Campbell, Ohio

Thank you. Thank you. I'd ask you to please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay. We have no special presentations or proclamations this evening, and we have no communications or petitions. So now we move to oral requests. This would be the time for anyone to address the Council on items not on tonight's agenda. And if you'd like to address the Council, you will have two minutes. Requests that you fill out a card or form in the meantime, you are not required to do so. I have one oral request on file here, and so I'd like to call Matt Ryan, please. Good? All right. I'm here tonight. I just want to address an incident that I learned about that occurred following our recent Police Officers Association meeting that we held last Wednesday at the Community Center. This was not a routine meeting. It was a meeting directly related to the active MOU negotiations between the city and the POA and matters within the scope of our representation. Several of our members attended meeting while on duty and parked their marked patrol vehicles in the Community Center parking lot. They were participating in lawful and protected union activity, discussing the city's proposed MOU and matters affecting their wages, benefits, and working conditions. As officers were preparing to leave, a member of this Council approached one of the patrol vehicles, yelling at it, wanting to know why it was at the Community Center. The vehicle was unoccupied. When approached by a uniformed member, this Council member then began saying that they were scaring members of the public, strongly implying that they needed to leave the Community Center. Our members were conducting themselves professionally. They were not interfering with anyone or creating disturbance. They were simply exercising rights guaranteed to them under California law. What makes this incident particularly concerning is its timing. This occurred while the city and the POA were actively engaged in labor negotiations. Whether intended or not, this incident creates the appearance that employees may face hostility or criticism simply for participating in the collective bargaining process. At a time when both sides should be working towards a fair and respectful bargaining process, this type of conduct sends the wrong message to our members . So I'll be very clear. Our members will not be intimidated from exercising those rights. They will continue to attend union meetings, participate in negotiations, and advocate for themselves, their families, and the future of this police department through lawful, professional, and respectful means. Based on this event and other events that the Council and the public is aware of, I respectfully request that this Council member voluntarily recuse himself from further participation in any negotiations between the city and the POA. Reasonable people can disagree on budgets, contracts, and priorities. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other oral requests? There may be one online. I'd like... Oh, there's someone online? Oh, please. Isenya, would you like to speak? Okay. Okay. Apparently the person is not there. Any other oral requests? Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on. Okay. So now I move on to Council announcements. So I have a few announcements here on behalf of the City Council. The Campbell Museum is hosting an e-waste and recycling event this Saturday, June 20th. It will be held in the Ainsley House gravel parking lot from 9 to 1. For information on what you are allowed to recycle, please visit the Campbell Museum website at www.campbellmuseums. com. The second announcement is that the Campbell Summer Concert is back with a full concert season. We're pleased to see that. Participants may dance, find a place to just sit and listen and relax if they wish. It's at the Orchard City Green, which is where we've held it for several years. The event offers a variety of music and performers, from bands that we enjoy every year to newcomers that we're excited to welcome. The concerts are held on Thursday nights from 6.30 till 8 p .m., and the first concert will start on July 9th. This is also a great time to support the Campbell Museum Foundation by purchasing food and drinks at the event. More information is available on the City of Campbell website, www.campbellca.gov. And the third announcement is that the Summer Music Nights will also return this summer, beginning on Friday, July 10 th. Movie Nights series features a number of family-friendly films that will take place throughout our park system or at different park locations each Friday. And the first movie is called The Incredibles, and it will be showing. They all start at dusk. This one will be held at the John D. Morgan Park at the P ony Baseball Diamond. All films will start, as I said, at sunset or a little earlier, depending upon the light. Participants are invited to bring long chairs and blankets and sweaters. Feel free also to bring a picnic or snacks. Carpooling is recommended. More information, again, can be found on the City's website , www.campbellca.gov. So that's all of the announcements that I have. So now we'll move on to the consent calendar. This evening's consent calendar include items 7.1 to 7.9, which the Council will take as a single item of business unless a member of the Council, a member of staff or a member of the public would like us to pull an item for further discussion. And I would just personally like to pull item 7.7 for further discussion. Would anyone else like to pull an item for further discussion? Seeing none, could we have a motion to approve items 7.1 through 7.9, with the exception of item 7.7? Also move. I'll second. Motion by Vice Mayor Bybee, second by Council Member Hines. Roll call, please. Council Member Lopez? Aye. Council Member Hines? Aye. Council Member Scozola? Aye. Vice Mayor Bybee? Aye. Mayor Furtado? Aye. Just before we discuss item 7.7, I just want to take note of the fact that one of the items that we did just approve that I'd like to acknowledge is to item 7.9. That was to accept a donation from Dale Scribner for a bench installation at the Campbell Community Center running track. It's actually going to be installed, of course, just off the track of the northwest corner of the park, of the track area. And I'd like to publicly acknowledge and thank Mr. Scribner for his generous donation to the city to allow this to happen. Okay. So now we'll move to item 7.9. As I mentioned, this was the item that I requested. 