Arroyo Grande, California

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor, there is one closed session item, labor negotiation pursuant to government code section 54957.6 with city designated negotiators as in the agenda. Thank you very much. And at this time, we'll open up public comment on our closed session item. Would anyone like to speak? And hit that little button there. There you go. Good evening, Madam Mayor and council members. My name is Nicole Bryant. I'm the field representative for SEIU Local 620, who represents your hardworking general unit employees here at the city of Arroyo Grande. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening as you prepare for your closed session meeting. First, I want to acknowledge the progress that's been made at the bargaining table. We appreciate the city's efforts to address recruitment and retention through market equity adjustments and ensure that the city's workforce stays aligned with comparable labor market. So the city of Arroyo Grande doesn't lose talented, dedicated staff to neighboring jurisdictions. Those steps matter, and they have not gone unnoticed by our members. So thank you. While we are close to an agreement, there are a couple key issues that remain that are fundamental to whether this contract ultimately provides real stability for the workforce. Chief among them is the need for fiscal certainty over the term of the agreement. The city has proposed shifting from a longstanding shared percentage model for medical premium increases to a flat dollar contribution. We understand the desire for simplicity and the ability to accurately predict future costs. But in practice, that shift transfers more risk to the employees. Especially in years where healthcare costs continue to rise sharply. Maintaining a cost-sharing approach that adjusts proportionally helps ensure that burdens remain balanced and predictable. Additionally, the proposed cost of living adjustments in the later years of the contract risk falling behind inflation. Without adequate COLAs and the very gains you've worked to achieve in the first year of the contract can erode and will, quickly putting employees right back in the position that this agreement aims to fix. This evening, you'll hear directly from our members who are dedicated public servants. People who serve this community each and every day who are dedicated by the decision, who are impacted by the decisions you're about to make. These are the employees who maintain your parks, plan and run your numerous community events, maintain your infrastructure, clear your roadways from debris during storms, and ensure that you have clean drinking water every day. They are employees who are dedicated to the city. They are employees who care deeply about the city, have built their careers, families, and lives here, and who are simply asking for stability, fairness, and a partnership that reflects their contributions. We respectfully ask that you provide your negotiators with the authority needed to reach a balanced agreement that supports both the city's fiscal responsibility and the financial security of its workforce. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you for your time and consideration. Okay, good evening council members. My name is Ken LaShaffe and I've worked for the city for 22 years. I currently serve as a senior account clerk in administrative services. I support myself and like many of my colleagues I'm proud proud of the work that I do for this community. I want to start by saying thank you. We truly appreciate the city's overall proposal and the effort to bring employees closer to market standards. Those equity adjustments matter and they show that the city recognizes our value. There are still a few important issues we need to resolve so employees can feel secure over the full length of the contract. One major concern is the anticipated double digit increase in medical premiums. Moving from a shared percentage model to a flat rate increase may seem simple, but for employees it means taking on more of a financial risk. For someone like me supporting myself, that uncertainty is real. We're also concerned with the cost of living adjustments in subsequent subsequent years of the offer fall below current inflation. When raises don't keep up with the rising costs, we fall further and further behind in the market. The very thing the city just made the effort to correct. And I want to remind the city council that SEIU members played a major role in helping pass measure E24. The sales tax measure that meant to support our streets and ease pressure on the city's budget. We stepped up for the community and now we're asking the city to support the workforce in return. We're close to an agreement. We appreciate the progress. We're simply asking for a contract that provides stability, fairness for the people who keep the city running every day. Thank you for your time. Anyone else? Oh, wait. Hello. Good evening, council members. My name is Corey Brooks. I love serving the city of Arroy Grande. I've worked for the city for 12 years and I'm raising my two kids here in our community. I'm here tonight to talk about the rising medical costs and the change from a shared percentage to a small flat rate increase. For employees, that shift makes it much harder to keep up with rising costs of health care. For families like mine, it makes our monthly budget a lot less predictable when you're trying to plan for your kids, your bills and your future. That adds so much unneeded pressure. We appreciate the progress that's been made at the table. We just need a little bit more support on these items. Employees count on secure, stable benefits that do not undo hardship on families. As always, we will continue providing the reliable service this city depends on every day. Thank you for listening and continuing to work with us. I am grateful for the progress. I am grateful for the progress. We have a great day. Thank you. I am proud of the city for eight years. I am proud of the city for eight years and I'm a lead worker in parks. I support my family, my two sons, both who are attending Cal Poly. I am a very proud dad as well as I support my in-laws. I am grateful for the progress we made together, especially the market equality increase that helped bring employees closer where the market says we should be. I am grateful for the progress. I am grateful for the medical purse will hit my family like mine hard. Moving from shared percentage basis contributions to small flat increases make our costs less predictable and less secure. And progress of the COLA that fell below CPI means we will continue to fall behind instead of keeping pace with the market. I appreciate the moment at the table so far and I'm hopeful we can keep working towards an agreement that protects the people who serve this community every day. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your time. Hello, Madam Mayor and fellow Council members. My name is Blake Simpson. I'm a maintenance to worker in the public works utility department. I have been serving the city for a little over a year now. I am a manager of many of my coworkers I'm trying to keep up with the cost of living in this area. I want to speak briefly about two issues in the current contract that directly affect whether workers like me can afford to live here. First, we're expecting double digit percentage increases to medical premiums this coming year. At the same time, the proposal shifts from percentage based cost sharing to small flat rate increases. That might sound simple, but it's actually leaves employees more exposed when premiums jump. For someone early in their career working towards saving for my future that creates real uncertainty about whether basic health care will stay within reach. Second, the cost of life adjustment. In years two and three falls below today's inflation rate. When raises don't keep up with actual costs, we fall behind rent, groceries, utilities, everything in this region keeps climbing. If our wages don't keep pace, it becomes harder for workers to stay rooted in the community we serve. I'm proud to work. I'm proud of the work I do. I keep the water running clean every day for our residents and businesses. All I'm asking for is a contract that reflects the real cost of living on the Central Coast and gives employees stability instead of fear of slipping further behind. We want to keep serving the city with pride. We just need a fair path that makes it possible for us to live here too. Thank you for your time. Hi, Mayor and Council members. I'm so nervous. Good evening. My name is Carrie Van Beveren, and I've proudly served the community for 24 years, currently as a recreation supervisor. I've dedicated my career to building programs that support the youth, families and people of all ages. And I'm also a mother of the two best kids in the world, and I help support them. Like everybody said before, we really appreciate all the things that have come along with the contract, but we have the two sticking points. And what we really need help with is financial security for the multi-year contract. Like they said, the double digit increases to medical premiums and then shifting from shared percentage based, I wish this was bigger, percentage based contribution increases to minimal flat rate places significant burden on me and my friends and coworkers. And it doesn't keep up with rising health care costs, and that creates some real stress. Additionally, the cost of living adjustments proposed for the second and third year fall below the current CPI inflation rate. That means our wages won't keep up with rising costs and over time employees will fall behind again. It becomes harder and harder to remain financially stable in the community we serve. We're not asking for anything unreasonable. We're asking for the fairness and stability so we can continue doing the work we love. I care deeply about this city and the people we serve. I want to continue giving my best, but I also need a contract that supports my family and my friends and coworkers and reflects the realities we face. Thank you so much. Anyone else? All right, let's check in with the city clerk, see if there's anyone online that wants to make a comment. If any members of the public on zoom would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. There are no raised hands. All right, at this time we'll close public comment and we'll move to item six adjournment. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. We'll see you all at six o'clock. Good evening, everyone. Welcome back. It's the Tuesday, June 23rd meeting of the Aurora Grandy City Council. Can we get a roll call, please? Council member Seacrest. Here. Council member Guthrie. