we're clear here. So what you're saying is, and I get it, given the pandemic and the uncertainty that we had, you're saying that we ended up taking in 4.7% more in terms of revenue than what we had budgeted for last year. Yes. My understanding is, recalling that I wasn't here, my understanding is that the city had adopted a budget and then, or at least had a prospective budget and they made some revisions to that budget and that became the adopted budget for fiscal year. So I think there were a couple of changes in there and I think what ended up being adopted was even a little bit ahead of what was initially conceived for the budget for the year. So can you remind particularly, since we have a number of folks in attendance who are not your usual suspects who are here every single budget year, can you remind us all what happens when we have additional dollars that came in above what our projections were? Where does that money go? So we've got that 7.668 million that came in above projections. So where did that go in terms of our budget? Well, I think one would expect because as I understand it, the budget was probably adopted with a deficit that might have been about 18.1 million with reserves being used to balance the budget. And so unused reserves actually would just return. There's nothing to return. It's just less of a draw on reserves is what would happen. So I think in short, you're looking at one half of the picture, which is the revenue expenditures also climb during the course of the year. For example, there was expenditures for to create safe social distancing vis-a-vis the hotel Sandman. So while revenues climb, expenditures might climb as well. And I think we'll see some of that conversation as we move forward. In addition, but in general, what would happen without climbing expenditures is those would be pulled back into the reserves. So if there weren't climbing expenditures, there weren't other costs. The simple process would be to go from increased revenue into reserve. That would be the process, Mayor. Great, thank you. Next slide, please. So this slide is taking it where we're projecting to finish the current fiscal year, vis-a-vis what will be forecast or what we're proposing to be forecast for revenues for the upcoming fiscal year 22. From my perspective, I think of the upcoming year as likely a year of transition. I think from an economic perspective, there may be some fundamental shifts in how and where people prioritize spending and the way in which we do it. Even more broadly, economically speaking, I think there may be other considerations that also influence business and personal responses post pandemic. So what you'll see is a forecast that reflects moderate increases across the board with a couple of exceptions. On the more robust side or sales tax projections where we project an increase of 9% given expectations regarding general retail and food products. And in this number actually, it was suggested that we adopt or propose this amount by Avenue Insights, our consultants on some of our revenues. I think we're also bullish on the resumption of close to normal parks and recreational activities in the coming year. We make no assumptions as to grant revenues that might be taken in. We record them as they come in. And expectedly non-recurring revenues, stimulus related, that is, will ease as well in the coming year. I think overall our budget shows an uptick in total general fund revenues of 3.8%. You know, one of the things I think we have in the year ahead of us is the opportunity to make thoughtful and impactful deployment of some non-recurring revenues received during the current year. The quality of those decisions will matter greatly over the longer term as they carry the potential to boost and or potentially alter infrastructure and economic trajectories within the community. At this point, are there any questions on this slide? Looks like Council Member Sawyer has a question. Thank you, Mayor. And thank you, Jan. At what point during the next number of months will we be looking at these projections and looking at as to whether or not we actually have 6.5 kind of unused or unobligated, if you will, in this forecast, the mid-year, when would we be looking at whether or not we were accurate in some of our assumptions? Well, one of the things that we proposed, if you'll recall, in some of the changes we'll be making is that we will formally return to the full Council at mid-year to review at that point where we were projected to be for the fiscal year. And hopefully, we'll be operating within the forecast, but I think part of it will be conscientious decision-making as to whether we stay the course at mid-year or take corrective action if need be, if in fact expenditures or outpacing revenues. I think informally, perhaps to the Planning and Audit Committee, we'd like to return on a quarterly basis with just an update, but with the formal review process at mid-year, probably in January, after the December month close. Great, I think at one point, whether it was on that subcommittee or in the full Council that you mentioned, just kind of a monthly review as to how things are moving along, is that a little bit too much work to anticipate? Actually, I think monthly probably is not enough of a picture, and by the time we finish the month, we're sort of, or closing the month, we're halfway through the following month. So I think it would be perhaps more informative to come quarterly to the committee, and then at mid-year to the full Council. That sounds prudent, thank you. Okay, and I'll just make a quick comment. I know you said that the sales tax projection, the increase of 9.1% is what some of our specialists are telling us to expect. I'd be a little bit surprised to see that just because I think this year, what we found is people shifted most of their expenditures online, and I think a lot of that will continue. So I think more people will eat out, and I'm good for us to use this, since that's what our experts are telling us to do, but I'll be pleasantly surprised if we hit that 9.1% increase for our sales tax. Mayor Rogers, you may be surprised, well, you may not be surprised. I actually did ask that question. Did we take most of it already, or are we likely to see it? But the budget team sort of hung firm on that number and supported it with Avenue Insights, and so here it is. So point well taken. All right, I appreciate it. Let's keep moving. This is just a representation on a percentage basis of the revenue slide that you just saw and how it breaks down as its share of the general fund. Next slide, please. Next slide. I thought the revenue slide was really sort of uplifting, if you will. The expenditure slides always turned out to be a re-grounding of realism, but in any event, big picture salaries and benefits make up 77% of the FY22 expenditure budget. So that doesn't really leave a great deal of room for what I consider to be financial flexibility elsewhere in the expenditure budget. Operationally, we're proposing to contain expenditure growth to 1.5%, as you can see at the bottom of the slide, even with some significant increases in certain categories, which I'll talk about. Per's liability increased by roughly 6%, which equates to about $3 million. In IT, there's a 9% increase though, but that reflects additional costs for plan review software. Professional liability insurance is up over 27%, had about half a million dollars. But altogether, I think the overall change in the budget is 1.5% greater than it is in the current fiscal year. Any questions? Council Member Sawyer? I think he's got a lingering hand up. Let's keep going. Okay, next slide, please. Again, just a graphic representation of proportional expenditures in the general fund. This is a point of clarity, Jan, if you will. I had a note down from earlier that we had 17% of the salary and benefits comes from unfunded liabilities. This slide says 12%. I just wanna make sure we've got the correct number down. You've got the correct number, it was my mistake. Okay, thank you. All right, next slide, please. Different, personally, I love graphs. And so this chart tells me a lot. I know it's three-dimensional, so sometimes that's a little bit challenging. But what this slide is by category and by percentage of change. And so the colors of gray, salaries, benefits, professional services, clearly what you're seeing, the big uptick is we talked about professional liability insurance in the previous slide. O&M projects, I didn't touch on that, but they're down somewhat. And it's just a graphic representation of the information we just talked about on the two previous slides, and this is how it looks. But I just find it helpful just to see it at a glance. Next slide, please. Error expenditures by department. Just big picture, internal service costs remain flat from fiscal year 21 to 22. That's the first grouping above. The downward shift in the city council budget is reflective of FY22 being a non-election year, and thus the change in expenditures. Community and government, intergovernmental relations last year was a new department. When consolidated, activities were somewhat broader, have become somewhat broader with citywide perspective. And the result is, I think, a reasonable, accurately reflection of associated activities given the change at the beginning of the fiscal year. Next slide, please. And again, just a graphic representation, sort of as where the change is in overall budget. You can see the intergovernmental relationship relations department there with one of the biggest increases. Anyway, it depicts the numbers in the foregoing slide. Next slide, please. And I think, yeah, these are expenditures by department. I think we can move to the next slide. Transfers out, these are other general fund expenditures. Transfers out reflect departments and costs that are not resident in the general fund, but that are nonetheless general fund supported. So dominating the transfers out include homeless services and related costs, the capital improvement fund, and other miscellaneous funds, such as parking, transit, and housing. Next slide, please. One of the things you've seen this slide before, albeit not in this presentation, but trajectory is important. And that's the reason this is looking backward over some period of time at what are performance. Performance meaning the measurement of revenues or expenditures against revenues is how I would say it and how the overall budgets performed. Performance over several years is really intended to perform as to financial trajectory, which is perhaps seen better seen on the graphic which follows. Next slide. So again, a representation, but you can see sort of the positives and the challenges. And in this slide, what I've talked about before is that this is representative, this is not just Santa Rosa, this slide is pertinent to Santa Rosa, but I think it's reflective of other challenges that all governments face today with the typical challenges that I've talked about previously, being social, environmental, organizational, as well as financial. And I think this will remain one of our challenges, but again, with one-time revenues, perhaps we have an opportunity to sort of alter or at least moderate some of these challenges. And that concludes my remarks on this discussion, portion of the budget. I'm not seeing any hands. So Mayor Rogers, if I could step in for a second, Jan, I understand that staff is working on providing an additional slide to be presented at this point in time, looking at FTEs within the organization. And we want to walk through that prior to going to the departmental slides. So I think this was a question in relation to Council Member Schwedhelm's question earlier about the total number of full-time equivalent positions by department within the organization. As you can see, we're looking at approximately 1254 for the current fiscal year, adjusting to 1,235 for the end of the year. Councilor, are there any questions on this slide? All right, Jan, before we go into each departmental presentation, I did want to know, do you have the number for what percentage our pension obligations are currently funded? So I know we were at 101% back in 2008 before the stock market tanked. I know we were down, I want to say, as low as about 82% funded. Where do we sit now? You know, Mayor Rogers, I don't know that I have the answer to that. I don't know if possibly Shelley does or Allen does, but it's probably easy enough for us to figure that out and come back. Okay. I mean, that's always a moving target up and down, right? Yeah, yeah, I completely understand. If you could just get back to us, that'd be great. Okay. And I see a question from the Vice Mayor. Because I am lightly blind, can this slide be emailed to us so I can pull it up bigger on my iPad? All right. Sure, yes. Thank you. Yeah, I don't know whether it'd be later today or if we can do it on the fly during the meeting, but it'd also be great to upload this as an attachment onto the agenda so the public can pull that up as well. Okay, we'll do. All right, Jason, should we keep going? Yes, please, Mayor. At this point, we are going to move into our departmental budgets, starting with the fire department. So Chief Westrop, looking forward to having you walk us through. Thank you, Mr. Nutt, and good afternoon, Mayor Rogers and members