7.7. Oh, yeah. 7. Yeah. But we discussed further. And this is the consideration of the adoption of a resolution dispensing with the bidding procedure set forth in our municipal code, approving a consultant service agreement with Project Sentinel for rent dispute and mediation services, and authorizing the city manager to execute the agreement. So my question was, I just kind of wanted to ask from our representatives in planning, specifically housing, how this project has been going and what the status is on the number of, approximately the number of cases that have been addressed perhaps over the last year or so, and just kind of a general report on the success of this process for mediating and hopefully resolving disputes that occur between, for those that rent their facilities and their landlords. So. Good evening, Mayor. Thank you. Yes. Good evening. Mayor and council members, Eloisa Murillo-Garcia, housing manager. Yes, I do have some data on the, on the, so I have a number of different categories, but for the current fiscal year, so please note that this data is only runs until third quarter because Project Sentinel reports to us on a quarterly basis . So we'll get the year-end report sometime in July after the end of the fiscal year. So just keep that in mind with the data. I do have data from prior years, however, though. So through March 31st of 2026, and that's July 1 of last year through March 31st of this year, they have received 124 calls and have provided information and referral. They've opened 37 cases and they've counseled 47 individuals and they've done three conciliations. And as I said, I do have data going back from prior years. So in prior years, they've, it seems like they're kind of on track to, to do what they've done in prior years. So in 24, fiscal year 24 to 25, they had 191 calls for information and referral, opened 79 cases, counseled 67 individuals, and did six conc iliations. So I don't know if you have any specific questions. And I do want to note that we have a representative from Project Sentinel available on Zoom if you have specific questions of Project Sentinel. So we have Esenia Macias, who's the director of tenant landlord counseling and dispute resolution. Thank you, Eloise. I appreciate that. I just kind of wanted to get an appreciation for how we were doing. And are you and the department satisfied that this process that we have and with this organization, that it, it is addressing issues of rent concern and so on? I'm not sure that, I mean, I'm not trying to say that everything gets resolved in everyone's satisfaction, but are you satisfied that the process that we have in this particular approach that we're taking is satisfactory to address city needs? Yes. That's what I'm sure. Yes. The program has been satisfactory in my time here. And I do have, you know, regular communication with Project Sentinel as well. We do work on trying to do more outreach in Campbell. And just recently in April, they were part of the West Valley Housing Fair, you know, just to get the word out about their services. And they're always looking for different outreach activities. Okay. Thank you. Any questions or comments by members of the council? Apparently not. I just want to thank you and Project Sentinel for the work and being able to have the rental discussions are very important to be able to have an avenue for where it can have a discussion. So I just want to emphasize the gray word. And with that, I'll propose a motion to accept item 7.7. All second. Motion by Council Member Hines. Second by Vice Mayor Bybee to approve item 7.7 on the consent calendar. Roll call, please. Council Member Lopez. Aye. Council Member Hines. Aye. Council Member Scazzola. Aye. Vice Mayor Bybee. Aye. Mayor Furtado. Aye. Thank you. We now move on to public hearings in the introduction of ordinances. And the first item is item 8.1. And this is the fiscal year 27 budget and capital improvement plan adoption. And we have been working on this for some time now. And so it's before the council for potential approval this evening. And the presentation will be made by our city manager, Brian Leventhal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. This has been a long process. And I greatly appreciate the council's time and energy to get through this. We've spent many discussions dating back to the March 5th priority setting. And all of these dates that are significant discussions are shown on this slide here. But tonight, our purpose is to actually adopt the budget. And it's been an iterative process. And every time we come back to you, we've made small changes or improvements, maybe not so small, based on council feedback. And we believe tonight, the budget before you represents the culmination of that work. And we just want to present those changes to you of what has changed since June 2nd. And they're enumerated on the slide. We've added the climate action plan to the strategic objectives. In the comment about the council priorities, we've added that. We've removed $100,000 general fund transfer to the supplemental law enforcement fund. We've reduced utilization of reserves by that same $100,000 . And we've increased the housing assistant fund, excuse me, based on anticipated revenues from either existing agreements or developments that are submitting. So we'll be paying fees by $2.1 million. So this slide really shows you the culmination of that work in one chart. So you can see for our general fund, the comparative revenues and expenditures in each of the last three fiscal years and the proposed budget. You can see this year where it shows a reserve draw. That's the $2.692,000. Call it $2.7 million that we're pulling from the reserve in order to balance the revenues and expenditures. And just to be really clear with this slide, when I show revenues of $74 million, those revenues include that reserve draw and that's why they're balanced. Without that $2.6 million, those revenues would be less that exact same amount. And then the ending fund balance of the city. So you can track along and see those changes. The representation this year for the proposed budget is an increase in the budget of 5.5%. Some of the things when we talk about a structural deficit, some of the things that contribute to that vary over time. And we were asked the question by a council member about why the reserve draw last year was $1.1 million and why it increased this year. Presumably, if we're holding tight on a budget, you wouldn 't have to pull more money out of your reserves. But the footnotes in this slide sort of highlight some of those changes year to year. And I just wanted to highlight those for the council. Why the structural deficit is increased from last year to this year. And these aren't