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Marvellian. Here. Mayor May Russom. Here. And would you please silently join me in a moment of reflection? Thank you. Thank you. And would you please join me in the flight salute? All right. Thank you. Under agenda review. Would anyone like to reorder anything on tonight's agenda? All right. So we'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. We'll see you all at the time. All right. Thank you. Under agenda review. Would anyone like to reorder anything on tonight's agenda? All right. So we'll proceed as published and I'll turn it over to our assistant city attorney to announce item 5A. For the closed session item read into the record, there is no reportable action. Excuse me. Thank you very much. And we don't have any ordinances tonight. So we have no item 5B. So that takes us directly to our special presentations. And this is an honorary proclamation declaring July 2026 as parks make life better month. And we have none other than the venerable birthday girl herself, Carrie van Bevereen. Come on up to the podium, Carrie. Sometimes little birdies tell us things. Thanks. Thanks. This is an honorary proclamation declaring July 2026 as parks make life better month. Whereas parks and recreation promote physical, emotional, and mental health and wellness through organized and self-directed fitness play and activity. And whereas parks and recreation support the economic vitality of communities by partnering with local businesses and nonprofits and offering events for resident engagement. And whereas parks and recreation create memorable experiences through youth sports and enrichment activities, teen centers and programs, senior activity centers, adult fitness and enrichment programs, free community events and beyond. And whereas parks and recreation foster social cohesiveness in communities by celebrating diversity, providing spaces to come together peacefully, modeling compassion, promoting social equity, connecting social networks and ensuring all people have access to its benefits. And whereas parks and recreation strengthen community identity by providing facilities and services that reflect and celebrate community character, heritage, culture, history, aesthetics, and landscape. And whereas parks and recreation facilitate community problem and issue resolution by providing safe spaces to come together peacefully and serving as key points of service, helping our communities heal both physically and emotionally. And whereas parks and recreation sustain and steward our national resources by protecting habitats and open space, connecting people to nature and promoting the ecological function of parkland. And whereas parks and recreation supports safe, vibrant, attractive, progressive communities that make life better through positive alternatives offered in their recreational opportunities. And whereas parks and recreation remain versatile and innovative in providing vital services to communities through local, national, or global emergencies, all while adhering to guidelines set forth by governing agencies. And whereas the California Park and Recreation Society has released a statewide public awareness campaign, parks make life better to inform citizens of the many benefits of utilizing park facilities, programs, and services. Now, therefore, may it be resolved that I, Karen Ray Russa, mayor of the city of Arroyo Grande do hereby recognize the importance of access to local parks, trails, open space, and facilities for the health, wellness, development, inspiration, and safety of all Californians. And declare the month of July 2026 as parks make life better month in Arroyo Grande. And if you would tell us what you guys are up to. So thank you, mayor and council members. Nice to see you all. And thank you so much for the proclamation on your dice. And then in the lobby, we have a calendar for everybody of little self-guided activities for some ideas to get out in the parks. So let's have a little speech for you. So on behalf of the parks and recreation team, thank you for recognizing July as parks make life better month. This proclamation highlights the vital role that parks, trails, open spaces, and recreation programs play in strengthening our community. Parks provide places for families to connect children to play neighbors to gather and residents of all ages to act to stay active and healthy. They contribute to physical and mental well being and enhance the quality of life that makes our city such a special place to live. We are grateful for your continued support and investment in parks and recreation, and we look forward to celebrating the many ways parks truly make life better for everyone in our community. Thank you so much. As my kids would say, thank you, Miss Carrie. All right. And item 6B is city manager communications. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the council, Matt Downing, your city manager. So talking about celebrating, you can celebrate America's 250th anniversary as the Rio Grande summer concert series starts off with a bang and a band actually at Heritage Square Park on Saturday, July 4th. Uh, the celebration begins at 10:30 AM with the national anthem and the Rio Grande police department honor guard flag ceremony. Uh, you can also enjoy, uh, patriotic music by the village band from 11 to 1 PM. And then we'll take a little break followed by the mother corn shockers from two to four. And the council knows how much I enjoy saying that one. So, uh, the summer concert series continues every Sunday, beginning July 5th through September 20th from 1 PM to 3 PM at Heritage Square Park. So we're get ready for me to tell you which bands are coming. Um, and while you're enjoying your 4th of July, we want to remind residents that only safe and sane fireworks are allowed in the city, uh, and can be discharged only on July 4th between the hours of 10 AM and 10 PM. Uh, safe and sane fireworks must, and I, I emphasize must include the state of California registered seal. Anyone found in possession of or discharging illegal fireworks are subject to, uh, fines. Uh, and the last thing we want to do, the reason we have all those regulations in place, because the last thing we want to do is start a wildfire, which is why the five cities fire authority will begin abatement of properties that remain out of compliance with the weed abatement ordinance beginning next week. Uh, residents are reminded that weeds are required to be maintained at four inches or less throughout the city and throughout the year to help minimize the threat of wildfire. And while we hope, uh, that we do not experience a wildfire, we do hope that the fire of public service burns within our residents because the nomination period for the November 3rd, 2026 general municipal election begins on Monday, July 13th and closes Friday, August 7th. Uh, anyone interested in running for city council can contact our city clerk extraordinaire, Jessica Mattson for more information. I'm happy to answer any questions. Council has just how many adjectives did you use in that statement? Not enough. I'll try harder next time. Any questions of the city manager? Okay. All right, then we will move on forward to board member communications and excuse me to city council reports and for mine for the audit committee I need to respond which I have not done yet I just realized holy cow because we're gonna actually meet. Um, CJ PIA meets next month. Uh, five cities fire authority did meet and we had a, uh, extraordinarily short meeting of about 14 minutes, um, where we authorized weed abatement for those, um, properties that had not been cleared. That was the only thing we really did on that. And for sanitation district, we had, um, we did our fiscal budget, uh, same as what we do here. So same timelines and, um, that is very healthy and doing just fine. And we purchased some extra equipment all within budget. So everything over at the sanitation district is knock on wood, hunky dory. Um, and I will tempt fate by saying we haven't had a, um, finer exceedance in quite some time. I don't think we've had one in over 18 months, something like that. So maybe a year. So, uh, like I say, uh, Mr. Gent and our, our, our great staff over there is doing a fantastic job. So with that, I will turn it over to mayor. Thank you. Um, F C F a, the mayor talked about, I actually was not in attendance of that meeting. Um, visit. So slow cow. We met, um, in early June, uh, received an update on tourism results for 2025. And then there are 20, 27 business and marketing plan, as well as a budget overview. General, everything is very stagnant right now. Um, in terms of tourism. Um, it's kind of similar to the last time I reported that the K shaped economy is really continuing. People do still seem to want to travel. Um, but they're just spending less doing it because that they can't afford to do it. Um, the interesting stats that I always like to hear are the economic impacts of tourism that they present to us. Um, they said that travel spending created $112 million in local tax revenue, um, accounts for almost 10% of our GDP, put close to 25,000 residents to work every day. And without visitors, each county household would need to spend an additional $21,000 a year and pay an additional $2,000 in taxes to reach the same economic benefits. So I think that's really valuable information that they do provide to us that the tour tourism dollars do bring a lot of revenue to our community. Um, thank you very much. And council member Guthrie. No reach has not met. So just the I W. Um, and a lot of, uh, housekeeping items on there, but the two main ones I did mention that we had approved the preliminary budget and we approved the final budget. There's just a couple of numbers I wanted to pick out from last year. As I've noted before, we, we are actually designed to lose money because we are, we are, we are reducing our, our reserves that were over collected in the past. And so we forecast to lose a million five last year, and we only lost a million two due to a lot of cost control. I should say that we spent on in lieu of raising taxes. We spent this out of our reserves instead of losing money. Well, actually we have, we have reduced the fee since they are taxes. We've already reduced the fee and that we've reduced the fee so low that we are losing money and will for the next two or three years to return about $5 million in over collections. Your glass is half empty. Mine is half full. Well, I think this is probably about seven eighths full. So it's, you know, so there, two and a half full. All right. So, so again, that, that is reducing the fees to, to a regular user. It's only like a buck and a half. You probably wouldn't even notice it, but that, that is something that is going on for the next few years. We also are changing our meeting schedule. Um, and we're going to try to go with just six meetings instead of scheduling 11. Um, and only six executive committee meetings for the alternate months with the hopes that eventually we'll be able to eliminate the executive committee, which is just really all the executive committee does is approve the, the agenda for the next, for the next board meeting. So technically the president can do that on their own, kind of like we do here. And so we're, we're looking at reducing them the commitment of staff time and the commitment of the, of the board's time. So I think those were the two, two most important things. Thank you. All right. And council member Seacrest. Uh, have a number of things. So, uh, APCD