of the council. Scott Westrop, fire chief of the Santa Rosa Fire Department and with me today is Jim Herron, our ASL. And we're going to walk you through our proposed budget for 21-22 and we'll kind of be going back and forth. Next slide, please. Next slide. All right, so for the first two slides, I'm going to turn it over to ASO Arand and he'll walk you through these two slides and come back to me. Good afternoon, Mayor Rogers and council members. I'm Jim Herron, the ASO for the fire department and I'm here with Chief Westrop to present our department slides. As a preface, I kind of wanted to let you guys know that this budget cycle was especially challenging as we were asked to prepare two different budgets that were vastly different scenarios. We did the first set of budget guidelines based on our historical way of doing things which was flat budgets, let's just get it done as far as we can. And I believe most of the city completed that and then we were told, change a plan. We're going to compare actually and set up to the prior year's budget and keeping it flat. We need to compare to 2019, 2020 actuals which was a whole different curve for us. We were also asked to cover any increases in city allocated costs with decreases in other line items. This was a challenge but so what I'm really trying to say is what we're presenting here is a hybrid budget based on a combination of 2019 actuals, 2021 budget and salary and benefits based on the current MOUs. So with that, I will like to go into our first slide here, the uncontrollable costs that when you see in front of you. As a note, you'll notice that it's pretty short list for us in fire and the biggest increase is the $682,000 increase in PERS unfunded liability. That's a huge bump that I think you're gonna find across the board with everybody. That's clearly uncontrollable for us. Another cost for us in fire was we increased our contract overtime by half a million dollars based on anticipated increases in our strike team activity. These costs are fully reimbursable for Cal OES so it's kind of like a wash but it's worth noting because it is a cost increase. The rest of our uncontrollable cost escalations are pretty minimal here since we were directed to cap all services applies at the 2019-20 actuals. So any increases we would have come up with would have been had to be deducted from another line item. For example, our dispatch for Redcom were fully anticipating a probably $50,000 increase that we did not put in the budget this year because I would have had to reduce another line item by 50. So that was left off. Next slide. These are the, oh, sorry, the controllable costs. Again, they were escalators. We increased our outside plan review cost by $40,000 which was driven by organization and citizen needs and the projects approved in a timely manner. This is something we're dealing with right now. We have a lot of people that want the plans done yesterday and we're struggling to stay caught up. So we increased the use of outside plan review to try to help us with that. We also added a fire inspector mid-year to support vegetation management. This was done at the beginning of the year. It looks like a cost escalation but it really was based on a budget revision mid-year. So again, very limited controllable cost increases listed here because of the scenario I told you before about matching to 2019, 2020. And at this point, I'd like to turn it over now to Chief Westrup to discuss the impact of the FTE cuts. Well, and before you go to that, Chief, I have a quick question for you, Jim. You mentioned for the uncontrollable costs, the $500,000 for your increased contract over time, it is reimbursable. How long does it typically take Cal OES to reimburse us for those costs? It varies, but for example, last year, they're all coming in pretty relatively quickly I would say three to four months at the most. For example, this year, we're up over $2.5 million in strike team revenue because we had a very heavy year last year. So I monitor those pretty carefully and we know exactly where we're at. And over the last year or so, they've gotten much faster at sending those monies to us. So then should council expect to see this both on the expenditure side as well as on the revenue side? Yes, and that's what you'll see. Budgeted revenues were in there as well to be a little more conservative. My budgeted revenue for strike team, I budgeted about 80% of that cost in overtime costs because what we receive in reimbursement, there's other costs embedded in that. We've got a 14% admin cost that they let us add on. Other things like that, so it's not all strike overtime. So to be conservative, I budget my best guess at what our strike team revenue is gonna be. I take 80% of that and that's what I use as my cost for contract overtime. Great, I really appreciate that. Thank you so much. Council, the other questions before we go to the chief. All right, chief, you're up. Great. Can we switch back to slide five real quick please? So real briefly, before we get into the actual 2021 budget, a 21-22 budget, I just wanted to take a moment to sort of clarify as council member Schwedholm sort of alluded to what the impacts are to the fire department with this reduction of five FTEs. So the fire department holds 151 FTEs in total. 132 of those positions are in operation. So from the operations bureau chief down to the firefighters that are on the fire engines, that's our funded positions. We've typically in the last year or so we've been running at 146 full-time FTEs or FTEs across the department, which translates to 127 in operation. So we've been running those five positions life for a while. And to sort of put it into context is we have 39 positions that are filled on the fire engines or in the battalion chiefs rig every single day right now. We could have that up to 42 with these positions. And what that does is we have to have those 39 positions filled. It's not like an office where if I call in sick or if the ASO calls in sick, the office is vacant. Those are the mandatory positions we have to have on the floor to provide protection to the community.  So we're a little bit nuanced in that. And sometimes I just want to make sure that everybody's clear on what we're talking about here is they're not office positions, they have to be filled. So that creates a position where with only 39 people on the roster and we could have up to 42 is that that it creates an overtime slot, right? So we have to fill that position with the body. So it creates overtime. What the extra positions are slated for and what the reason that they're over our normal daily staffing is there would be two extra people on duty per shift. So if somebody called in on vacation instead of plugging that position with overtime, we plug it with one of the extra bodies. And so that's really the nuance in this is that we're keeping our minimum staffing with these positions that are slated to be or proposed to be eliminated from the budget. We keep our daily staffing normal but it eliminates our ability to fill in those overtime positions that we are currently filling with overtime. Now through analysis we've gone through and we looked at a bunch of different ways to meet our number of $945,000 to eliminate from the budget. And the problem we went run into is the fire department's a bit nuanced in that 82% of our budget is in salaries and benefits. So that leaves us a smaller slice to actually have some variability in our budget with. And when you look at our service and supply budget it shows it translates to $4.1 million. But if you take out all of the uncontrollable costs that we don't really have any say on we end up with a service and supply budget of right around $700,000. So if you figure you take a 10% cut out of $700,000 or a 20% cut out of $700,000 it's nowhere near that mark. So that turns into we have to look at we have to look at people or programs in order to make those cuts. So we went through, we've been through this many, many times but we went through it again and we determined that in order to meet that $945,000 this is what we have to present to council to consider. So what that means for us after this two variables is that number one we went through and did a cost analysis and what it shows is those overtime positions those positions that are filled with overtime that's about $53 to $55,000 conservatively per year more than it would be to fill those with a full-time body. So there's actually an overtime savings in filling those positions. And then it gives us the ability to be flexible not only in our daily staffing but also when we upstaff when we get a red flag or a PSPS or a flood we can also upstaff a little bit easier with extra personnel on board to keep our daily staffing normal. And what it equates to is if you look at five position it equates to two firefighting resources. So when we do an all call like we have done in the tubs nuns, Kincaid and the glass fire when we do an all call and bring everybody back that gives us the capacity for two additional firefighting resources that can be on the road with two to three people per apparatus that might go out. And really the message I wanna convey and we're gonna get more into this as the city manager alluded to in September's long-term financial plan committee meeting is really the internal impact that it has on the organization. So having those additional bodies there reduces the amount of mandatory overtime that's inflicted upon our employees. And what that does is it reduces the wear and tear on employees both physically and behaviorally. So meaning mental health, behavioral health. So it really reduces that wear and tear by not impacting them to where they're on duty for 96, 120, 144 hours on a road during the peak season. It gives them, it gives a little bit of flexibility in there and a little bit of relief to our crews. It also increases our capacity to commit to strike teams and also backfill. So if we send an engine out to Medesino County or LA we obviously have to bring people back in. So it increases our ability to send resources out to help our neighbors in California but it also increases our capacity to backfill. So that's why those extra positions are important to us. So the long story short is this, is that between our service and supply budget and where we're at with personnel, we are about as lean as we can get and we're trying very hard and we're working diligently not to impact service delivery but we're right on the precipice of having to do so with any more cuts. So that's the story we wanted to tell about our five positions and as we get towards the end we can answer any questions you have about that. So with that, I will turn it back over to Jim to handle the general fund budget for 21-22. Okay, if we can look at slide 31, there you go. This is the general fund proposed budget for the fire department by category. As you'll see from here, the we've gone up by 1.5, almost 1.6 million or a 3.6% increase. The majority of this came from salary and benefit increases that you can see in the change column. Those are two rather large ones and the biggest by far is the benefit side where we had an increase in the CalPERS unfunded liability costs of about 682,000 of that 770. The rest of it was made up of an increase in workers comp and a reduction in the normal CalPERS retirement. So overall benefits increased by 771,000. The salaries you see there looks a little unusual that they look like they increase at a smaller rate. That's a little misleading because of the fact that remember we have five eliminated positions in there as well as a transfer of one of our other positions to IT and increase and MOU step increases. So it looks like we've only gone up by 200,000 but there's some major cuts that came out of that. So that's why those two numbers look a little bit unusual. One other thing to mention is the contract overtime, like I mentioned, is up $556,000. And as I explained to Mayor Rogers, the budgeted strike team revenue this year is just under 1.5 million. I budgeted 80% of that or 1.2 in contract overtime which was an increase of $556,000 there. The other big thing is if you'll go down the table, if you'll look under information technology that shows an increase of $197,000 or 28%. Again, that bears a little discussion because 153 of that increase or 153,000 of that increase is that salary swap out we talked about above where we had an IT person funded by the fire department working here, she got promoted and is working now in IT and we're going to have a position in IT that they're gonna carry and we're gonna increase our IT cost to make it up. The bottom line for the budget is it's a wash. So, but it does look unusual. It bears telling you that that's why that number is up to 28.6%. The other big number is the admin cost plan. As you can see, we went up by 13.8%. That's $400,000. So those are the major impacts or the major reasons why do you see the cost increases going up so much in the general fund? As Chief Westrop mentioned, we're very people heavy, 82% is salary and benefits so we don't have a lot of wiggle room elsewhere. We're very tight and we did a lot of shuffling around to make the numbers come out, but by the end of it, it's a mathematical exercise is what you're doing. We're not moving all around a lot of money there and there's not