the only reasons. There's others. But these are some very significant reasons to see in that increase. And they're shown here. Increase in annual unfunded liability payments to CalPERS retirement system by $630,000. Increase in annual general liability and property insurance premiums by $115,000. And then the increased contract for fire protection services for the Santa Clara County Fire District in the amount of $377,000. There is other things that contribute as well. But those are the main ones I wanted to highlight a little this evening. Thank you. And as we did before, I wanted to show you the forecasting here. And like with the previous slide, this forecasting assumes the proposed reserve draw is part of the balancing of that budget. That green line that you see here is a representation of what happens if we follow staff's proposal to use those reserves. Without those proposed reserve usage, that green line would dip below that red line much sooner than it does here in this drawing. So I just wanted to make sure that was clear to the council here. And then last, not to be forgotten, the CIP is a very important part of our budget. This year, we're adding $4,200,000 in new capital projects. That's added to the existing capital projects of $71 million that are ongoing for a total of $75,220,000. We're expecting this year's expenditures for those projects in the $7.1 million range. And just to note that there's been no changes in these numbers since our last discussion. So that sort of brings us to the recommendation, which is here on this slide. And I know there's a lot of words here. But we're recommending the council adopt the operating capital budget by the amounts that are shown here. Approve a five-year capital improvement plan with the projects totaling the amounts shown on this slide. And then direct staff to incorporate the final adopted budget document with any changes or adjustments based on this public hearing and any other minor corrections or errors that need to be incorporated into the budget. And then finally, adopt by resolution the GAN limit of $104 ,806,000 as a procedural requirement for the state of California. It's part of our budget process. And with that, I am more than happy to answer questions, comments. We also have our finance director, Will Fuentes, here, who is happy to answer questions. And Norit Vong, our assistant finance director, is available as well. Thank you, Brian. First of all, I'll ask if there's any questions from the city council. Okay. We have no questions. So, the next step is, I would like to open the public hearing to allow any member of the public to comment on this agenda item, specifically the potential approval of the city's budget for the next fiscal year. Would anyone like to speak during public comment? Is there anyone online? No, there's one online. Apparently not. I will close the public hearing and bring the matter back to the council then. What is the pleasure of the council? Sorry, Mayor. I just have two comments that I'd like to make, if I could. And thank you, staff, for putting up with all my questions. So, it was very clear to be able to get that articulated. Campbell budget is heavily being influenced based on the upcoming court decision. Our budget today reflects that necessary to maintain current services and staffing with labor, COLA, increase, and MOUs. Taking a pessimistic approach would make potentially unnecessary decisions on city services and staffing, only to be reinstated with the optimistic result. We should not be pessimistic nor overly optimistic. We should maintain the approach but have a solid plan ready for both the pessimistic and optimistic results at our upcoming mid-year or early-year decision point. So, I am in favor of the budget. I would like to talk specifically about my favorite line item, the CFD-1. CFD-1 is an additional Campbell Village property tax, which sums up to $150,000 per year and needs to be allocated for Campbell Village Public Works. Campbell Village also pays an equal share as every property owner, equal share as every other Campbell property owner for all other city services. For the past 12 years, the CFD-1 funds have gone into a general fund, which in turn pays San Jose $200,000 per year for no services. That's $2.4 million today that has been paid for no services. San Jose fee was for lost sales tax for the Campbell Village annexation. I am advocating to tell San Jose to eliminate the fee due to demand on Campbell Public Works and Public Safety from the multiple housing buildings on Bascom, Porter, and Campbell. Then allocate these funds for Campbell Village Public Works . This line item in the proposed fiscal year 2026-27 is 101.5 40.7458. I propose a motion to have staff review elimination of 101. 540.748, which is the payment of San Jose for no services. I'll propose that as a motion. Councilman Arascozola. I don't support that and we have discussed this a few times already but I believe may I ask staff that is a very beautiful neighborhood as are many of our neighborhoods very expensive homes last I checked our average home is about 2.4 million dollars it's probably gone up since I checked last anyhow I believe and please correct me if I'm wrong but if you account for the people who live there it's a tax of I think around not quite 600 a year which I think that the people who live in those beautiful homes can easily afford and I think we should drop this because we the benefits far outweigh the negatives to the people who live there are there any other comments with respect to the proposed motion is there a second to the motion can I ask a question yes so does the city have any flexibility in deciding not to pay to take to remove that from the budget isn't that a legal agreement that we have with the city of San Jose and what would what would it take to undo that it would take a considerable amount of goodwill from the city of San Jose to undo it we are contractually oblig ated to pay that amount to them and barring San Jose's willingness to renegotiate it we are obligated to do so yeah and my motion was to ask staff to review being able to the elimination of the prospect so once again I'll ask if there's a second to the motion I 've seen none that motion fails uh I'll just make a brief comment on that I don't think that it needs to be um part of the budget vote but I think it's appropriate to review that and we can discuss more I think it's really ultimately a political resolution if there's one um so yeah I want to keep the the budget discussion with the staff recommendation but I understand the frustration I wanted to just have that as a