met in June, uh, June 17th. Um, they're still working on their data migration for the new payroll and HR policies. Uh, the estimate for the roof came out higher, uh, solar, solar system. It's kind of funny, but the system solar in it, uh, is still pending bids on that. They still have open, uh, rebate programs for marine and ag equipment. Anyone knows anyone that is interested in that. And they're still have 55,000 available for lawn and garden, uh, equipment conversions. In terms of the feds, uh, so Carbohal introduced a bill for blue whales, blue skies that would cover the entire West Coast. It's not clear how, how that's, it's just the start. We'll see how it goes. Uh, they've had a number of controlled burns. Um, a thousand acre burn in, I think Parkfield with Cal Fire and the indigenous tribe from Carrizo Plains. Um, I think they, we've just had the Oceano Halcyon area FCFA burn. The dunes reopened after the endangered species issue, which again was a federal thing. Air quality is about the same as last year, which is good. Uh, we approved the, uh, fiscal budget 3.8 million and the reserves are over 4 million for next year. They're in great shape. Uh, we appointed hearing board members for the public representative and a public representative alternate and the attorney representative for the hearing board. We eliminated the executive committee, uh, regular meetings because it, it just was turning out to be, you know, staff time expenses. And, uh, they can still call a meeting if they have an issue, but they don't have to have them regularly. And we evaluated the director, um, and he was given a 5% raise. Things are going great. Um, they're with me. The H SOC executive meeting was 617. We have approved vice chairs for two out of three of the committees, which just will really give the committee heads some help and assistance, but also hopefully train some folks to come up through the system and maybe take those committee, uh, assignments at some point. Um, they worked very hard and developed a regional equity funding. Um, they, they tweaked the funding program basically. And that was due to some of the problems we were having with somebody didn't get funded last time. I don't know if you've heard about that, but at any rate, they're still gonna, excuse me, be very data data driven. But the bottom line is if, if something happens after they, they put a grant out there and they divide it up and it looks, it there's, it's apparent that one region of the county is not, is not sufficiently certain. If they're not sufficiently served with anything either with no funding or with such a small amount that they can't really do anything with it, then they're going to do a correction. So, um, I think it's pretty clever. Um, I think it's pretty clever. They worked really hard on it and I, and I think everyone's really happy with it. Um, the fiscal year 26 continuum of care competition from HUD, um, which is always sort of, this is my word, a nightmare. Um, the federal government keeps changing what they want and how they want us to do it. And, um, the biggest problem, I think the biggest challenge, um, realistically is that for whatever reason they are now, they want to focus most of the funding on new programs. Um, which doesn't give funding to all the great programs that are here already and, and, and functioning well. So that, that's a challenge they're going to, everyone's going to be dealing with. Um, hold on. That's it for HSAC to do. Do, do, do, do, do, do. I went to, um, the, the last, uh, South County Chamber of Commerce meeting, the government affairs, um, attended with city manager Downing. I think it was, uh, was very productive and we had a good group discussion about housing laws, the newest housing laws, how the public reacts, what we can do to get more understanding out there. So that was, that was great. Um, I attended the state of the cities and our lovely mayor was there as a keynote speaker, which was great. Some other, or a ground day folks, uh, not, um, council people planning commissioner Martin. Uh, and we heard from all three mayors and it was, you know, inspiring and fun and poignant because, um, several of them, including her honor will not be, will not be, uh, here next year. Did I hit everything? Oh, I went to a fire safe meeting, um, which I'm kind of excited about. Uh, and five cities fire attended and I, um, uh, was there with chief Hallett and it was in the neighborhood of, sorry, it's La Jolla Oaks. I think. Okay. Can you say, anyway, so they're HOA and it was just a really great experience. It's a super nice group of people. They had organized themselves, maybe 30 or 40 folks at the end of the cul-de-sac. Very nice neighborhood. It's their HOA. They were friendly and polite and very interested in what they could do to make their neighborhood fire safe. So it was really just inspiring to see the program, um, and interact with them. And I'm going to hopefully, uh, coordinate with five cities fire when they go out to the other neighborhoods. And that's it. Thank you. Thank you. I should have reported that I did that speech at the state of the cities, which we do every year in June. It's not often that I get to quote both Teddy Roosevelt and Winnie the Pooh in the same speech. It was fun. It was fun. Uh, okay. So this takes us to item eight. This is community comments and suggestions. This is your chance to come to talk to us about items that are not on tonight's agenda. So if you were here about something that is announced on the agenda, now is not the time to come forward. If you're here to talk about things that are not on tonight's agenda, then you can come forward at this time. You can talk to the council as one body and please keep your comments to 60 seconds or less. So for items who are not on tonight's agenda, please go ahead and come forward. Good evening, Judy Chiquetti. So I have concerns about, and I can't say his name, the speech last time about the streetscape between Elm and Halcyon. I have a feeling that that includes a lot of high rise buildings that perhaps they want to build there. But since neither are ARC or planning department has had any meetings, I don't know how you can find any of this out. And also, I am not in favor of state water. I think a lot of people will not be able to afford it. I don't think that's on the agenda tonight. And I'm confused about the way they're saying who's voting or with their how they're putting it on the ballot. Even KSBY. I didn't understand what they meant. So maybe that could be clarified. Thank you. Anyone else? Let's check in with the city clerk and let's see if there's anyone online. If any members of the public on Zoom would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. There are no raised hands. Thank you. So we'll close public comment. I'll bring this back to first of all, I'll talk to Mr. Downing. Mr. Downing, this is exactly what we were afraid of when we spoke about. I don't remember if it's C or D 26. That is the state water one that is a bit confusing. So, A, can you explain that? And B, is there anything we can do about that? Certainly. So the ballot language that was adopted by the council is now is now set. The council did establish a subcommittee of council members, including the mayor and Councilmember Lowe, to write the argument in favor of measure D 26. Essentially, what that does is it repeals measure A, which was passed in 1990, that precluded the city from doing anything related to state water without a vote of the people. And in 2016, the voters enacted said you can do it if there's a local state of emergency regarding water. Really, it's we're not looking to buy into the state water project. We are looking to establish opportunities where we can to buy excess state water from others in order to plan and save and store for future dry years. So it's just an arrow in the quiver, as I'm calling it for our water portfolio at this time. Thank you, and it's important to note, too. Again, I'm one of the people that's going to be drafting that argument that we have at least two entities that we have connections to that have excess state water that we would be able to potentially purchase from them outside of a time of emergency. So again, just we only have two arrows in the quiver right now. This would give us three because we have Lopez. We have groundwater. This would give us a third option in regular years. So that's all that is it's not meaning to go buy into to the state water project retroactively. Okay, then we are going forward now to item nine. That is the consent agenda. These today are items collectively 9 a through 9 J. First of all, I'm going to go ahead just on behalf of the council poll item 9 E for just separate discussion just brief, but does anyone else have anything else they'd like to pull or ask questions about or be considered separately. Yeah, and I please cook. Can we please pull a 9 G the over streets overlay project. Yes. You want to pull it or you want to you have questions. I have questions. Okay. All right. Let's start with 9 E then. So, Mr. Downing, can you just give us a brief explanation of what's going on there in terms of the supplementals that are now in the staff report that the public may be sure I'll actually pass that over to our assistant city attorney and I'll ask you to ask for any shapses to respond to that. Yes, mayor. There have been a number of supplementals added to the agenda and those supplementals are from the bidder that has been noticed as non responsive. And we do have a member of our team at BB and K here tonight. So he's also available for questions as well on this item. Um, and so I'll pass it over to him once we have additional questions on this. Um, but, uh, what the city is doing here or proposing a city staff is proposing is to award the contract, the second lowest bidder, um, for reasons that are discussed in the supplementals. Thank you very much. Are there any questions from, uh, of the council? Yes, ma'am. Is this, thank you. Is this a litigation issue at this point? No. Okay. It is not. Um, and. I'll, uh, I'll add that, um, there, there has been no threat of litigation at this point. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. I do wonder if you or, or your, your associate online could, could, could give us just kind of like the short version, not the eight page version of, of the city's position. Uh, you know, the, the, the basic, cause when we say non-responsive to the public and often to me, that means that they, they didn't, they didn't answer the phone or something. And it's actually not that at all. So I wonder if we could get just a basic explanation from the, for the public of, cause we all read the deal and we all talk to you and all, but for the public. The, a short version of, of what's, what's actually taking place here, what the two positions are. And I'll defer to my colleague, Mr. Vasquez on that point. Hi everyone. Um, yeah, this is Adam Vasquez with Best Best and Krieger. Um, so from a high level, uh, this is the complete streets project. Um, and it was, uh, bids were opened, um, earlier this month, uh, I believe maybe at the end of May. Um, but there was a situation where the apparent low bidder, um, Edwards, uh, submitted a bid that contained, uh, a bid schedule that had some pretty substantial bid irregularities. So some price irregularities for specific line items, um, that when staff reviewed those prices, they appeared substantially lower, uh, than the engineers estimate, which on its face sounds great. You're getting a, you know, a much lower price, um, except those costs appeared to be buried, um, and kind of misappropriated, uh, along other bid items, uh, that were more likely or more subject to potential future change orders. So, um, a bit of a, uh, strategy that sometimes employed by, uh, by bidders, uh, that then creates what's called an unbalanced bid. Um, and in coordination with myself and, uh, others, uh, staff at the city, we kind of, uh, determined that the risk posed to the city of moving forward with a bid that while on its face presented. Um, as the lowest bid ultimately would likely drive up costs so that it was not actually, um, you know, the lowest bid in a material sense. Um, the second low bidder, uh, who I believe staff is recommending to is V Lopez jr. and sons, uh, their bid represents an increase of approximately $600,000 more, uh, than the low bid for a total contract price. I believe of around four, um, excuse me. Um, I'm not sure exactly on the exact, uh, price in front of us, but I know that the Delta between the two is approximately 600,000. So even though the, the total bid price for, for the next low bidder is higher, um, our, our recommendation was to proceed with rejection of the apparent low bid based on the material irregularities in the bid schedule that, um, ultimately could, could pose a risk to substantial change orders, uh, for the city. Um, and in, in, in following up with that, sorry, just to kind of flush out the, the, the timeline here. Um, in response to that determination from staff, Edwards construction, uh, was provided a notice of non-responsiveness. They took issue with that. They replied to the city, um, in coordination with our office, we provided a more robust explanation to them. Um, Edwards has since, uh, retained counsel who has also supplied a letter to the city. We have responded. Um, so at this time we have given them, you know, ample due process and an opportunity to be heard regarding the responsiveness, uh, non-responsiveness finding. Um, and so to, to, to Mr. Schatz's point right now, there is no current threat, um, of litigation. However, should they choose to, they could, uh, potentially pursue, um, a writ, uh, proceeding to challenge the city's decision. And I guess you're confident that the, that the city would prevail in such a, in such a matter. Uh, that, that's correct. I mean, I, you know, obviously litigation is, is always a difficult one to, to evaluate the risks. Um, but considering the, the high threshold, uh, that is the, the high level of discretion that is afforded to a city in these reasonable, uh, decision-making situations, uh, the, the, the likelihood of success appears to be low for, uh, the protester. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions on this? No, thank you. All right. Uh, then let's go ahead and ask questions about nine G. Uh, councilor Seacrest. Mm. Good evening, engineer Sweeney. So I am just wondering, because we've been out in the community and I've heard of a certain amount of concern or noise or however you want to say it of, of folks not understanding, uh, why more pavement is, isn't being done quickly. And, uh, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Um, and I think that's a good question. Good evening, engineer Sweeney. So I am just wondering because we've been out in the community and I've heard of a certain amount of concern or noise or however you want to say it of, of folks not understanding, uh, why more pavement isn't, isn't being done quicker. And here people say, you know, we've got past E24, you know, what's happening. It seems like more should be happening. So can I just ask you a few questions about that? Or can you explain the process? Certainly I'd be happy to, Mayor, Council. Uh, Shannon Sweeney, city engineer. Uh, back in 2025, uh, April 2025, I came to city council with a 13 year pavement management program. And it was developed, uh, with the intent of having about $5.5 million each year, which is a substantial portion of the measure E24 funding that is available. So we took every street used its pavement condition index based on visual group, group them by neighborhood, grouped them by type of treatment, uh, and looked at ways in which we could most cost effectively, um, perform pavement maintenance. And then developed a 13 year program where every street, um, um, are on that list in order to be able to get everything paved. We were constrained by the $5 and a half million per year dollar amount from the measure E24, uh, when developing that 13 year program. Uh, the work that is in front of you, um, um, that staff is requesting be awarded is in the $6 million range, 6.9 million. Um, and then the remaining money will be spent in the upcoming year, fiscal year. Um, and then some of the streets that were scheduled for the upcoming year, turns out don't need full depth reclamation. When we did the coring and deflection testing found out that they actually needed a less expensive treatment. So we're basically moving them forward. So we're taking two years worth and doing the boat two years worth, but being able to move forward some of the overlay. So it ends up being a $6.9 million project. Um, and then the remaining money will be spent in the upcoming year, fiscal year for the full depth reclamation for the streets that coring and deflection testing demonstrated would need a full depth reclamation. So, uh, the, the treatment is expensive and, um, but, but we were basically constrained by the dollar amount that is coming in through measure E24. And council member Seacrest, I'll add to that. Um, this isn't, this is something I have been hearing in the community. Uh, folks go, we passed this in November of 2024. We haven't seen any paving yet. There's a lot of boring, but important facts to that. Uh, even though it passed in November, we couldn't implement it by state law until April 1st of 2025. So that that's the first thing. Uh, so we couldn't start collecting until April fools of 2025. We didn't see any payments from that, from the initial implementation until the end of June of 2025. So yes, we had, uh, think about just under a million dollars come in, in those first couple of months. Um, the thing about us, because we are not a big state agency or a federal agency where we have tons of pots of money to move things around and go, okay, well, we know we're going to have this money coming in. Let's take from here and put it over here and then we'll pay ourselves back later. We have to sit there and wait and save the money in order to have it to then be able to go to contractors and say, okay, we have this project. We need you to bid on it because they don't typically like it when we say, oh, trust us, we're good for it. Um, so that that's one of the reasons why it has taken so long. I, I implore the community, bear with us. We're about to get started and you're going to see a lot of work on a lot of different streets, including, uh, Wasna, some of the neighborhoods in that, uh, in that area out on the east end of town, uh, in the central section of town off of Halcyon where you're going to see a lot of paving here pretty soon. So bear with us just a little bit longer. Um, to add to Mr. Downing's point, uh, last year we built a bridge and that bridge was one to $2 million a month and it was on a reimbursement basis. So we did have a bit of a cash flow situation where trying to throw another very large project into that mix would have been challenging. So, um, by it that they had to be sequential. And so we really did have to finish the bridge before we would have the millions of dollars necessary to be able to put forth towards the paving. So that was another reason why we didn't go full bore into paving in 2025. Ha ha full boring. That's engineer jokes, right? Thank you so much. Um, and just for the public's knowledge. So if we approve this tonight, when will we begin seeing that kind of thing just out in the wild? Right. So we've spoken to our contractors indicated that they'd like to get started, uh, mid to end of August. What we will see first is a lot of concrete work. Uh, whenever you do overlays, uh, and that sort of pavement rehabilitation, you're required to, uh, replace curb ramps and bring them up to ADA standards. So they always do the curb ramps first. So you're going to see a lot of concrete and then you're going to see just street after street after street being paved. It's 32 streets and all. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Uh, let's go ahead and open up public comment. This is your chance to comment on items 9 a through 9 J. So anything that begins with a nine, you can come up at this time. And seeing no one come forward here, we'll check in and see if there's anyone online that has comments. We do have one raised hand and if anyone else on zoom would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. Okay. Our first speaker is Josh Hardy. Good evening, Madam mayor and members of the city council. I'm Josh Hardy with SMTD law. I'm appearing on behalf of Edwards construction, a contractor based in a Royal Grande. That was the lowest responsible and responsive. Responsive bidder on the Halcyon complete streets project agenda item nine E as explained in our letter dated June 19. The city staff's recommendation to reject Edwards constructions bid will increase the cost of the city's taxpayers by more than $600,000 and expose the city to legal liability for failing to comply with the public contract code. The legislature enacted the public contract code to protect the public from the misuse of public funds and eliminate favoritism fraud and corruption in the awarding of public contracts. Because of the importance of these goals, courts strictly enforce the competitive bidding requirements. The city improperly rejected Edwards constructions bid as non-responsive without presenting the supporting evidence and therefore without providing Edwards construction an opportunity to respond. This violated Edwards constructions due process rights under the public contract code, even for a simple responsiveness determination. The limited time prevents me from going through the city's letters in any detail, but despite repeatedly changing the legal and factual basis for its determination, none of the letters included the supporting documents or asked for a response. The city sent its initial rejection letter on the same day it sent a letter notifying all bidders that it was awarding the process of the city. The city sent this afternoon for the first time, the city referenced concerns with the pricing of the cobblestone rock bike lane symbols and bike loop detector bid items. But despite Edwards constructions public records act request, the city did not provide the supporting documents and did not ask for a response. Nor