much we can do about it. So we're just monitoring as best we can. And unless there's any questions, I'll go to the slide 32, which Chief Westrop will handle. Thanks, Jim. So as we start talking about undefunded additional needs requests, there's two categories that you'll see consistently throughout these presentations. The first is with COVID is related to the American Rescue Act and the second is non-COVID related group that relates to other funding mechanisms such as the PG&E settlement. So quickly for COVID related impacts, there's a $500,000 request for professional services agreements. As you recall, in a communication, I sent to council a few weeks ago in regards to the Fire Prevention Bureau and our plans to be a process being backlogged due to COVID, both from the perspective of the inability to do the work in-house and then the sharp increase in plans to review. And I laid out short, medium, and long-term plans to resolve that. The short-term plan was to internally absorb costs to build out our PSA with Bureau Veritas and Coastline Engineering to get working on that this fiscal year that we're in. And then in the next fiscal year, request the $500,000 for PSA work to actually continue reducing that backlog. And then long-term, it's gonna be as part of the Vegetation Management Program funding is to hire a second plans review examiner. It's difficult to attach a body to that for the backlog that we're in. That's why we're opting to go with contracts because as you know, it ebbs and flows, development ebbs and flows. And so if we attach a body to it and we get into a big eb, then we're in trouble with having a body on board. So we wanna get this backlog caught up and then get the second plans examiner on board and continue on a path more on a normal process with plans review. The second item is station remodels for three of our fire stations. We have temporary engineering controls in place to divide particularly the living quarters. So particularly in some of the dorm rooms where it's one large dorm that had short barrier walls in place for limited privacy. We've had to put temporary restrictions in place. So this is looking at a remodel of three of our fire stations to make those temporary restrictions permanent. It also increases our privacy in regards to diversity, privacy in those dorms. So it sort of has a twofold effect but that request is in there as well. And moving on to non COVID related additional needs requests. The first one is $1.5 million for two frontline apparatus, the type one fire engines that you see on a daily basis. They're in queue to be replaced this fiscal year. We are replacing a 21 and 23, four year old engine. And so typically we struggle with where we're gonna find that kind of money and so we're making the request out of here and I'll get into what our plan is moving forward shortly here, but that's our request for this year is to replace some very old apparatus that are costing us too much in maintenance and they have too much downtime. So that's request number one. The second one is, and these will be prioritized in later slides, I'll just go down the list for ease of your tracking. $4 million in a capital fleet replacement program funding. So we don't have, and my first point leads to this is we don't have a mechanism for replacing our capital fleet assets.  So we don't have a replacement fund for that. So we see here is an opportunity for that seed money to go into a replacement program. And what we've done is we've developed sort of a all a cart menu, so to speak, that lays out with our fleet replacement forecast. So for instance, in this case, with a $4 million initial investment in a capital fleet replacement program, that leads us to for the next 25 years and into the future is right now would be a $400,000 per year ask. So it's inversely proportional. And so if we were to put in $5 million into the fleet replacement program, initial investment would go down to $300,000 a year. So we're looking at that seed money that's never been there for the fire department, never been there, existed in the city and is leading to these issues where we have to come out and find ways to creatively finance buying fire engines or fire trucks. It's that seed money that we've needed that we haven't developed in the last 15 or 20 years to continue forward. So we don't have to keep coming back to council every year and asking for these big ticket numbers. We have that at our disposal as we move forward. The third item on the list, and I very missed not to put this in is a $15 million for an additional fire station, whether it's the relocation of an existing station or new construction of a new station. We've developed a sort of pros, cons, risk analysis of what each one of the stations we need to build come with. For instance, station nine is a great station location. It's in the Southeast. It would service Mount Taylor as far as the movie goes. But that comes with the need for additional bodies. We already own the property, but we would have to have an ongoing cost of additional bodies moving forward with that. Whereas we could go with something like station 11 or station 11, when we own the property, it would not come with bodies. We would just build the station on the existing footprint. That station was built in 2009 and it was supposed to be, it's in a temporary facility. It was supposed to be there for five years and it's been there for, since 2009 as a temporary building. So there's different options in there. We do have some capital investment in three of the stations that need to be built, station eight, station nine and station 11. So we have a little bit more skin in the game there. So it's just asking for that seed money so we can put forward another fire station that we need to rebuild. 1.4 million dollars for the hot EOC. You've seen this time and time again. This is to take an existing building at the MSC and convert it into a full-time, technically competent state of the art emergency operation center. There's some other funding opportunities with the hot EOC out of the federal government that we're looking into as well. And Mayor Rogers has been part of those conversations. So we'll find out more about that later. And then lastly, you'll see it's actually number two on our priority list is approximately $200,000 for a new fire inspection database. It's a new program that we utilize for CUPA, engine company and fire prevention inspections. It creates an advanced production of reports and communication directly to the state. And the purpose is routine reporting, training, audits and things we have to go through as a CUPA agency. System can also be configured to talk directly to finance so any billing that needs to be done, it can go directly to finance. So it would really be a big win for our fire prevention bureau as far as tracking and reporting goes. And so the ask is in there for that as well. There's a question from Council Member Sawyer. Very good. Council Member. Thank you, Mayor. I was having a hard time unmuting. Chief, could you explain to me how the, I mean, the rest of the city has fleet replacement program. Is the fire department separate from that because of the high cost of the, when you have to replace a piece of equipment, the high cost of it? Because the rest of the city does participate if I'm not mistaken in a fleet replacement program. That's correct. So our smaller vehicles such as our, the SUVs, the command staff drives and the fire prevention bureau drives, those are part of the fleet replacement program. But because these capital items are either they're nuanced in that we can't go in and into a fleet purchase and buy a bunch of similar dump trucks or tractors, whatever the case may be, they're selected and there's changes with technology and with configuration. So, but they are very expensive. Number one and number two is that we have to go out and spec it very specifically for what we're looking for at the time. Thank you. That makes sense. That's from Bersuad Elm. If I could just clarify with you, Mayor Rogers, do you want questions each slide or wait for the end? If there's, if we're doing a transition and it seems natural, go ahead and put your hand up and we'll ask. Otherwise we can ask at the end as well. Okay. Well, since we've already asked on this one, let me ask Chief West for this stuff. So regarding the 500 K for process professional services agreement, I was very appreciative of the memo you sent out on April 29th. The question I have is what impact will this have? So my question would be regarding fire inspections and plan check. What is your expected turnaround rate? What do we tell the community currently, our fire chiefs expects those plan checks to get turned around in what timeframe? So our typical timeframe for that that we want to get back to is four to six weeks. Right now we're at 10 to 12 weeks with a 400 backlog. And so we're getting back into that four to six week and also the expedited home owners or developers or whomever can pay an expediting fee. And right now the expediting fee does no good. And so we get into an expediting fee as well to where we're actually able to expedite plans coming out. So four to six weeks on standard with expedition, it would be sooner than that. And so this investment of half a million dollars would get us back to that. And I know your memo outlines some long-term strategy. So the community expectation would be invest this and we'll get to this level of service that this community expects. Am I getting that right? That's correct. It's the short-term stop gap with a small investment that we came up with internally to bolster one of our contracts to have a third party vendor help us close the loop or close the gap on the backlog. And then with this $500,000, it would be a full-court press to get everything we can involved to clear that backlog and back to a place of normalcy when we have the second plans examiner come on board. And so there's gonna be a recruitment timeframe for that. So what I'm trying to do is close each one of those gaps, the two-month gap to the end of this fiscal year, the gap to we get the second plans examiner hired and then moving forward, we should be in a better position. Great, and then this is exactly the data that I always wanted to make that decision. And then that next bullet point is 7.5 for three fire station remodels. That's the first I've heard of that. Was that presented during any of the options for the PG&E settlement funds? It wasn't. We were trying to, during the PG&E settlement funds, we were trying to keep it much higher level and look at very strategic broad goals. The reason that we added this into the American Rescue Act funding was that it was very COVID specific to reduce the ability, you know, we have, and this has been a big struggle through COVID, the fire department has a very unique living situation that our crews are with each other at least 48 hours a day in very close quarters. The stations that we're talking about here are station three in Coffee Park, station four in Bennett Valley and station seven in Oakmont. And those stations are all very small, they're all butler buildings. And so the ability to social distance is pretty much impossible. So we created these temporary barriers and we're looking just into the future. We're probably gonna face something else like this. You know, COVID could be continued, whatever the case may be is making that more permanent. And at the same time, we can take the opportunity to increase our position for recruitment and diversity by creating a better privacy situation. So it just does lead me to ask, since this is the first I've seen of that, are we currently in a legally compliant situation with what our housing situation is at those three fire stations you just mentioned? Yes, we are currently legally compliant. And so this will take us to a next preferred level versus a legally compliant level. Do I have that one correct? Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, my last question too is the non-COVID related. You may be expecting this one as we've had some discussion with PG&E funds and for station five. Initially the cost for that was 15 million then the last time came to council was 21 million. I see this 15 million fire station relocation and construction surfaced again. Can you share with us a little information about what's the difference in those two different funding? Absolutely. And I wholly was expecting this question as soon as I typed that number in there.  