separate motion but again I propose I accept the budget as uh as listed and uh no discussion yeah I just want to say that I have heard uh from you Terry many of my council members when it comes to things of this nature staff time costs money and so you know maybe you know I've asked for things that I thought would take relatively little staff time to look into that didn't get looked into because it was argued towards me oh we don't have the time for that so I would just use that same argument in this case that especially when we have budget shortfalls and we're going from reserves I just think wherever we can save money I don't think this is an issue anyways thank you any other comments with respect to the budget um yes um I just want to thank um staff and uh all of the departments for getting us to this point and I know it's been a lot of work and a lot of back and forth um the one thing that I did mention to the city manager uh I did want to be sure that the service objectives do get included in the final budget document I really feel that those serve as a matter of um accountability and transparency to the community and they they should be somewhere that we can measure um our productivity any other comments well to make would someone like to make a motion to approve the budget I'll move uh adoption of uh uh staff recommendation to uh adopt a budget and see if I'll second we have a motion by council member pines a second by council member lopez to um adopt the budget as presented the other way around so okay yeah it was uh council member lopez was uh the one that um i apologize i got that fixed okay you got it okay great um roll call please council member lopez aye council member hines aye council members scissola aye vice mayor bybee aye mayor frittado hi let me also add my comments to thank both the city manager and your staff as well as our director of finance and and assistant director and all the members of the finance department and let me also acknowledge uh and my my appreciation i'm sure shared by my colleagues of all members of the executive team i know in this process um you all are required to review your own budgets of your departments and make recommendations and suggestions and go back and forth and much of the preliminary work on the budget before it comes to the council is done by the staff and um it's been a successful process um we have had questions in our various study sessions and things of that nature and comments and uh appreciate those being you know incorporated in this process and um we look forward to uh successfully conducting our business of the city for the residents uh and supporting our local businesses as well so thank you we now move on to item number 8.2 and this is a council compensation 2026 and once again uh the presentation will be made by a city manager so brian please go ahead thank you mr mayor and members of the council um this item 's before you uh it's something that we talk about every two years about adjusting council compensation we typically like to do it uh before the election season opens and it would become effective next january uh the state law and the government code uh establishes the the limits to council member compensation uh and more recently senate bill 329 made an adjustment to those uh salary ranges uh last time we discussed currently the salary uh by council members is set at 1275 dollars the law allows that to increase uh for each year by five percent but put it into perspective for you um that number is a very small number the total increase allowed by statute at five percent per year would be 127 dollars and 50 cents per month increase from the prior salary of the council members and total 1402 dollars and 50 cents so it's at 1275 the the uh the statutes would allow it to increase up to 14 or 250 and the council can certainly do anything within those those two numbers uh should the council choose to um uh want to uh compensate its members uh to a lesser degree um this does require an ordinance um so we'll be asking the council to introduce the ordinance tonight and then we would be back second leading on july 7th thank you uh first i'll ask if there's any questions and there's other council seeing none i'll open the public hearing and um invite members of the public that would like to speak on this item 8.2 uh to approach the podium so anyone online apparently not okay i will close the public hearing and bring the matter back to the council for discussion well yes uh thank you mayor uh i would definitely support this to the maximum we can uh my reasoning simple as i've mentioned two years ago uh i personally know someone who he was thinking about running for council but he you know working class struggling family and that little bump up we did last time was just enough for him to throw his hat into the ring uh and so there's a lot of people out there that especially if you want younger you know working class families and people with more experience uh i think that this is something that would encourage more more of those folks to apply and give more of that perspective to to our council and and quite frankly it's a lot of work for very very little compensation so i fully support uh raise and pay that i don't think i'll be benefiting from thank you council member heinz yeah i concur with uh mr scozzola and uh feel that uh we do need to still a small amount um that uh we need to be able to uh have people do it there's there's a certain amount of um fiscal prudence to hold off until measure k but i will defer to the other council's uh decisions and approach on that any other comments um vice mayor bobby i would support the uh staff recommendation i think it's a small dollar amount um and it does uh keep us consistent with what the state law allows and i i don't i wouldn't necessarily agree to defer it until measure k settles because it does have to be adopted prior to an election cycle so and that may not happen with measure k so i would recommend the increase would someone like to make a motion okay so i'll go ahead and make the motion to introduce an ordinance addressing the council member compensation within this limit set forth by government code section three five one six second we have a motion by vice mayor by the second by council member scozzola um roll call please council member lopez council member heinz council member sc ozzola aye vice mayor bybee aye mayor frittado all right the city clerk will now read the title of the ordinance an ordinance of the city council of the city of campbell adjusting city council compensation for calendar years 2027 and 2028 i move the further reading be