is there any merit to the city's alleged concern that Edwards constructions bid could increase the cost of the project. For example, the combined price of the bike lane symbols and the bike loop detector symbols is only $16,500. That's just 0.3% of Edward constructions price. There is no plausible scenario where the city would add enough symbols to offset the more than $600,000 price advantage. Similarly, the actual quantity for the cobblestones would have to be more than double the city's estimate before Edwards constructions pricing could begin approaching V Lopez's price. This is not a credible concern. Edwards construction submitted a responsive bid that is more than $600,000 less than the recommended bid. If the city council awards the project to V Lopez, not only will the city's taxpayers be forced to pay an additional $600,000, but the city will also be exposed to liability because it violated the public contract code and denied Edward construction its due process rights, creating the very appearance of favoritism the public contract code was enacted to eliminate. Thank you. There are no other raised hands. No other raised hands. Thank you. And so I'll close public comment and I'm going to ask our assistant city attorney that there were basically two allegations made there in that by that caller. And first is that the the public contract code was violated and second that the due process was violated. Can you just briefly respond to those? Yes, I'll defer to my colleague, Mr. Vasquez online. Thank you, Scott. Thank you, Scott. So I would reject those allegations. In full, the city complied with the public contract code, you know, with respect to responsiveness and responsibility. I also take issue with the characterization that due process was not afforded. I understand that the the compressed timeline with, you know, with respect to some of the letters being sent out today in advance of the meeting of the council meeting today. You know, obviously, we had just discussed the need to get some of this type of work under contract as soon as possible. But with the responsiveness finding of non responsiveness, there was, you know, an opportunity to be heard vis a vis the comment that was just made. There was a letter that was reviewed by city staff from SMT law that was responded to today. There was a letter from Edwards construction that the city received contesting the non responsiveness finding to which the city responded to. So they've had at least two different opportunities in addition to the public comment that was just made to rebut the finding of non responsiveness as to the merits of the non responsiveness finding. I think the city is afforded great latitude and discretion in making those decisions based on its consideration of the public welfare. And I, you know, appreciate the concern expressed with the taxpayers of the city. And I know that the city council also shares in that concern as well. Thank you. All right. Then that brings that back to us for action. Would anyone like to make comments or yes? Question. But what is the start time for the Halcyon project? If we take action tonight, what's the what would would roughly is that start the starting date? It taken into consideration getting insurance bonds and contracts signed projects typically start within a month of them being awarded. So we're expecting to start the project sometime in the next month, month and a half. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Any other discussion? Would someone like to make a motion? I move approval of consent items a through G through G. Second. Sorry, J. J. A through J. Second. We have motion to second. Can we get a roll call, please? Can I also add if the motion maker is okay with also adding the adoption of the resolution for this item that was included as part of supplemental two? Second. Second. Can I hold? Yes. Thank you. All right. Roll call, please. Councilmember Guthrie? Yes. Councilmember Seacrest? Yes. Mayor Proton Marvillia? Yes. Mayor Vey Brassum? Yes. All right. That takes us to our first public hearing tonight. This is the directing of the levy of annual assessments for fiscal year 2627. And it's not Sweeney as I see here on this piece of paper. Mayor and members of council, I'm happy to introduce Theresa Wren, our capital improvement project manager, to present this item tonight. Mayor Vey Brassum: Hello. Do I just jump in? Oh, there we go. Awesome. Hi. This is our annual public hearing for the maintenance districts. We have three. Parkside Park, Grace Lane, and Arroyo Grande Landscaping District number one, within track 1769, which we usually just call maintenance district number one. That's a mouthful. Let me see. Okay. There's three steps that we have to go through as the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. This is the third and final step. Kind of paraphrase to keep this going. The first meeting was May 12th, where we present the improvements. We let you know that there's no changes and order the preparation of the engineer's report. Then the second part was on May 26th, that your regular meeting that was the you received and approve the engineer's report and adopt a resolution of intention to levy and collect assessments. And then we set the public hearing for today. Our city clerk has sent out the notices as appropriate. And then today is taking care of items number three and four, which is holding the public hearing and then adopting the resolutions confirming the assessments. So this is probably the most important slide. You can see on the columns. We have our districts and then is a CPI adjustment allowed, which is the annual adjustment that can be used to adjust for inflation. And then if there's any increases. The important thing you can see on the column on the right is that all in bold, no increases this year. Nothing is changing. Everything's the same. Just as a note of information for Parkside Park, there is a CPI that is built in that could be used if it warranted. But this year it is does not. The other two were not. The other two were not. So, for example, landscape district number one, which was originated in 1992. There's been no change since its inception. This is just an overview of the three districts. We have grace laying up at the top and then landscape number one and Parkside Park are right next to each other. So we'll just briefly go over Parkside Park. There are two zones. Zone one is not built for the detention basin because it is its drainage does not go there, but everything else is offset by both zones. You can see the little mini park playground up there in the corner and then we have the drainage basin. This is just a little picture of some of the public landscaping that we take care of. This was the old Parkside Park playground that was dilapidated. You can see all the rubber surfacing is falling apart. Part of the project in 2025 was to rebuild it and the residents voted. Everybody was happy. It's been a happy been used really well used is a great success. This is just the overview of the financial situation. We will be meeting with a city attorney over the next year as we conclude what needs to be held as a surplus because we do have specific equipment with the basins and the playgrounds that have to be replaced. But what is appropriate for that. Then we have Grace Lane. There's an overview. It's our second district. Grace Lane has three different categories. One is fuel modification, which is taking care of fire prevention, weed abatement. There's storm drain maintenance. And then just some basic upkeep and weed abatement on the sides of the road. This is kind of just an overview of the photo. And this is our financial balance. Again, no changes this year to assessments. And then our final one is landscape district number one, which is right along Oak Park and Farrell. And it's just the landscaping in the medians and on the side like that. That our crews take care of and water. And this is the financial overview. So tonight's recommended action is we conduct a public hearing. We confirm the resolutions for the three districts. There are three separate resolutions and then find the pros proposed action is exempt from CEQA. So we're going to be able to do that. Thank you for the air conditioning too. Questions? All right. Let's see if the council has questions. Any questions? All right. Let's go ahead and open up. Why does this sound so echoey? Let's go ahead and open up public comment. If you'd like to comment on item 10, a please come forward at this time. And you got three minutes. And seeing no one come forward here, we'll check in online. If any members of the public on zoom would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. There are no raised hands. So close public comment, bring this back to the council. This is a pretty routine item. We do this every year. We did get one inquiry from the public from one of the people. I think it was for Parkside and that was answered very positively by staff. So with that, would anyone like to make a motion? I'll adopt a resolution confirming a motion to adopt resolutions confirming the diagram and assessments and directing the levy of the annual assessment related to the Parkside Village Assessment District, the Grace Lane Assessment District and the Rio Grande Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District number one within track one seven, six, nine. Pursuant to the landscaping and lighting act of 1972 and find that the action is exempt from CEQA. Second. Any discussion? All right, Madam Clerk, we have a motion in a second. Can we get a roll call, please? Mayor Pro Tem Marvillia? Yes. Councilmember Seacrest? Yes. Councilmember Guthrie? Yes. Mayor Ray Russom? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Marvillia? Item 11A. This is a pre-application 26001 Canyon Crest offsite wastewater treatment. And Mr. Perez, I see you here. This is our acting community development director, sir. Yes. Good evening, Mayor. Members of the public and council. I'll be presenting the staff for this item this evening. So as a bit of background, the applicant for tonight's pre-application is Canyon Crest HOA. Canyon Crest development consists of 54 single family homes and a development located between Wasna Road and Stagecoach Road just outside of Rio Grande City limits. The development's private water company operates its wastewater treatment system, which consists of individual septic tanks on each of the residential lots. Then the affluent from those septic tanks is conveyed to a community leach field on a lot located adjacent to Wasna Road. Back in October of 2022, the Regional Water Quality Control Board issued the development a notice of violation for failures of the wastewater treatment system that resulted in elevated nitrate concentrations in the groundwater. It was found that it was that create a public health issue because it affected the surrounding water resources beyond this particular development. So in response to the violations identified in the notice, the community came up with two potential solutions. The first being construction of an onsite wastewater treatment facility. That solution came with a price tag of between 1.5 and 2 million dollars in startup costs and estimated that annual operating costs would range from 83,000 to 180,000 dollars per year. The second and preferred option consists of consolidation of the development's wastewater. The second and preferred option consists of consolidation of the development's wastewater and sending it through the city sewer infrastructure for treatment at the sanitation district's facility in Oceano. The second and preferred option is to provide the treatment for the treatment plant. The second and preferred option is to provide the treatment plant for the treatment plant. The treatment plant would be responsible for installing approximately 1,000 linear feet of sewer pipe to connect the existing development to the city sewer infrastructure. The point of connection within city limits would occur near the intersection of laws in the road and parrot avenue where there's an existing manhole. From there wastewater would travel to the treatment facility where it be treated by the sanitation district, which has confirmed that the plant does have capacity to treat the anticipated volume of wastewater that the development would generate. However, because Canyon Crest is located outside the sanitation district's service area, the track would need to be annexed into the service area for this plan to move forward. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. The next slide is to be addressed. Is it the same fee that someone who is actually already a landowner in the city and is coming forward and asking to hook up? Or is that calculated differently since this is not someone, frankly, that we're obligated to take care of? Is it a different calculation based on them sort of buying into our system versus somebody who's already an owner? I think it's to be determined. It's anticipated that it would be the same fee that a user within the city would pay. But I think, you know, based on how tonight's discussion goes, there might be an opportunity to look at that fee and see if it's, you know, flexible. Those are my questions. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Seacrest, any questions? No, thank you. Okay. Mayor Pro Tem Maravillia. Not knowing much about the treatment facility since I'm not on that particular board. You mentioned that we have additional capacity there, like a lot of additional capacity. Just with thinking of other projects that might happen around the city and in South County in general, how does that affect? Yeah, it's something that's definitely very relevant to the conversation. At the current time, I believe that the facility operates at less than 60% capacity. So there is room for growth. But, you know, if Council is supportive of the applicant moving forward with additional technical studies, one of the things the city was going to ask for is projecting forward based on our new land use element, our growth patterns, and what that might mean by adding this additional loads to this facility. The other thing that I'll add to this that actually Mr. Perez pointed out earlier today, the estimate for about 8,000 gallons worth of liquid into the system, I kept referring to it as effluent, because that's typically how I refer to wastewater and water that goes down the sewer. So it was pointed out to me that the residents, I'd lost the word again, septic systems, thank you, will remain in place and will actually settle the solids and will be conveying purely the liquid that comes thereafter through our system. So it conceptually, because when I saw that number, I went, well, that seems pretty low, but that explains why that number is so low. So, perhaps another question for me, because if I read the report right, the, the applicants are considering building on that on top of that, that current site, how would they do that then and also deal with settling out the solids. So the individual septic tanks are in each respective residential lot that that law where the five homes are contemplated is the leach field. So that's where the effluent currently just percolates into the soil. Thank you. So just following up on that. So the, the, um, if I have it correct, that's going into the leach field. Now, if this plan goes forward, it would then that is what we're talking about. That would be transported. Okay, correct. All right. My questions. Um, it just, just for clarification of for everybody. If this development had been in city limits at the time that it was, that it was, uh, coming forward. Would they be doing anything different than we're asking them to do now in terms of the cost, uh, recovery for us. Um, yeah, I don't believe so. It seems like, you know, they'd be subject to the connection fees for the city and sanitation district. Um, the one thing that. We still need, would need to work through is whether this process would invoke development impact fees. Um, if it were to be a new build in the city, each home would be assessed wastewater impact fees. Okay. Thank you. Hold on. Annually. That's a one-time fee. Um, it, I think I know the answer to this question, because it goes way, way back. But again, for the, for the benefit of the public, why wouldn't we just annex all of them? Why are we only annex it? Why is LAFCO only contemplating the annexation into the sanitation district rather than within city boundaries? I believe it, you know, goes back to discussions that the applicants had with staff. Um, as I mentioned with this annexation to the service area for the sanitation district, it just obligates the sanitation district to provide sewer service. Um, if it were to be annex into the city, then the city would be, um, tasked with maintaining the streets, um, all the water infrastructure. Um, every, every other city service that we provide police and fire protection, um, which, you know, obviously bring additional costs. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. And are there any indemnifications that we need to contemplate as part of this agreement? I'm assuming that there will be, but the, the breadth of those is unknown and to be determined, uh, as we negotiate the MOU. Um, if we get to that point. Okay. Okay. Thanks for writing that down. Um, are any and all costs currently contemplated? And I think that that was a question I wrote down here, but it's, you've already answered it. So we may have others. Um, I told, uh, council, or excuse me, council member city manager Downing before the meeting that I was going to ask the question about precedent. And the concern I have here is I don't even remember how long ago, um, we had a, um, single parcel project come forward, uh, in Berry Gardens. That was technically Grover beach and needed to, to connect up to Grover beach. It would have been far easier and cheaper for them to connect to us. We denied that. So how is that? How is this different from that? So this is different in a couple of ways. Um, this is, this is not annexing the, the development into the city itself. It's annexing it into the sanitation districts sphere. Um, it's limited to wastewater only, uh, in this instance, it's not the full city services. Uh, additionally, it, because this is ultimately reviewed and approved by LAFCO, uh, if the city supports it, then they're the ultimate decision maker in this. Now that all being said on the political side of things, that is a policy call for the council to make. Um, that is one of the reasons that staff has been a little hesitant on this up to this point because of the potential growth inducing, uh, impact of that. Um, the fact that we're not annexing the development into the city completely has, it settles my concerns a little bit. Um, but I do want to ensure that we set this price. If, if the council moves forward with tentatively conceptually agreeing to this, that we set up the process so that it protects the city and its rate payers to the maximum extent possible moving forward. So that should we get another request like this in the future, we're not, we're not ultimately saddling our residents and rate payers with, uh, charges and costs borne by those outside the city. Are you aware of, uh, any other developments that are in similar situations? So right now I'm not directly aware. However, uh, I, I imagine the, uh, the developments representative will speak to the ever evolving nature of the state's regulations with particularly when it comes to wastewater. Um, it's continuing to make it more and more difficult. The, the, the product that you put out has to be more and more clean, uh, even sometimes cleaner than your drinking water standards. Um, so will we face this in the future even more possibly the way, the way it's going right now? Yes. So that made me think of something I hadn't thought of until just this second. So with the modern, um, developments, you have to do your stormwater retention, right? So in this case, do they have an applicable stormwater retention plan that would meet today's standards because it's going to get discharged into our system, right? Or is it just septic? It's just septic. Okay. Um, I think that I, I didn't think of this before until, um, Mr. Perez said it, but I'm going to say this a different way and tell me if I understood what you were saying correctly, Mr. Perez, that something for the council to consider is with current capacities, we have to contemplate as part of our general plan build out. And so when we're adding capacity without, um, development within our borders, that's actually, I don't want to call it a taking that's really strong, but it's, it's taking away capacity from us being able to do things within our borders. How significant is that number? Or is that what you're talking? Is that what you were talking about analyzing? Exactly. That's what we would be asking the applicant to analyze, um, with these additional technical studies. I think, you know, there's hesitation to do those studies without the council's, at least conceptual support, because it's going to be an expensive task. And, um, with that support to hear from council, if they do, um, then they can engage in those studies based on council's feedback. And would there be any, uh, would it be reasonable to consider that there would be some sort of, uh, um, a cost to that capacity change? I mean, we wouldn't have, we're essentially doing a nexus study or they would be doing a nexus study because we're, we're figuring out how much capacity do we have? How much of that are they using? And is there a cost for that loss to the, to the entire system? Yeah, I think you outlined kind of what our concerns are. So it's something that needs to be analyzed. And I will, I'll add into that. This is a unique kind of situation. I think everybody in the room would agree to that. Um, and there is a certain amount of information that we simply don't have to be able to do. Um, and I completely understand that. Um, and I completely understand that. So I think there is an amount of back and forth that needs to occur and additional information that staff needs to gather in order to either fully support or fully, uh, oppose this action. Thank you. All right. That's my questions. I can