Yeah, thank you. So for station five, one of the big issues we have is the area we chose to put the station and the land that we chose to put it on. So almost $6 million of that cost is moving dirt and leveling that land and getting it prepared to be built on because it's never been built on before. So that's really where that $15 to $21 million number came from. So if we look at, for instance, station nine, which we own the property for, they're currently landing construction equipment on it. So it's very compacted. It's very flat right now. So station nine, we don't need to do a bunch of land movement. So it eliminates that $6 million number. Station 11, there's already a parking lot. We don't even need to go through CEQA to build station 11. Station eight and station six, which would be moving the stations off their current location, not adding bodies. We'd have to purchase property and what we would do is be much more, we would learn from previous lessons and make sure that we're buying property that is not gonna get us into a prolonged or very expensive venue of having to move a lot of dirt or to go in through a huge CEQA process. So, and then again, we also have some money set aside through CIP for station eight, station nine and station 11. So we have some capital on hand to put in towards that as well. So that's why we landed on this $15 million number is due to lessons learned and where we have to put these stations moving forward is a much more convenient for lack of a better term position to put the stations in. And is it safe to assume you've also factored in the escalating cost of materials in this that they just been skyrocketing everything I've heard? Is that factored in this figure also? It's factored in, the recent news of a sheet of plywood being almost $60 is obviously is a huge problem. So we're hoping the supply chain kind of catches up this. It'll be a while before we're using wood products and things like that. So we did factor that in and that's one of the reasons the cost is so high in general to build these buildings at $1,000 square foot. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Any other questions council? All right. All right, next slide please. So the additional unfunded additional needs request is one of the things that we really, really struggle with in general and get a lot of questions about is our non-contract overtime. And just to make it clear for the council when we're talking contract and non-contract overtime contract overtime is the overtime Jim was talking about that strike team overtime that we reimbursed for plus about 14%. So that's fully reimbursable. Non-contract overtime is typically MOU, MOUs related overtime costs. So vacation, sick, industrial, jewelry, leave those kinds of things. So the issue that we run into is for the last five years our non-contract overtime budget has been about $2.88 million. It has not changed. Jim Wintherin did a analysis in the last three to five years. Our average is $4.1 million. So we're seriously under budgeted in that line. So what this budget request is for is to bring us closer to what our actual spending is in the non-contract overtime line. I've told you that I've already told you the analysis that we have to fill the seats every day. So we did a staffing report obviously as most you recall in 2019. And that showed that we needed to hire these six positions that are currently taking on our roster plus additional 14 if we wanted to eliminate the overtime problem completely. So that's sort of the long-term goal is to get into that building the roster out to where if we have a sick leave or a vacation leave position open up, we can plug that in with an already a hired body. On the short term, we're doing things like improving our injury and illness prevention programs both on the physical and behavioral health side. We've added a lot of behavioral health assets to our inventory for our employees to use with the idea of reducing that injury or sick leave time usage. And then long-term, it would be adding those positions. So a lot of times you'll see in bigger cities just as a comparison because the question did arise earlier where you'll see a five-person engine company or a six-person truck company. So if somebody's sick or on vacation, they don't fill that spot with overtime. They just have the bodies there. So I don't think we need to get into that vein yet. That is one of the issues and one of the reasons that the staffing study showed that we needed to get into this over hiring by 14 positions place in 2019. So really what this budget request is for is to true up our numbers and align it with what we're actually spending. So we're not pulling from another line item to try to balance our budget appropriately. And I'm not surprised to see there's a couple of questions Mr. Mayor. Vice Mayor. So my question was Chief, if we allowed additional staff, I know that the equation is bigger than just salary, right? So how much is one person that salary benefits everything? Because if we're spending 1.2 on average, if we're spending 1.2 million, how much is it set out of body? It just doesn't make sense to me. And so if it doesn't make sense to me, I don't think it makes sense to the people that are watching. So Jim and I have had this conversation expecting this very question for some time. And what it is, it's this great dichotomy of needing the extra positions, but the extra positions don't completely close the gap on the overtime line. So the number that we're using for the reductions, the $945,000 number is $194,000 per body fully vetted. So what the difference is, and I said this number earlier is to hire that position for overtime annually, it costs us between $53,000 and $55,000 more than that. So you can figure it's gonna be right around $250,000 per year for that body. So that's the difference in the numbers. And so really we're trying to do two things. We're trying to shore up that number in our daily staffing, so we're reducing the overtime. But on the other side, we need to bring up that number so it's short up and it's actually what we're spending. And what you're seeing is the difference isn't made up. So if we were to hire all five of those positions, that only saves us between $250,000 and $300,000. It doesn't make up the gap of $1.2 million that we have in the overtime line. So they're all sort of commingled, but it is a tremendous dichotomy on one hand to have $945,000 proposed cuts. And then we're asking for 1.2 in overtime, but we always end up having to move numbers around in the budget in order to balance our budget at the end of the year to make up for the shortfall on the overtime line. Okay, thank you, Chief. Thank you. All right, I didn't see any other hands. Great, thank you. And so to bring us home, I will turn it back over to Jim for the last couple of slides. Okay, we're on number 34. And these are the, this is just a little table showing all the funds that fire touches. As you can see, the majority of it is general fund. 92% of it is general fund driven. The other big component is measure O, which most of you are familiar with. So on this particular table, you'll see on measure O, there's a net change of $197,000. And that's essentially made up of increases in overtime. Again, strike team overtime and a benefit increase on the PERS unfunded liability in workers comp and healthcare.  The other 10 is an increase in liability insurance, which I believe Jan talked about. So that's where we're at with measure O and that's why it's gone up 197,000. The other big changes in the capital improvement fund down below, that's essentially, we have a, we get some CFF, capital facilities fund, or we get some money once a year. It's in the neighborhood of 400,000 that we split between three fire stations. That's the primary driver behind that. The reason you're seeing a difference of higher than that is you've got 551 in 2021 and 379. That's a couple of grants. Anytime we get grants, in this case, we had NOAA radio grants that you're hearing all about, so we're handing them out. And a weather station grants, those are in there from 20 and 21 and they weren't repeated in 21, 22. So it looks like a decrease, but it's really not. So overall the big takeaway on this is most of our budget lies in the general fund with the balance really in measure O. And with that, we can take any additional questions. All right, council, any last questions for the fire department? All right, thank you gentlemen. Thank you very much. Thank you. Before you leave, chief, I believe there was one more slide for you on slide 35. Oh, yeah, Jimmy got one more button. Oh yeah, that's the same. I already talked about that in 34. It's all related. I do see council members, what Helm took this as an opportunity to put his hand up. Okay. It's more of a question for you, Mayor Rogers. This is the first department that's making reference to measure O funds. And I understand there are some challenges with measure O oversight that they haven't approved this budget. I would like council to handle any questions about that or are we just assuming each department's measure O funds were spent appropriately. Mr. City Manager, I'm gonna forward that question to you. I say at this point, I'd appreciate receiving any comments that we can get relating to measure O. I will discuss it with the city manager and chief financial officer as well as the two chiefs and we'll bring that conversation back to council at a later date prior to budget adoption in June. And I'll also point out we've got a fire here. We've got police next. If we put some of those questions on the table, we can create some space in the discussion tomorrow as well for the to have as answered. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, and with that, Mayor Rogers will move on to the police department and I'll introduce Chief Navarro. Good afternoon, Mayor Rogers and members of the city council. Rainer Navarro, chief of police. I'm here with our administrative service officer, Pam Lawrence and both of us will be available to answer questions. I'll be going through each of the slides and then if you wanna dig a little bit deeper, Pam will be there to assist with some of the more specific line item budgets. And then I know Council Member Schwedhelm, you had a few questions that came up regarding impacts. We're gonna, I'll address that at the end of our seven slides. We can talk a little bit more about that and then we'll also be going over some of our measure impacts also. Next slide, please. So this is our slide regarding our uncontrollable costs. You, it was very similar to what you saw with the fire department on this, on how the slides are gonna be presented. For us though, you'll see some numbers there on each of those lines. Those are the amounts that, the increased amounts. That's not the actual amount of each of those light items but it's actually the increase from last year. You can definitely see our PERS unfunded liability has been, has increased by 17%. We've had a significant increase in our public safety consortium costs. The consortium is made up of several different jurisdictions. We pay the lion's share of the cost because we are the busiest agency and so they do it by percentage. We've seen some increases in our radio infrastructure. So our radio tower releases and new equipment. We've seen some increases there. And with those, with these costs going up, paying these costs will continue to help us address the communication issues that were outlined in the after action report and then also assisting in navigating the natural disasters that we see and fire disasters that we see on a regular basis. We had a increase in costs in our substation. So we have a substation on the west side of town on West Steel that was actually provided to us at a very nominal cost, but they ended our lease. They're doing some expansions and we had to move. So we are seeing some increase there. We've seen some increase in our phones. And so the $18,000 increase really goes towards all of our phones going into the dispatch center and also addresses the iPhones that we provide, our field staff. Those iPhones are really important because what they're doing is they're actually taking, they're taking the place of a phone, a camera and several different apps that we are gonna need to have in the future. So we no longer have to issue cameras to each individual officer. We no longer have to issue an audio recorder to each individual officer. They can do that through their phone. We have the phones allow us to connect with our body or cameras so they can input information. Makes it a little bit quicker when they put it into our evidence program. And then also as we start going into the latter part of this year, we're gonna be diving into the Racial Identity Profiling Act which is gonna be mandatory in January. And that's gonna, the officers are gonna have to put in a significant amount of information into this new program. They're gonna be able to do that through their smartphones. So we wanna make sure that we have them ready and available for all of our field officers. And then there's several other bullet points on there. You'll see they most, these are all increases based on contracts with outside services. And basically cost for business is going up everywhere. And so we're seeing a significant increase in several of these areas, specifically accident toes, our prisoner transports. We used to rely on the Sheriff's Department to provide transport. They no longer do that. And they now each jurisdiction has to provide their own transport when we arrest somebody from out of the area and bring them back to Sonoma County. There's an increase in some of the, again, the way they do testing for DNA and blood draws to address significant investigations and DUIs. There's other, several other internal or uncontrollable costs that we have that are related to internal funds. And we'll go over those in the next few, in a few more slides. And then one of the biggest unknowns that we have that is hard to control is our overtime costs. And we'll go into that a little bit more, but one example is with the last fire, we spent a significant amount of