waived i'll second roll call please council member lopez aye council member heinz aye council members scozzola aye vice mayor bybee aye mayor frittado hi this is a public hearing to consider the adoption of an interim ordinance to extend the interim ordinance which established an urgency measure in response to senate bill 79 the abundant and affordable homes near transit act of 2025. members of the public may recall that we have previously uh considered uh a discussion and held a discussion of item um senate bill 79 um this in this particular item members of the city council who live within a close distance uh of this area or own property within this distance are required to recuse themselves and has been previously noted um council member lopez council member heinz and myself um either live or own property uh in that area so therefore we three would recuse ourselves from further discussion however in order for this measure to be heard by the city council it requires four members of the city council to hear the measure because if it were to be adopted it requires a four-fifths vote of the city council uh therefore we now invoke the rule of necessity um to allow two members of the city council who uh who previously recused themselves uh to be seated and go ahead and discuss this and in order to do this uh the procedure is to draw straws so once again i will ask the city clerk uh to provide the straws so we can draw them uh the person with the short straw will have to recuse themselves and and not participate in this discussion uh okay i will do that so um i have drawn the short straw so i will recuse myself from this item and i will pass the gavel uh to the vice mayor for the discussion of this matter to the vice mayor okay thank you and so we'll move on and i'll uh invite our senior planner stephen rose to present the staff recommendation uh thank you and good evening acting mayor uh bybie and members of city council uh item before you is to consider the extension of a previously approved uh urgency ordinance related to sp79 this is a reminder sp79 authorizes the city to uh exclude certain sites from applicability uh two relevant categories to campbell in particular are those walking path exclusions so sites which are greater than one mile walking from a transit stop as well as historic register sites on june 2nd the city council did in fact uh identify sites that were eligible for removal and took action to do so as an urgency ordinance was effective for an initial period of 45 days and it is set to expire on july 17th unless it's extended the item before tonight seeks to extend the item for 10 months and 15 days with the intention of providing staff time to develop and return with permanent policies for adoption and as noted earlier as an urgency ordinance it does require four-fifths vote of the city council for adoption in conclusion staff is recommending that the city council adopt an interim ordinance extending the urgency ordinance and that concludes staff's presentation and i'm available for any questions thank you steven are there any questions of the council for steven do you have the steven do you have the map that shows the exclusion areas i i do so on screen i have varying maps so i think that this is the walking path exclusion map which shows those i identified properties which are greater than a one mile walk from the pedestrian access points thank you steven any other questions at this point i will open the public hearing and invite anyone in the audience or anyone online to speak on this item is there anyone in the council chamber that wishes to address the council and do we have anybody online with that i'll close the public hearing and um bring it back to council for discussion and or a motion council members no discussion uh yeah i don't i don't really have comments but i i would move the staff recommendation i'll second so we have a motion by council member lopez and a second by council member heinz to move the staff recommendation could we have a roll call vote please council member lopez council member heinz council member suzola vice mayor by the eye at this point i'd ask the city clerk to read the title of the ordinance being an interim ordinance of the city of the city council of the city of campbell extending interim ordinance number 26-2350 which established urges urgency measures in response to senate bill 79 the abundant and affordable homes near transit act of 2025. file number pln-2025-170 thank you kristin and is there a motion to wait for the reading so moved second motion by council member lopez second by council member heinz to wait for the reading could we have roll call council member lopez council member heinz council members suzola vice mayor by the motion passes and um if we could get mayor to part of that okay thank you we now presumably move on to item 8.4 this is a request for the city council um uh to initiate a general plan amendment to change the land use designation of a property within an existing single-family residence located at 480 chapman drive from neighborhood commercial to low density residential and the staff report on this uh presentation will be made by uh daniel fama pardon me senior planner good evening uh before you is a preliminary application for consideration of city council initiation of a general plan amendment for property located at 480 chapman drive so procedurally the city zoning code requires a private request to amend the general plan first come before the city council for uh basically permission for an applicant to submit a formal application it's basically a type of gatekeeping function that prevents unnecessary expenditure and money to be spent by an applicant if a proposal is made that the council does not feel warrants for consideration so the application side before you is a 9500 square foot parcel located on chapman drive between walnut and winchester uh the property's current general plan and zoning designation is neighborhood commercial uh it is developed with a single family residence that was constructed circa 1956 and is bordered by single family residences to the west and a converted residence that's a daycare to the east the existing house as you see here is a non-conforming use meaning that it's basically grandfathered in under the rules and effect at the time when it was constructed in 1956 and as a result under the city's invitations for non-conforming uses while the house can be maintained and remodeled it cannot be expanded or rebuilt except upon involuntary destruction such as a fire so the applicants request before you is functionally two fold uh they're seeking to uh