see you leaning forward. I can feel it. Councilman Seacrest. Thank you. So, um, is it, do we have any sort of estimate as to, uh, how much the studies that we might require would cost them? Or is that, that's all. Not, not. Well, I'm sympathetic. I just. Yeah, I would defer that question to the applicant. It, this is not entirely, but so I missed the, the, the request to, for the property and Berry Gardens to join in. So was it, were they requesting to be annexed into the city or just be annexed into the sewer system? So they, they had to go across the street or something instead of come the other way. Correct. I believe, I believe in that. Correct. Okay. So, so just, we were going to fight just like Oceano actually provides water to, to south, south end of Elm Street. So we do, we do have other outside. That are going the other way. Water wheeling agreements. Yes. This is a unique situation because to the best of my knowledge, we, we don't, we don't have this anywhere else. Um, we have water agreements elsewhere, but not, uh, sewer. That's who, and then we turned one down on the past. Okay. Okay. That's all I wanted to verify. Thank you. All right. Any other questions? Thank you. Um, so they're actually on. On there in the county's jurisdiction. Is there anything that the county could be contributing? I mean, if we're, if there's a cost to the city to take in what they need, I'm just wondering. Oh, I, um, I see what you're asking. No. Um, basically it is the development's responsibility to address this matter. It wouldn't be just like, it's not directly our responsibility to address it. It's also not the county's responsibility to address it. Um, but I'm also not providing legal opinions for anybody in the room because I'm not an attorney. All right. Um, then this is where we shift to you. And I'm guessing this is the one you're waiting for since this is the last one on the menu tonight. Um, so if you would like to come forward and speak to the council, please do. You have up to three minutes. I see a lot of new faces here today. So just kind of explaining how this is going to go. Um, you can, as you've seen others do come to the podium, you'll see that there are three lights on the podium. There's a green and yellow and a red. You're going to get three minutes. That timer will count down. And when he turns yellow, you'll have 30 seconds left. When it turns red, then I'll gently stop you and say, thank you very much. And we'll go on to the next person. Um, you don't have to use the whole three minutes, but, um, please adhere to that as you come forward. And you don't have to fill it, fill out a speaker slip and you don't have to be perfect and don't be nervous. So if you'd like to come up and speak on this, please do that now. Hi, my name is David Trader. I'm a resident of Canyon Crest. Um, I just wanted to point out that, uh, at the time the development was, uh, installed, you know, septic may or may not have been an appropriate solution for the wastewater, but we all know that as density increases and as our understanding of the water table increases, uh, septic is no longer really a preferred solution. And that's, uh, reflected in the state's recent passage of a couple of measures encouraging consolidation of septic systems. Uh, potable water systems as well to be served by a larger communal base, which has more of an infrastructure resource. And that's what we're asking for. And that's what we're asking for. We're asking to join in with the larger community at the same fees that everyone else pays. We're not asking for any free passes. We're going to eliminate, uh, any impact on the water table that we are currently subject in the community to. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council members. Thank you. Thank you. I wish to thank you for entertaining our proposal. It means a lot to us. And I just want to touch on some of the people have touched on the fact that when Canyon Crest was created and went through all the permitting. And I believe the county was mostly involved. And I think there was some meetings with the city. Um, there was nothing taboo about septic tanks and settlement bases. It was considered just okay. And when I bought, and that was back in 2001. When we purchased our house in Canyon Crest, it was 2006. And as you know, real estate agents, they have to put all kinds of onerous things in the agreements and warnings. And there was no warning at that time because we didn't have a crystal ball to know that things would change in the future and it would become more strict. And that's what's left us in the mind. Um, you can say, well, maybe they should have thought of something else or, you know, it's, it's history at this point. What we need to do is go forward. And that's why I appreciate you people entertaining this idea. And we're going to try and make it happen on our side. So thank you. Good evening. Excuse me, mayor and council. My name is Jim Monroe. I'm also a resident of Canyon Crest. Uh, we bought about five years ago. We love it. I would love to be a full time Aurora Grani city residents. So if you want to annex us, that'd be awesome. But I realized that's not why we're here. Um, we, we did not know about this when we bought five years ago. Um, this is a crappy situation, pun intended. Um, it's something that we didn't expect. It's something financially that is a huge financial burden for everybody sitting behind me. We're public servants or retired parents. Um, my kids go to school in a row grande. I eat in a row grande. I shop in a row. This is my city. And so I guess what I'm asking is, uh, if you wouldn't mind entertaining, at least the idea to go forward. Um, we need help. Um, and we're stuck. So, uh, thank you to staff for even just listening to our representatives and getting us to this point. I know it's a long road still, but, uh, we appreciate being in front of you and we're just asking for help. Um, this is a perfect example of literally neighbor helping neighbor. Um, I'm, my house is a thousand feet from the city limits and I consider myself a resident of a row grande. Um, and, uh, just like we do in my professional life, we help each other in this South County region. And I'm hoping that, uh, you folks will see that and assist us in this endeavor. So thank you very much. Anyone else? Good evening. Thank you, mayor. Thank you. Council members. My name is Jay Kuchek. My wife and I moved to, uh, this area to Canyon Crest four years ago, this coming Thursday on June 25th. And we came from Minnesota where we lived in Minnesota. We were part of the friends of the Mississippi river. And as you know, the Mississippi river has a huge problem with nitrates. That's why you have the dead zone down in the Gulf of Mexico. Um, the corn and soybean belt is all in the Midwest. The Mississippi river is one of the, uh, third or fourth largest watershed areas in the country. And there's been a lot of studies with regard to not only the dead zones, you know, with all the over, uh, fertilization, killing the, um, uh, creating the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico, but just the health impacts of the, uh, the aquifers in our area. So it does lead to developmental delays. It is also, uh, causing some types of cancer in our County. Um, they did a study in at the Mayo clinic. This is not to do with nitrates, but if you lived within a six mile radius of a golf course, this is a 25 year old 25 year retrospective study. You are two and a half times more likely to develop Parkinson's disease from fertilizer, from herbicides, from the chemicals that were used. Um, there's another study that, um, was showing that, uh, problems with, uh, PFAS chemicals coming from the 3M, um, plant affecting other city areas that 3M had to, um, spend $850 million in, um, uh, coming to a settlement with the areas. And that's because it also calls health concerns. So the nitrates in our area that have been concentrated since, um, 2022 and have increased, it's not just going to affect our HOA development. It's going to get into local aquifers and affect people in that are in those aquifers, including in the city area. So from a, um, environmental and health concern, I'd like to consider, um, the effluent being, um, us being able to discharge our effluent to an area where it could then be taken and treated properly rather than getting into local aquifers. Thank you. Hi everyone. My name is Nairia Shajian and I am with the project team, uh, for Canyon Crest. Uh, for Canyon Crest and there's so many things that I want to touch on. You guys had a really good question. So thank you for, for all of that. And for your presentation, um, coming off of this comment, I will say that in terms of the precedent angle, I think that, um, helping alleviate the groundwater situation for Canyon Crest with the 54 homes, which is a major development for that region. Uh, would help alleviate the groundwater water and mitigate that health environmental health concern, ultimately contributing to the health of the groundwater regionally. So hopefully in terms of NOV notices of violation being passed out left and right, hopefully that's not the case moving forward. Um, that is something that also sets this project apart is the notice of violation and is not a growth driven, uh, proposal of why we're here. Um, it's kind of a not good situation and we are asking for help. Um, excuse me, I told this to the crowd at a different meeting. I'm not nervous. I'm just pregnant and out of breath. Um, to put a percentage on the gallons per day for the 8,000 gallons per day. Uh, it always helps me when there's a statistic on it, but that's a lot. That's less than 1% of the city's average daily flow to the sanitation district. So in terms of capacity, um, it is really quite minimal. Uh, the concerns for the longterm capacity, of course, are very valid, but I think thinking of in terms of less than 1% helps me. Um, and then lastly, this is the second half of a legacy issue. So Canyon Crest does wheel its water through AG system from the Oceano Community Services District. Uh, the, this component is really the second half of a longterm infrastructure issue from the, the day this development, uh, was approved. So we are here trying to kind of write the second half of this issue for the residents who, like you've heard so far, many of them bought into a problem that they never really anticipated or wanted. So, um, we appreciate your questions. And that is why we're at the proposal or the, what we're asking for approval for today is to move forward with, um, you know, the necessary studies to be able to answer some of the more technical questions and we hope to, uh, reconvene with a lot of those answers. So thank you. Good evening council staff. My name is Rob Miller, the applicant civil engineer here to answer any technical questions that you may have. I did want to provide a little feedback on the magnitude of these studies. We are looking at probably something less than 50,000, but more than 20,000. We need actual proposals from the consultants and we would be using the city's preferred third party consultants, not just doing the work ourselves, but