money, $300,000 in overtime, overtime alone, just in response to the glass fire. So those are some significant uncontrollable costs that we have. Next slide, please. This slide outlines three significant controllable costs that we have. Again, with other outside professional services with the costs going up, there is an increase in the first two specific areas. However, we can control that by, once we hit the cap, we can stop towing cars, basically. But our large vehicle tows that there's a significant increase there. This year we're gonna be budgeting $54,000, which is our three-year average. We actually spent about $70,000 last year, but we're going with our three-year average on that. One of the big issues about the cost increase here is because large vehicle tows usually require some sort of special disposal. So the tow companies have to go through a significant hazmat disposal to clean up any of the, the issues that they have with these towed vehicles that they're taking. We're also seeing increases in the abandoned vehicle, or the Abatement Vehicle Officer program. And again, we see more and more cars being towed and the cost more to tow those vehicles. So far this year, for 2021, we've spent about $110,000 on tows. And so the total amount within our AVA program pays for our AVA officer, and then up to a certain amount of tows. And then the small community outreach team. So again, that's just a small amount of money to allow our newly formed community engagement team to have some funds as we loosen restrictions up and start having opportunities to provide more and more community engagement opportunities. That's gonna allow for some funding to put on events such as coffee with a cop, community police experiences, and then also go to certain specific events such as Cinco de Mayo and maybe other fairs that we're invited to. So we're looking forward to having, even though it's just a small amount of money, it's gonna help this collateral assignment that we're starting up. Next slide, please. So this particular slide shows our general fund proposed budget and to start off with, per the city council's direction last year, we took the department back to the baseline. And to do that, we cut five positions or froze the five positions. And then to meet the department required target, we had to cut an additional police officer. So those are the positions that you saw early on in the presentation by the city manager. The salaries line item you can see has decreased because of these cuts. The salaries do include our overtime. And so again, with our overtime, that's a significant issue for us. Last year, we spent about $400,000 on overtime just to backfill due injury and staffing shortages. You have certain minimum staffing levels that we want to keep in patrol. That helps us with our response times and try to keep them down. Right now, what we're seeing is our, over the last several months, we've seen our response times starting to creep up. And I'll go over that a little bit later in our presentation. We've, again, we've responded to emergencies on a regular basis. The overtime, again, was about 300,000 for the last glass fire that we had. And our fighter average for overtime is about 3.1 million. We're currently going to budget about 1.9 as directed by the city. And we will be working with the long-term finance committee on how to address this in the future. You can see our benefits increased. Again, that's due to our PERS liability that we talked about on the earlier slide. Our professional services line item shows a significant jump percentage-wise. And so that is, the city manager talked about the mental health response program that we were putting on. This is where the money has gone. This is, this particular team is going to assist us in addressing, again, the issues that have come up and that has, that has become a council priority for us. So we have about 1.1 in that particular area for that program. We also have several other things in there such as our radio agreements and contracts and several of our other professional services contracts that we talked about, such as the DNA testing, exams such as psychological and polygraph exams for our new hires and prisoner of transports and blood draws. Our vehicle expenses, you can see that went down. It is a little bit, it can be a little bit confusing. We actually are seeing our garage rates in service costs go up from the city garage. But as that goes up, we do have almost all of our vehicles in the vehicle replacement program. And that allows us to be more fiscally responsible with handling and maintaining and replacing our vehicles. We do have a significant amount of that cost is in fuel. However, what we've seen is with the implementation of hybrid vehicles into our fleet, which we are still transitioning into, we've already seen a reduced fuel consumption. So as we start replacing our older vehicles with the hybrids, we're gonna see continued reduced fuel consumption in the future. The other, one of the other things I'm gonna bring up again, information technology that has gone up, that's for our PC replacement and IT overhead that the department is now absorbing and our training is in the other miscellaneous category. And there's about $308,000 worth of training. And the majority of that is for mandated or required trainings that we have to send our staff to. We also have the, at the bottom note, although there's no change, the CIP and OMM project, that is used to pay for, that is going to be used to pay for the auditor. And then the upcoming staffing study that we're gonna be doing later this year. Last year we paid our after-action report and the OIR reports that you viewed last week. And then also the, or two weeks ago, and then also a department security camera system. So in the future, it'll be used mainly for our auditor and then our staffing study for this year. Next slide, please. So again, our mental health response team, they're a one-time funding that we are requesting. Again, per Council's direction, we are working with Whitebird Clinic on a Kahootz-type model for Santa Rosa. This is gonna provide a team of non-sworn specialists to respond to calls involving individuals experiencing mental illness or a health crisis or people who are under the influence of the controlled substance. It's kind of a Kahootz-plus model because we're gonna be looking at things more than just social work, right? So there'll be, there is a mental health professional, a homeless professional and then a paramedic on this team. None of the staffing is sworn. So there will be no police officers on this team, but they will be working with us and through our dispatch to dispatch them to these particular calls. Year one is, it's not a full system. This is just the pilot program to get us started. It's 10 hours a day for seven days a week and the hope is to expand this program to a point where it can be 24-7. And so what we're looking at right now is we are in active conversations with several other entities, private partnerships in the county to see how quickly we can expand this into a full-time model and then how do we sustain that over the long-term? So again, you see the three-year projected proposal for us as we go forward, but this will be a, we want this to be around for a while and we're in conversations right now on how to make that happen. Go to the next slide. Yeah, Vice Mayor, you've got your hand up. Yes, Chief, I had a quick question. Why such a large jump between year one and two and then a smaller jump in money's allocated for years two and three? Part of that is again, the expansion into increasing the time and also increasing vehicles. So we'll have to add additional vehicles and equipment to go into the vehicles if we were going to expand the team into longer hours. Got it, thank you. And then just to know that I think one of the things that we're going to see out of this is last year, about 17% of our calls were homeless related and we're hoping this is going to help out with that CAHOOTS Plus style response to our community. Next slide, please. Council Member, sir, you have a question? Yes, thank you, Mayor. Chief, is under controlled substance, is alcohol considered a controlled substance? Yes, I would consider that a controlled substance. So if somebody's having a lot of times you may end up going to a call and you really don't know what it is. So they may be either intoxicated or they may be under the influence of another controlled substance and that team will be able to, we're hopeful that that team will be able to manage that and get that person to the appropriate help. Thanks for that clarification, appreciate it. Next slide, if there's nothing else there. So this particular slide shows our entire proposed budget. This includes Measure O and we'll talk a little bit more about that as we, this slide and the next slide. You can see that, although our general fund is increasing for this Kahoot style model, we are seeing a reduction in Measure O. That reduction is about $500,000 and it equates to basically three officers who were cut from the SRO program earlier this year. We are, and I'll go into more Measure O information on the next slide. We see a reduction in the federal asset forfeiture. It basically is 40, it's reduced to $40,000 just to align with the prior year actuals. We have the supplemental law enforcement line item just so you know that is our funding for the body more camera program. That funding will run out at the end of fiscal year 22-23. So we've got about two more years of funding within that line item and then we're gonna be working on what does that look like to be able to fund that camera program. It is invaluable for us, it's helped us tremendously, not only in our investigations but it also helps us out when we're dealing with, or trying to address accountability and any complaints that come in and we've actually seen a reduction in complaints with these when we went to the body work camera program. So it's very important to us to keep that program in the future. Our, the asset forfeitures, state asset forfeiture that's used basically specific to narcotic related operations or training and investigative needs. And then the capital improvement fund, that particular line item is a, that's being used this year for the public safety building generator. We've had some issues during the fires where our power goes out. This is a matching fund. Cal OES has funded $300,000 for the generator. So this is a sitting match and we are gonna be using that to basically stabilize and keep our station going, including our dispatch center, which was run 24 seven. Next slide, please. So again, this is some of our non-general fund budget highlights. Again, we talked a little bit about the federal narcotics asset forfeiture. It's been realigned. The measure roll funds, again, we reduced it by three officers. And so what we did in anticipation of the cuts, we held, we've been holding these vacancies since the beginning of 2021. After some people, some of our staff members retired, we've held those vacant and those are gonna be cut. As this really kind of goes into the general fund discussion with the number of positions that we've lost. So since 2018, we've lost a total of 15 and a half positions. Seven of those have been sworn. Eight and a half have been civilian positions. With the staffing cuts that were proposed, that's being proposed for this year, we will be down to 251 positions. 174 of those will be sworn. 