get council approval to submit an application for a general plan amendment to change the the zoning and land use to single family residential that would render the residence that conforming land use that would allow a homeowner to do in addition to the home they're also seeking city council consideration for reduction application fees for the required amendment as we 'll discuss in a moment in terms of context uh the site here shown um in the outline is part of a run of properties along winchester that is currently zoned neighborhood commercial uh you see a fairly defined line between the properties that abut winchester and the residential properties behind it along walnut drive uh this runner properties has been some form of commercial since these back going back to 1966 uh the graphic at the top right is from an old zoning map that highlights the area as ch so that was uh commercial highway zoning and then for quite a while it was general commercial and then with the city's adoption of the 2023 general plan it was down zoned to neighborhood commercial as it exists today uh in terms of a quick land use analysis for the proposal uh the general plan uh the most applicable policy guidance is policy lu 2.9 that basically it requires the city including staff and the council and commission to consider various considerations with land use changes particularly having to doing having to deal with compatibility of the changes wanting to ensure that any language changes don't create new compatibility issues such as noise into a neighborhood so here uh the change would basically allow that residence to be cohesive with the adjacent residential properties allowing it to be functionally used in performing way as the neighboring properties are currently used now as noted more in the staff report the trade-off here is that without the two properties the day care and this property uh seems unlikely that there would be any future development for the adjacent day care property simply because it would be so shallow but after 60 years without any redevelopment that may be more of an academic point than a realistic concern with regard to the fee reduction costs the formal application cost of this involves three separate land use amendment applications a zoning change a general plan amendment and a form-based loan form-based map amendment that in total exceed 36 000 in application costs that number is fairly high generally because these types of requests usually involve fairly substantial policy considerations that just aren't present here this is a rather unique request given that it deals with a single property that has been long developed with a single family residence so based on an estimate of 24 hours of staff time that would incorporate basic staff report presentation and review by the director holding public meetings uh estimate cost is about six thousand dollars for a realistic cost recovery basis so in terms of staff recommendation next steps staff does recommend that the city council adopt a resolution that would authorize initiation of the general plan amendment subject to the formal application being submitted within one year's time and just to clarify this actually would not guarantee approval it would need to be formally considered in further detail by the planning commission city council and could ultimately be rejected and then staff would also recommend approval of a reduced application fee in the amount of six thousand dollars and with that i will take any questions to council mayhaw thank you thank you questions by members of the council council member hines i'm sorry the last point that you said i think you said it would reduce uh uh reduced application view thank you any other questions yes vice mayor bobby that six thousand dollars uh daniel does that include then um hearings by at the planning commission level it does not the same and and city council correct and would you expect that the six that this you might exceed the six thousand dollar um goal i mean it is an estimate so that is always a possibility yes so would you recommend um a contingency to i mean this is being structured as a flat fee i mean the council could uh direct staff to collect a deposit which we could bill against the actual staff time could could you um um bill if if the staff time exceeds the six thousand dollars would you could you build per hour what whatever excess hours you needed to process yes i mean basically that would change i mean what's be recommended here is just a flat rate of six thousand dollars based on the estimate the alternative would be take a six thousand dollar deposit and then actually count on an hourly basis for all the staff time that would be involved and then if we exceed that amount and collect additional funds that would be charged against the hourly rate i mean that of course would also involve more accounting work which of course would also increase the overall costs so i'm not meaning to over complicate things i just want to be sure that what we recoup our staff costs any other questions thank you so i will open the public hearing and allow um someone to or anyone to speak on this item uh the applicant um may take up to five minutes if you'd like to address the council hi there mayor and council appreciate the time um on this matter um i have a presentation to share um oh and i'm jenny from gkw architects i'm gordon from gkw architects okay okay all right so um we are here presenting the 480 chapman drive project um and the general plan amendment would allow the owners to be able to expand their home they are a husband and wife with two kids one of which is a newborn um so this addition to their home would help their expanding family seven months and four year old let me move this over here okay um so the existing floor area is 1470 square feet it's a three bedroom two bath they would like to add 499 square feet to the rear of the house it would increase the size of their great room and allow them to add an office or flex room with a new floor area of 1969 square feet this is the rear view of their home as it is currently we have put together a rendering of the proposed house with the addition with an with an extra kid yes maybe maybe ours play date play date yeah um and this is an aerial view of the existing home and the proposed aerial view of the addition and this is the front view and as you can see the addition is not visible from the front that concludes our presentation any questions we're here and so is the homeowner um and yeah we really appreciate the time and uh we really do think the city of campbell does a great job with uh all the local