providing that, uh, independent review so that you can rely upon those studies. And I thank you so much for the consideration. Be happy to answer any questions as they come up. Thank you. Anyone else. Just had ankle surgery. So I'm hopping along. Hopping along. Anyway, my name is Jody Venema and I'm president of the, uh, Kenyan Christ mutual, uh, benefit water. I'm the face, the crappy face behind all this. I could stand up here and just repeat everything everybody else said, but, uh, I'm been living out there since 2001 from, from day one. Um, so I can, I'm more than willing to answer any questions you might have. Either now or later. Thank you for your, for your hopeful support. Anyone else. All right. Let's see if there are any online commenters. Madam clerk. If any members of the public on zoom would like to make a comment, please raise your hand. There are no raised hands. Thank you. So I'll close public comment and bring it back to the council. How about we start on this side this time? Comments. Thank you, mayor. Um, I am sympathetic to Canyon Crest situation. Um, definitely. I don't think it was something that they could control. And I understand that regulations have changed. Um, I think the environmental point is a good one on the other hand, and they're pretty stuck. I would say on the other hand, I think mayor and, uh, council, uh, person Guthrie make good points. Uh, we have to be careful about what sort of burden we would be taking on for the city. Um, but having said that, it sounds like doing some more research and having some studies done is a good idea. And then we'll know more where we're standing in terms of impacts on the city. Councilman Guthrie. Um, yeah, I was gonna say actually until I thought that in the past we have actually approved some of these, these kinds of things. I remember we, we did the annexation on the top up behind the high school up there. And so I don't know that I'm as worried about the precedent maybe as, as some other people are. Um, my concern about is, is that we have to be able to do some more research. Um, and I think that's the thing that I think that is, is that we ensure that our rate payers are, are made whole here. That in fact, you know, that it isn't, it isn't just that. Yeah. It's 1%. It's just that we're finding that there's, there's capacity to handle this and, and, and, and, and, and I'm fine with that. I just want to ensure that in fact, I, I see this as fundamentally different that this was a lot inside the city. You would come forward. You would come forward. You're already, you're already a shareholder. You, you may not have, you know, paid, paid all your fees or done all the things, but you're already a shareholder. And in this case, uh, this is somebody coming in and, and being added, added to our company. And, and I want to ensure that they are paying their fair share, not just to hook up, not just to, uh, meet some capacity issue that that might be the way to get there, but to ensure that, that they are in fact, also purchasing the equity that the current rate payers and everybody have all have already paid in over the years. And, and, and that, and, and it hasn't been, hasn't been paid here. And so exactly how you arrive at that number. I mean, simplistically, my mind, it's the sewer systems with X amount, there's 7,000 homes and it adds up to something that's that in addition to, but what I'll call the, the extra costs of them hooking up. And if anything, I think we would want to overcompensate here. I, so I'm in favor of moving forward, doing that kind of study with, with having that in mind, it is fundamentally different than an impact fee because it is a buy-in fee for lack of a better word. And as, as related more to, to, to, to ensuring that our equity is, that our, the equity is, our equity is not diluted. Pun, pun unintended. And so, I have one other comment there. Oh, well, may think of it later, but so I'm, I'm certainly in favor of, of moving forward this, like I said, just, oh, we, we are likely to have a significant rate increase. Warning. Warning. And I just want to ensure that we've done everything we can when we, when we come back with that rate increase to, to protect our, our rate payers. And, and have done everything, not just this, but everything we can along those lines. Thank you. Were you talking about a rate increase for water or wastewater? It's going to be both. Okay. Well, Mayor Prachem. I'm, I'm pretty much saying the same thing. I'm very sympathetic to what you're all going through. I can't imagine having to deal with this. Like, I definitely feel for you for in, in that aspect. I share council member Guthrie's concerns of just making sure that it is equitable of what we're doing. I think that's the only fair way, but I am support in support of staff's recommendations and moving forward with something. Okay. So for me, before I give my comments, I need to declare that I had ex parte communications with the lovely pregnant lady back there. Congratulations, Nairi. I will declare that as well. Cause I did as well. Thank you. As would I. So apparently I'm the only one that follows the council handbook up here, but no, I'm just kidding. Just kidding. Just kidding. Easy, Karen. Okay. Um, so just given the numbers of the staff report, this is clearly the half price solution for you. And that makes sense. Um, I suspect it's not going to come in at the half price solution because there's some other equity issues that the council's talking about, but it's still going to be the right move forward for you. And I, I really do think that Nairi said a couple of really important things that this isn't growth driven and it's not growth inducing. And I think that's a, that's something for us to consider. So thank you for that. Um, and I've got a few things that I want to put here, uh, just in terms of what I want staff to consider, but I'm absolutely for, um, working towards a solution here because I think no matter where we end up, it's going to be better than you all having to do it on your own. Um, so that's important. So that being said, I wrote things slightly different than Mr. Guthrie, but my comments are very similar. I want to make sure that the AG taxpayers don't foot a penny of the bill. I know you all are not intending that either. It's just a matter of staff and us pre thinking out how to make sure that's the case. And that's where, why we're here tonight. So I think what you're hearing is that you have, you have support across the board that we want to hear you out. Um, so some of the specific things that I want to, um, make sure that we consider is, um, the cost to the system capacity, not of sanitation district, but of the city of Aurora Grande vis-a-vis the general plan. Those are different calculations. So I want to be sure that, that I'm specific about that. Um, because that is a, that, that has an effect on what we can do here in AG. Um, I want to make sure that there are indemnifications as part of this, that the risk to our rate payers is nil. Um, that may include some level of bonding on things. I don't know. Uh, I want to make sure that we don't by extension somehow get, um, have any risk with regard to the contamination of the water supply via the nitrates. And especially if that develops. So, um, that's something to think about. Um, I am, I would definitely want to consider the wastewater impact fees akin to development fees for sure. This is what anybody would do. Um, and I wrote something similar to what Mr. Guthrie said. I said, uh, a buy-in cost like state water. So for example, if they had bought in, in 2001, now realizing that they didn't have a crystal ball, the world was different at that time. Nobody skirted anything. Nobody did anything wrong in 2001. But if they had bought in, in 2001, then, and, and all the impacts had happened since then, um, what would that number have been? Like how, how do we, and I think that that speaks to the same issue that Mr. Guthrie was talking about, about, um, it is fundamentally different and there have been impacts of the system. It is a bit like an equity share in a company. And so I don't know how you quantify that. Um, but we do have a finite starting point as 2001. So we can come up with some sort of framework of what that is worth to the AG rate payer. Um, but I'm confident that between the brilliant Nairie and all the residents and our staff, we can come up with something that, that will be equitable for our taxpayers. We'll help out, uh, your situation and ultimately best for our, our aquifer. And that's, that's where we need to be. So, um, I do want to add that I would like this to come back to council as part of the MOU. I want council to hear it, um, rather than just going to the, the final, um, decision. And with that, this is not a receiving, this is not a receiving file and it's not something that we're going to make a motion on, but, um, do you have enough information staff that, that you can take this forward? Or do we need to make a motion officially since it's a pre-app? Um, it, it, it, it's not necessary to make the CEQA finding at this time, because it's not the final action that council's going to take here. I think it, it would just be a motion to say that, you know, there is confirmation of conceptual support for this idea. Uh, yeah. Uh, yeah. So, council, I mean, uh, uh, staff, you heard council say, I mean, basically we want to make sure that any and all costs, um, both legal and fiscal are covered. Uh, and as part of that, and we're willing to entertain it if that's the case. That's what I'm hearing. That's what I'm hearing. Yes. I'm seeing concurring nodding heads. Okay. All right. Well, I guess we will see you all at some point in the future. So Godspeed to you and all of those, um, studies that we're going to make you do. So you'll be mad at us later. I promise. Um, but, uh, we'll work together and we'll see what we can do. Okay. So with that, that concludes item 11 a that takes us to item 12 council communications. Uh, I will go first and just saying that we are hosting the mayor's meeting on Friday at the gallery. And, uh, that will be my last mayor's meeting to host. So I'm excited about that. And that should be lovely. Um, and we already talked about the state of the city and I think that's it for my announcements. Would anyone else have announcements tonight? Kate, of course you do. Well, first of all, the mayor and I are doing, we're attending an event on a Wednesday. And, um, yes, celebrity bakers. No one would ever believe that about me. And they would about the mayor. Actually, my daughter will make the cake, but the point is we're going to raise money for rotary. So it's going to be awesome. And our theme is strawberry fields forever. So, and then I have just an inspirational quote. Don't let someone else's fear rob you of the chance to know another human being. Where did that come from? Um, That's nice. And any other council communications? All right. That takes us to item 13 adjournment. We'll see you in a month. Everyone. We are dark for the first part of July. So we'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July. We'll see you at the end of July.