77 will be civilian positions. We try to have around 85 in patrol. And we are below that number. And some of the things that we try to do is to, you know, we borrow from these other assignments to try to keep our response times low. Some of the things that we've been impacting. So before you ask the question, Council Member Schwedhelm, we have seen a reduction in our community engagement. It's been a little bit more difficult in some of the engagement opportunities. So in addition to COVID, we don't, we no longer have a gang unit. So once we lost those positions last year, we have no way to staff the gang unit. We now no longer have an SRO team. And those two teams were our primary officers who were directly involved with the Violence Prevention Partnership. They were involved in our Cinco de Mayo planning and events and staffing those booths. And they were the kind of our go-to staff members to go to any particular last minute community meetings that would come up. And so we no longer have that ability to just pull from those special assignments. We've seen our response time starting to increase. They're starting to creep up over the last eight months or so, actually since August. And so where our goal is to be at six minutes for our priority one response times, we're at almost seven minutes right now. So we're starting to see those and then the other priorities creep up. So we're seeing an increased, so reduced staffing, increased response time and less ability to address community engagement. And then also some of our investigations have, we've have a lower clearance rate in some of our crimes. One of the things that occurred in 2020, again, our crimes against persons increased by about 6%, but our clearance rates for crimes against persons dropped by 6%. So those are some of the impacts that we are having as we address our current staffing issues. That does conclude our slide. So be happy to answer any questions. Okay, I'll start with Council Member Sawyer. Thanks, Mayor. Chief, what is the status of your calls for service and your response time is going up by the calls for service directly proportioned to the response times, would you say? Or is it the nature of the types of calls that we are taking more time to get to? So we have, at the beginning of 2020, our calls dropped significantly just because of COVID. And then, but we saw them start to creep up, around May and June, they started to increase and they've been continually increasing. Our response times, for each priority, we try to make sure that we're getting to the priority ones as quickly as possible. And those are the domestic violence, potential suicide calls, prowlers, shootings, fights, stabbings, that sort of thing. And those are the ones, over the last several months, it's increased and we're now almost at six or almost at seven minutes. And that's where we want to see that six minute line. Our priority twos, those are usually our alarms, kind of verbal disturbance, checking the welfare of people. That is over 11 minutes. So it takes us about an average of over 11 minutes to get there. Again, they're incrementally starting to rise up. Our priority three calls, those are cold reports like a theft report that may have happened a couple of days ago. Traffic hazards, noise complaints, those are over 21 minutes in average right now. And then our priority four calls, those are things such as parking complaints, towing vehicles, abandoned vehicles, phone calls to officers. Those are at almost 30 minutes. Yeah, yeah, that priority one call, that seven minutes can feel like a really long time and it does give me a high level of concern. Thank you. Vice Mayor. So I have a couple. Thank you for your presentation, Chief. The first would probably be the measure oath funds in us not having the game prevention or intervention. This is a time to get feedback, I'm assuming. So I really would like to see how we can get that back because we know that game prevention and intervention that the measure oath funds are supposed to assist with that. And it really starts when the children are a lot younger before they get into games in such activities. In addition to really wanna see us out there in the community again, coffee with a cup before I even thought about being on city council. I was able to participate in that and really see who patrols my neighborhoods. And it actually allows the residents to speak to the officers that patrol their neighborhoods. So I do like that program. And I wanna look at increasing training, non-mandatory training, but the enrichment of officers. I think that it is so important. Like we need to have the mandatory training, but we also need to have training that allows enrichment of our officers. So if we can, I know I'm asking a lot, but I'm probably the one that should be giving. I would like to see those things implemented. Thank you. I think again, it comes back to being able to have the time and then the funding. And so our training has remained flat. We have not been able to increase it. And again, the majority, you know, especially as we come out of COVID, one of the things that we're gonna have to do is to make sure that we're, because a lot of training was suspended because we couldn't do things in person. We try to make the best out of doing online training, but we're, as things loosen up, we've got to start getting people back to make sure they're wearing compliance with all mandatory trainings. And that's gonna be taking priority. And so that's really what our training budget's for. And we do what we can to try to find, you know, training that is enriching.  But most of our training right now is gonna be dealing with some of the mandatory training that we have to be cut up to speed on. But we will continue to seek those out. Thank you. Council Member Svato. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief, I'll just keep on this one of questions in the comments. So you mentioned you're doing a staffing study. So I know the department historically has looked at obligated and unobligated time. And I know the definition that this community had used for to be considered a community policing organization, about half the time would be proactive. In other words, officers, meeting community members, some things that we heard from some of my colleagues, building those relationships. And the other half would be responding to calls for service, doing reports and whatnot, right? And it's concerning to me that the response times to priority one calls have increased to seven. In my understanding, correct me if there's new information, the only way you can adjust that, you either need to stop responding to some calls, priority calls for service, or get additional resources. Is that still fairly accurate? Yes, that is accurate. We are currently looking at response times and calls for service that we respond to. And so the thing that is new to this council and to this community is our work in the area of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Have you factored in how that will be incorporated the police department and how will your members of your organization be able to start learning about this? Because the bottom line is if I'm calling 911, I may not be interested in hearing that officers are not 10, eight on the streets, right? They're doing more training. How have you factored that into these response time, this additional training and education to make some of these cultural changes that this council has been talking about? Well, we, I mean, we are definitely doing the best we can. I think the biggest thing for us is that we do want to, we're trying to maintain that level of service right now. So if somebody calls, you know, we provide training to our dispatchers to really try to triage each particular call. And so they will figure out if they need immediate help or if they need a phone call back, you know, what have you. But most of the issue that we have are, you know, we don't have staffing, the call times are going to go up. And so it is, you know, there is a customer service piece of it and we want to treat all of our neighborhoods equally. And that's just, that's the struggle that we're having right now. I guess I don't really have an answer on what we can do, what the solution is based on what we have right now and what our proposed budget is. We are going to be addressing reevaluating calls for service. We are going to be addressing looking at what kind of trainings that we do, but we've got to get to prioritize the mandatory training and then our minimum staffing levels to try to bring those calls down. I guess to put it from a council perspective where I'm struggling is I see that's really, there's two options that we can provide you feedback with. It's either saying stop one of these type of calls so you have more time to do the DEI work, the community policing, get the emergency response times to the low seven minutes. Either we can do that by either adding resources or stop responding to some calls for service. Are there other options that aren't in either of those two categories? Yeah, I think those are the two major possibilities. The only other possibility again would be overtime that just burns people out. And so I think the biggest piece right now is add more resources or we stop providing specific services. Okay, thank you. And then can we go back to slide 40 about the mental health of response team pilot program? Because I think you test based on it. And I think all of our interest is eventually we want this to be 24 seven. And it looks like we're $1.4 million short of that. You talked about meeting with different community stakeholders. Have you heard or are there some willing participants in the community that'll help fund this operation to get us to that 24 seven more quickly than three years? Yes, that's a good question, council member. We are getting a lot of positive feedback from the community, not only the community in general, but actually are some of the stakeholders in this. And so I don't know if I can give you exact names, but I do know that we're speaking with members of public health or in the health community and then also the county. And we're actively trying to work on raising other funds. So almost like a public-private partnership to be able to expand and increase that team quicker. So we can get to that 24 seven model before year three. We can get there quicker and then we can actually sustain this program in the years to come. So those are happening right now in the partners that we're talking to. They seem to be very encouraged and they seem, they appear to be very willing to try to assist in some of this public-private funding. And given what's projected here for a cost of year one, year two, year three, if we receive no outside funding, this council will be having a discussion, okay, now last year, if we commit to 1.1 million, next year we're gonna have to commit 2.2 million, that if that funding is available, correct? That's correct. Okay, and then additionally, I know going federal government's passing the CAHOOTS Act, it's my understanding that in order to get some of that reimbursement from Medicaid, your emergency response team has to be 24 seven and that would then open up the opportunity to apply for reimbursement from some costs. And I'm not even sure if it's just the police money but for the program, is that still your understanding of that CAHOOTS Act? Yes, that is true. We have under our grants that you can put out for and you can also get some funding through some new legislation, but you do have to have a 24 seven model before that kicks in. Okay, so again, given what we have here on slide 40, year three, we'd have to come up with a 2.5 million before we qualify for any of that and that would be 100% city funding. That's correct. Okay, all right, those are the questions I have on that one. If you can go to slide 37, I had a question about blood draws. So this said cost escalations, uncontrollable costs, blood draw cost increase. Have we solicited feedback from the fire department because I think we have some trained paramedics or EMTs and I apologize for that classification but I believe one of those class of employees have the ability to do blood draws. Have we explored using our own resources versus going outside to make the assumptions blood draw is not from the city employees from an outside entity? Yes, so we have explored that with the fire department.  There's a couple of things that we still have to work through. I think one of the biggest issues is that ambulances are especially equipped for blood draws and the fire apparatuses are not. They would have to be, there would be some costs associated with equipping the engines. And then I think the other thing that comes up is if there's a blood draw, who responds to that, right? Is it the closest engine company? If that's the case, if they're in their rig, it takes a full rig off and if it's one of the busiest, if it's a busy engine company, it could take them offline for a significant amount of time. So we're working through that. I think the biggest thing that we can do, we're gonna continue those conversations with fire to see if that's something that is an option for the future. And so I know you had mentioned that we just have a 13K increase. What's the total cost of a blood draw contract? Do you know? I believe it was about $32,000. Pam, am I correct? Yeah, hi, everybody. So the cost increases going up to about 151 per draw and we do about 20 a month. 