people here all right thank you thank you thank you for your comments i'll just ask clarification here um the item before us is a zoning change and while i think it 's fine to see the proposed a new home that is not what we're approving we're simply approving the zoning change and this item would come before the appropriate bodies presumably the planning commission i don't know perhaps the council at a future time in terms of the specifics of the presentation that was just made am i correct in that yes this would be if ultimately approved by the city council in addition of this type would just be a building permit and ministerial application thank you however thank you for your presentation would the applicant herself or himself like to speak as well good evening mayor and members of the city council my name is alicia and i am the homeowner of 480 chapman drive thank you for the opportunity to come before you this evening i am proud to call campbell home for the past eight years this city has been has been the backdrop of some of the most meaningful chapters of my life and over the last four years my house on 480 chapman drive has been the center of it all what began as a home for my family has grown into so much more and that growth is exactly why i'm here tonight since moving in my family has expanded and we are now raising two young children who deserve the space to play explore and grow we are so grateful for everything this community has to offer the new library has been a wonderful addition and my children have truly loved spending time in there it is exactly the kind of thing that makes campbell such a special place to raise a family our current zoning classification as neighborhood commercial limits our ability to make the improvements necessary to accommodate my family's needs by approving my application to rezone the preliminary application to rezone the property to low density residential you would be giving us the opportunity to expand our home in a way that allows my children to thrive here in the community we love this is not a temporary fix or stepping stone this is our forever home we are deeply rooted in campbell invested in the neighborhood and committed to being long-standing members of the community for many years to come the rez oning approval would allow us to responsibly utilize the space we already have to create a comfortable lasting home that reflects that commitment i respectfully ask the council's support of this application and thank you for your time and everything you do for the residents of campbell thank you for your presentation appreciate that would anyone else like to speak on this item seeing then i'll close the public hearing and bring the matter back to the council for further discussion councilmember lopez thank you first off thank you to the um applicant um your love for campbell clearly it comes across and while we're of course not voting on the design appreciate hearing a little bit more about the plans um i do support the staff recommendation i think for the first off i i think just the the the zoning um change is just uh common sense so appreciate you being pragmatic there um i of course support cost recovery um but i do support going with the the amount that's estimated because as as it is an estimate it it could exceed that amount or it could also potentially be lower if um ultimately it does you may not need every hearing um that uh uh uh you know could could go either way and i think it's at such a lower amount it's it's better just do a flat fee i think for larger projects um it may make sense actually tracking kind of billable um hours but um i i'm cautious of creating more work for staff for what um ultimately is going to be um i i don't think very much of a difference in either direction thank you uh any other comments i might add myself that i do support the staff recommendation um if if by chance um you know the fees involved would be less than what the flat fee is i would just suggest that the staff come back to the council with a potential reduction of fees for some additional fees which they will need to pay for permits and things of that age so um with that would someone like to make a motion i'll move the staff recommendation i'll second uh motion by council member l opez a second by vice mayor bybie if there's no further discussion roll call please council member lopez aye council member heinz aye council member scissola aye vice mayor bybie aye mayor furtado aye welcome and thank you okay we now move on to new business um item 9.1 this is the calling for a general municipal election for the districts three four and five and to request consolidation of election in accordance with the california election code and the staff presentation will be made by the city manager brian leventhal thank you uh thank you mr mayor and members of the council it's my pleasure to present again um this is uh something that we do uh in years of election uh it's called the calling for the election in which the council's asked by resolution to uh set the elections uh in this case for the three districts that have elections this year as the council's aware uh several years ago we went to districts in campbell and so there's five election districts this year districts three district four and district five is up for elections so only the residents that live in those districts will be able to vote on those council members uh so tonight we're asking you to call for those elections uh we're requesting uh that the council approve consolidation of those elections with the county register of voters and that the council also determines uh determines uh in advance to resolve any tie votes by lot versus by having a runoff and that lastly the council approves a living of a fee for each candidate in their candidate statements so with regard um to the um candidate statements starting in 2004 uh the council has subsidized those candidate statements the current estimate for a statement of a candidate uh is three thousand three hundred ninety two dollars that's the cost for the register voters to print that statement from a candidate in the ballot material um and in the past the council has set the fee to the candidate at three hundred dollars thus subsidizing the remainder of those costs on the city uh in the past the fppc the fair political practice commission advice letter um did make a determination that the city can't absorb some or all of the cost of the form it's ballot statement um however the council can choose to charge a higher amount than we have before in the past so the recommendation before you tonight in that is uh to follow