20 a month. I guess I would just encourage because to me it is a controllable cost. If there are some things in chief, if you had mentioned what they are, I mean, is there something that would prevent a police detective to actually bring the patient to where the resource is, right? We do that. And I'm just thinking operationally, it may be a way to save the costs for those type of programs. So I'd really appreciate further exploration on that because I think it is a cost that we could control. So thank you. Those are all the questions I have. Thank you. All right, thank you, Council Member Chief. I had a couple for you as well. First, I kind of wanted to punctuate the point that Council Member Schwedhelm was making. It'd be great for the council to hear what resources the police department needs to be able to implement the DEI work that we are talking about. And I'll have the same question for the HR department. Really just asking where does the budget that we're proposing reflect the values that the council is trying to espouse in our community as well. And so I know that a lot of the programming is being done on the HR side, but when we come back for the final adoption of the budget, it'd be helpful for me to see where the police department feels like the budget that's being asked for is reflective of that principle as well. And if it isn't telling us what resources you do need to be able to meet that obligation or that you feel like you need to meet that obligation. The next question I had for you was about the abandoned vehicle towing. Is any of that cost recoverable? Yes. So for abandoned vehicles, we receive about 180,000 a year from the county, but that also covers our community services officer salary. Okay, so with the $15,000 here for the cost escalation, does that mean that our reimbursables will also go up at the same time or is this uncompensated escalation? That's uncompensated. Okay, and there's no recoverability on the individual who abandoned the vehicle? I don't believe so. Chief Navarro, do you know? No, I don't think so. Okay, perhaps something for a conversation down the road is how we potentially do that and for individuals who don't have the finances to take care of their vehicle, how do we monetize if there's a way to do it, the city having to take care of these vehicles that have been left in the public's right of way? But I don't have an answer for you on that. And then the last one I had for you, Chief, and it's a random one. It's, I saw that Katadi in their budget discussions today actually have a component of it that matches their climate goals in having their police department vehicles, their fleet, when they get replaced, have to be electric vehicles or non-combustible engine vehicles. And I'm just wondering if this is something that the department has started to look into from a performance issue, from a cost issue, and from a climate issue. So right now we're working on transitioning over to hybrids. There are a couple of electric vehicles, patrol vehicles that are out there. I know Fremont has, they have a Tesla, but I can tell you, when the battery runs out, you're, it's done, you have to tow it back to the yard. They actually had one of their cars, basically lose power in a pursuit. So those are some of the issues that you, that we need to think about, but we have not started exploring fully electric yet. Other than, we do have some, we do have some zero motorcycles that are assigned to our downtown enforcement team that are electric, and those work out very well. It is something that we can look at in the future, but right now we're trying to transition over to the hybrids. And usually what we do is go for you, we work with fleet to get on the fleet pricing. And so a lot of what fleet has us, we work with fleet with most of the, most of the vehicles that we get and are basically giving them specs, and then they will provide, this is how we're putting it out. But we'll definitely look into that in the future. I appreciate that, Chief. As somebody who drives a hybrid and Envy's friends who have fully electric vehicles, I can tell you the performance is generally, and Tom's smiling, the performance for the electric vehicles is generally preferred, although I do understand that there are circumstances that are less than desirable. So I'd be interested in us pursuing something around that as well to see if we can, again, meet the values that the council has espoused in our budgeting. Councilor, are there any other questions? Council Member Fleming. Hey there, couldn't help but jump on the bandwagon around fuel efficiency. One thing that I noticed continually when I'm going around the neighborhood is officers' cars idling, and not when they're dealing with a situation, but just when they're hanging out. And so I just wanna put in an additional plug to remind folks to conserve where possible, since we're all getting to the point where we have to conserve everything, both for financial and climate change related goals, but thank you for the presentation. Yes, thank you, and Council Member Fleming, we do idle our vehicles a lot because we do have a lot of power that's being generated for the computers and the light bars that in the radios that are constantly going. So part of being able to, we do have some backup batteries, but it doesn't always do the trick, and we have to continue to keep the cars running. And so the hybrids actually accommodate that because they'll shut off when they don't need it, and then they'll turn back on when they need more power to juice the batteries up. Thank you, and helpful information. And Mayor, if I could chime in here just to add, the fleet will be coming to the Climate Action Subcommittee here over the course of the next several months to talk about a vehicle procurement program, specifically focused around hybrid and all electric vehicles. The goal there being that we can start to address, we can start to address some of the issues that you're having discussion with the Chief Navarro on. There are new technologies coming out that will address some of those idling issues that are more in line with our Climate Action Plan. And so please look forward to that conversation coming in the fairly near future. All right, thank you, Jason. I for one think that the Chief would look great rolling around the community in an Nissan Leaf. Thank you, Mayor. Do we have any other questions for the Chief? Okay. Council before we move into the next, thank you, Chief, and thank you so much, Pam. Council before we move into the next department, we're gonna go ahead and take, let's call it a five-minute break and then we'll come back for that department presentation. All right, Madam City Clerk, let's see if we have a quorum. One moment, Mayor. Thank you, Marius. I am ready as a little slow today. Just give me a second here. I'm having some technical difficulties with my program. It's all good. Okay, we'll call Council Member Tibbets. Council Member Schwedhelm. Here. Council Member Sawyer. Here. Council Member Fleming. Still here. Here, Council Member Alvarez. Present. Vice Mayor Rogers. Present. Mayor Rogers. Here. Let the record show that all council members are present. All right, Mr. City Manager, let's go ahead and resume. I believe next up is transportation and operations. Leading off that presentation is Assistant City Manager Jason Knott. Thank you, City Manager. Thanks, Mayor. Please allow me to present the Transportation and Public Works budget if you advance another slide. Talking about things that are uncontrollable costs. One of the concepts that's coming forward is a series of state legislation that could result in impacts. One of which we talked about when we went to implement the zero waste plan or the zero waste ordinance, and that's SB 1383. When we were in discussing that originally and trying to identify what some of the concerns might be, the consultant that we had, R3 that was looking at that particular plan identified a need for additional staffing in order to comply with the rules of 1383. There's no funding that comes as the state approves its laws like that. And therefore it is something that as we start to see this implement and roll out, become starting January 1st of 2022, we expect that there's going to be impacts to the local agencies. What I've shown here is simply the potential staffing needs in order to support that new law. But there may be other components of this such as living within the law is a requirement that we purchase and acquire compost, depending upon what ultimately gets approved within the law that could be significant on the order of half a million to three quarters of a million dollars worth of compost that we would have to purchase and distribute. So while I only show the one particular component here, there's a number of other things that may be moving forward. There's other bills that relate to how we might be able to see telecommunications systems coming forward and how that could impact our systems within our traffic and signal facilities. And those could have specific and direct impacts to the city as we're responsible potentially for making improvements to those facilities in order to support those new telecommunications activities that come forward. We also continue to see an increase in the number of, in the type of utilities costs. And we don't expect to see that slow down. Some of our hope moving forward will be in a study that we're currently doing, which is an energy audit and a microgrid audit that we'll be bringing to the Climate Action Subcommittee here later this summer. Maybe it'll give us an opportunity to at least cease some of the increases that we may see to these utility costs moving forward. But at this point in time, this is our anticipation as we have costs of about $126,000 at least for this year that are gonna be expenses that we don't have control over. Next slide, please. Some of our controllable costs are things that we implemented in and of ourselves. And as we've talked about, or you may have heard over the course of the last year, we've had a substantial increase in the number of acts, number of asks and requests of our real estate team to the point where we're actually not able to achieve and deliver all of the projects necessary for some of our capital improvement programs. We're struggling to keep up with some of the requests coming within the downtown area. And so we're specifically looking at trying to add an additional staff member and add some additional resource so that those requests have something that we can bill against in order to get the types of professional services that we need. For example, as we're looking at trying to do an RFP for lots 10, 11 and garage five, trying to come up with a professional service that can help us do the title report, help us do the appraisal, help us do some professional marketing, help us to be able to reach out to those developers nationwide that may show interest in doing a comprehensive about a study or a comprehensive development at that location is gonna be important. And so that's part of why we've made this specific ask in addition to just being able to provide capacity so that our increasing water sewer and general fund capital programs have the support they need because everything is coming forward with additional real estate acquisition costs, whether it's time associated with needing additional right of way, whether it's some of the easements that were required, whether it's trying to just do additional evaluations associated with those capital projects that only the real estate team can do. So that's why this particular request is coming forward. You saw it on the initial slide that Sean showed as an additional need, but it is a controllable cost. It's something that we believe we have the ability to be able to say, yes, this is an area that we need to be able to keep up the pace with the things in our expectations for the services, or whether we can continue to control and contain the amount of effort that we're putting in this particular area. Next slide. Looking at our general fund for the proposed budget, as you've looked to reduce the number of staff members, and again, going back to slide five, not asking you to change Ms. Clerk, but just trying to relate back there, there are seven positions that the department is looking to trim as a part of the exercise that Mr. McGlynn explained. In those seven positions, you see the net change of about $412,000 in a reduction. That does then get balanced, however, with the benefits where we have a slight increase. A portion of that slight increase actually goes, as you've heard from the other two departments, is a PERS function, as those employees remain in our retirement system. We still have costs associated with that moving forward. And therefore, even though we're reducing staff members in an effort to control our day-to-day costs, there is an ongoing benefits cost associated with that. From a professional services, the cost of providing services, whether it's janitorial, HVAC, continues to rise over the course of time. And in order to ensure that we have those professional services to keep us in clean and functioning organizations, we're needing to keep pace, which causes that increase. From a vehicle expense, just like you've heard from the other two departments, those rates have gone up in an effort to ensure that we have good, common maintenance practices and our equipment is kept in a good condition. Utilities, as you heard me say, earlier PG&E continues to rise, as well as other expenses from the utility standpoint. And we just need to make sure we're adjusting it to keep pace. On the operational supplies aspect, there is about $116,000 increase in the budget associated with the Roseland annexation program. There's a component of that that relates to our operations on a day-to-day basis. That is aside and different from the capital expenditure, which you'll see when we get into the capital improvement program likely tomorrow. Information technology continues to rise. A lot of this has to do with some of our COVID adjustments. With a number of our professional staff working remotely, we did adjust the technology components to provide them with mobile devices in an effort to ensure that they have continuity of operation while they work from home. That did increase the cost of providing service for our department. We will be over the next year looking at how we can adjust that so that that number can start to come down. As we look to reduce the number of desktop devices we have and retain just simply the laptops that we were able to acquire during the course of the last year. On the general fund administration cost plan, this is just our overhead from the citywide cost allocation plan. This really is us working on the reorganization that took place a year and a half ago. And the department is still playing catch up in making sure that its budget is constantly, is established in a way that actually reflects the newly formed program that includes now parks maintenance and parks planning. And then we do have a minor increase in our CIP and O&M projects. And this relates specifically to the real estate increase. A large portion of that does come in the form of a single amount that not only will the staff but our professional services will be able to bill against in an effort to ensure that we have the right kind of professional services moving forward. When it comes to the reduction in staff, the city manager asked us to kind of describe for you what that looks like. As it stands, we'll be losing four skilled maintenance workers. What that relates to is we'll actually have to cut the special projects crew that we have in our street maintenance team. What that involves will be, we will no longer be constructing pedestrian ramps. We'll no longer be doing concrete repairs. We'll no longer be repairing and replacing storm drains and pipes that are not part of a capital program. These are things that our team that's within the organization will go and make these types of repairs in an effort to address specific complaints that come forward. As it stands, at this point, once the loss of these staff members we'll only be making those repairs as a function of a capital improvement program in the future. In addition, it'll also address, it'll also impact repairing ballards when we have ballards that get knocked down dealing with survey monuments and also the cleaning and ongoing debris management associated with our storm drains throughout town. It reduces our program in the storm drain side not quite 50%. This is not the storm drain program that deals with the two vector trucks that we have. This is really the day-to-day hand removal of leaves during flood response and winter events. We also are gonna be looking at reducing two groundskeeper positions. The impact of the reduction of those positions will force us to close the majority of the restrooms in our parks. Our groundskeepers, their specific job is the ongoing upkeep and maintenance of those or I'm sorry, the janitorial aspect of those bathrooms. They also do litter patrol in and around the parks and we will see a substantial reduction in the amount of day-to-day litter patrol associated with that. There are a couple of ways we may be able to address some of those concerns. We may be able to look at our janitorial contract to see if they can pick up some of those costs and some of those services, albeit that will counteract the cost savings associated with the reduction of those staff members. And then on the electrical side, we are also losing one electrician within this. At this point in time, that position has been vacant for some period of time and the staff has done an excellent job of keeping up with the program. We do expect that that will limit our ability to be proactive in the future. We typically have a reactive oriented program relating to streetlight repair and maintenance as well as our facility repair and maintenance. This will just simply further delay our ability to be able to respond to some of those requests as they come forward. Next slide. When we think about unfunded additional needs, obviously you've heard me talk for several years about all of the different needs that are out there within the aspect of the $5 billion worth of infrastructure that were responsible for maintaining and the needs are substantial. And I felt it was just, I felt at this point in time, what I would do is I would identify those that we recently talked about as a function of the PG&E settlement funds. These items with a couple of minor exceptions showed up in the presentations that you saw between December and March. These are some very high profile critical projects that we believe have merit moving forward. We do know that the funds are very tight. And so these are just items that we wanna make sure that we're putting in front of you as you're gonna see from other departments as well. A couple of things to highlight, the police department recently upgraded their radio system and provided a brand new digital system that other departments can transition to. Transit is one of those systems that would benefit from being able to move over to that system recognizing and you'll hear later in the study session about their budget. There are operating on a fairly tight budget and they would be asking if there was a way for them to come up with the $100,000 capital need to be able to transition each of the radios and the 29 buses that we currently have to the new radio system. With that said, the expectation is that future buses that we would purchase would come already equipped with that new radio and that would be accommodated as part of that capital expenditure. We also talk about the Herne Avenue interchange as an evacuation route, as well as something that's an economic development benefit for the South part of town. It is an area where we've got substantial congestion that relates not only to impacts to police and fire travel, but also to their ability to be able to really develop at the highest possible level from the retail and commercial standpoint in both of those two quadrants, the Southwest and the Southeast. It is a substantial bottleneck. You also heard not just the public, but you heard both Chief Westrop and myself talk about a number of fire recovery aspects, whether we were dealing with looking at implementing fiber optic and CCTVs with the idea of trying to produce flushing plans that would allow us to increase evacuation routes, but also looking at some of the direct impacts, whether it's recovering the pavement that was damaged, not only during the debris removal mission, but now during the fire recovery mission. We've had a huge reduction in the pavement quality in both the coffee park, the Hidden Valley and the Fountain Grove neighborhoods. The difference visually in those streets and the structural damage that we've seen is significant. And so that's one of the other items that you've heard about and we thought we would just go ahead and identify here again. And then the last piece that I put on here, which was just identifying that we are looking at coming forward later in the summer, early fall with the results of the energy audit and the microgrid recommendation, they are gonna have a series of implement, series of recommendations for different types of programs and projects that could be put into place. I put a number down, that number is not set. There's no specific recommendations at this point in time, but I do believe that does provide a general order of magnitude of the types of substantial programs that you could see coming from that recommendation. Next slide, please. In addition, we were also asked to look at the ARPA funds and what those might be used for as well. While we did take the opportunity during the course of COVID to implement and modification to our city-wide HVAC units, the heating and air conditioning systems were retrofitted with bipolar ionization units in an effort to really try to address the aerial and particulates associated with COVID as we recirculate air through the ultraviolet systems and those bipolar ionization units, address, clean and scrub all of the COVID components. I had a 99% plus ratio and it was a huge benefit to the staff that was required to be in the offices during those periods of time. But also the staff that we're gonna be bringing back in over the course of the next several months as we begin to return to a different type of service following the relief provided by the state. The idea that we have here relating to HVAC replacement and upgrade really is we've got a very antiquated system. Several of those units are still relying on a coolant substance that is now no longer readily available in the market. It's something that we've been told and we need to phase out over the course of time. Circulation is certainly a major issue. The bipolar ionization units themselves are only as good as the circulation associated with each of those buildings. Many of the buildings that we occupy are not currently configured in the way that the way they were when they were originally built. And so the modifications associated with the circulation, the ventilation isn't necessarily up to speed with the current configuration of those buildings to support the staff. And therefore we see a strain on the equipment and that's why you see this particular item in here. It is a hefty number because we do own 108 different structures and majority of those structures have more than one HVAC unit on the roof. When we brought up the concept of some of the fire recovery under the PG&E, we really did talk about the idea of installing fiber optic utilization of CCTV. This is something that the ARPA funds are really looking at trying to implement more from the standpoint of connectivity, especially with the number of students and personnel that were out in the community working from home. The connectivity and the broadband aspect is really limited in a number of areas with the West and Southwest and Southeast being some of our hardest and most challenged areas. And so the ARPA funds are specifically called out or I'm sorry broadband is specifically called out as an identified use of the ARPA funds. Again, throwing a number on the table, we put just a number on the slide for just for scale that would provide a substantial impact and benefit to being able to outfit the Southwest, West and Southeast with fiber optic at least on the standpoint of a backbone system. There would need to be an additional investment in order to be able to get either to the home or to a wireless device that would allow better connectivity in each of those communities. The other thing that ARPA came up with was just general investment from the benefit of increasing the number of employment opportunities so that we can start to see a return to business. And so these last two items, one I've already talked about the energy audit, it could also fit within this criteria. But the other would be something akin to a citywide park playground and ball field improvements. I just kind of provided an idea of what a program could look like, how that fund might be implemented just to give you a scale and concept if you requested more information in the future of what types of things we may be able to utilize as an investment under the ARPA program. Next slide. So this slide provides you with a snapshot of just the entire fund balance within the transportation and public works. What you'll notice is about 30% of the fund that you'll see here is within the general fund side of the department. About 30% comes into the capital improvement program, which is a general fund part of the capital improvement program, not necessarily a water or water enterprise. And you'll see more of that as we get into the capital improvement program discussion. And then the other 30% really is about the enterprise. It's about transit, it's about the golf course, it's about our fleet enterprise. And that's what makes up the majority of our department budget. As you can see, we have made strides as we looked at how we were gonna address this particular budget year at reducing our overall budget impact. As you heard from the other departments, we did start with the 2019-20 actuals, recognizing that during the course of that time, we had substantial changes in operation. During the first part, or I'm sorry, during the last part of that year, we had staff members off of work to provide for that highest quality health and benefit of their support for approximately 10 weeks. That kept us from realizing quite a bit of in-service activity, whether you were on the transit side, whether you were on the road maintenance side, whether you were on the fleet side. We went down to very bare bones operations during that period of time. And then earlier during the course of that year 2019-20-20, you remember, we dealt with the concave fire and a fairly significant response to the concave fire, but also a huge amount of evacuations, one of the largest evacuations within our community. And that had a substantial impact in our ability to support operations within the department, which also had a reduction in our service ability. And so all of those things within the 2019-20 actuals created a baseline for us. And then we took what we knew were the most appropriate activities at the levels that they should have been implemented during those times and added those back in to produce the budget that we've put before you. That does include some reductions. We did find that we had a reduced need for some of our supplies and services. With that, we did go forward and reduce some of those numbers. And that's why you end up seeing the reduction of 4.1% in the overall departmental budget. And with that, that concludes my presentation for transportation of public works. And I'm happy to answer any questions. All right, thank you so much, Jason. Council to be at questions. Council Member Spudhelm. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Jason, can you just reframe, because I heard the transportation public works, general fund reductions. One of the impacts I heard you say is that if you were to lose those seven positions, restrooms in all the park facilities would not be open. Did I hear that correctly? That is one of the impacts that we'll be moving forward. That we'll be presenting or that I am presenting as a p