past practices and charge three hundred dollar flat fee to the candidates and then lastly um the election codes allows for the council to choose how tie votes are broken the council can choose to require a runoff election um or the council can resolve tie votes by lot much like we drew straws this evening um and it's staff's recommendation to resolve uh tie votes by lot if we were in that unfortunate situation uh because uh the added cost to uh consolidated uh because uh the added cost to uh consolidated election if we had a runoff election uh it would not be consolidated because it would be sometime after the november election we would have a standalone election which would be tremendously expensive for the city so our recommendation is uh to resolve those tie votes if we had one by lot uh and then uh lastly um the staff report addresses what happens or what could happen the council could choose if we don't have candidates that run in either district um there is a very short time window for the council to make that decision but it's our recommendation that we don't make a determination what to do in that instance right now until the election uh filing period has come and gone uh and and then if maybe we would set up a special meeting of the council to talk through that um i just wanted to be clear on when we say calling for the elections about the dates for this so if the council were to approve staff's recommendation this evening the municipal election on november 3rd the filing period for candidates wanting to file for one of those three districts would begin july 13th and would end august 7th so those are the dates that we're working off i know it's now only june but we do this in advance so we can do the preparatory work for that um so if uh the recommendation uh by staff uh is approved by council uh we would call for the municipal election we would consolidate the election with the register of voters we would uh determine to resolve any tie votes by lot and we would levy a fee for each candidate of 300 for your state with that i'm glad to answer any questions thank you any questions okay no questions i will allow some time for the public to comment on this matter would anyone like to speak on this matter before the council seeing none i'll close the public comment and bring it back to the council for discussion or motion well there's no discussion i'll be happy to make the motion to approve the staff recommendation including the the candidate statement fee at 300 dollars i 'll second motion by vice mayor by the second by council member hines roll call please council member lopez council member hines council member scissola aye vice mayor by the mayor furtado hi thank you we now move to item 9.2 this is the approval and award of a contract to authorize the city manager to execute a consultant services agreement with guida that's an acronym for city service surveyor services services and the presentation this evening we made by our director of public works amy elay good evening i'm real mayor and members of the city council um the purpose of item 9.2 is to seek city council approval to award a new contract for city surveyor services to guida an authorization and authorization requested for the city manager to execute a consultant services agreement for an initial two-year term with up to three one-year extensions the reason we are seeking consultant services is because all subdivision maps must be signed by a licensed land surveyor for technical accuracy and the city does not have the expertise in house so this then requires the city to contract with a consultant to provide a surveyor services and act as city surveyor the contract also would cover miscellaneous surveying tasks such as monument setting for instance so since 2021 the city has been working with csg consultants and the workload has increased significantly due to state housing laws and so due to the workload the agreement has been amended six times with the most recent amendment amendment expiring on june 30th so with that um we issued an rfp in april where six firms responded four firms were interviewed by a panel of engineering staff and guida was identified as the most qualified firm after the full evaluation initial contract will be for two years and 250 000 with an allowance for three annual one-year extensions of 125 000 and so the extension provides for cpi increases and a contingency is included to address fluctuations based on workload the costs are all budgeted in the public works operating budget program 740. however the expenditures will be offset by map review fees revenues that we get from the applicants and with that i'm happy to take questions and i'm here the staff roger stores senior civil engineer is here with me so we're both available for questions thank you amy questions for the director of public works well no questions so thank you would anyone well first yeah no questions from the council would anyone like to speak on this matter um seeing none i'll bring the matter back to the council for discussion or motion just having uh dealt with surveyors on one property that i had purchased and then uh sold it uh it's a very important and uh that survey was used quite often so uh i fully support this and i propose a motion to uh accept the staff recommendation or item 9.2 of the contract uh for the surveyor all second motion by council member heinz second by the vice mayor vibey uh roll call please council member lopez council member hines council member sc issola hi vice mayor vibey mayor frittado hi thank you we now move to item 9.3 the approval and award of consultant services and agreement uh to bkf engineers and approve a funding agreement with the valley transportation authority for the hamilton avenue highway 17 southbound off ramp the widening project project 24-cc and to authorize the city manager to execute the appropriate agreements um the presentation once again by director of public works thank you hello again purpose of item 9.3 is to seek council approval and award a consultant services agreement with bkf engineers for 640 000 plus a 10 contingency and approval of a funding agreement with bta for 256 000 in measure b funds this project would improve traffic operations at the hamilton 17 southbound off ramp by widening the ramp and adding a third left turn lane so addition of a left turn lane is needed to efficiently handle the traffic volumes at the off-ramp intersections and also address queues on the ramps and along hamilton avenue by doing this it will also give the city flexibility to out reallocate green time from the off-ramp to hamilton avenue so operational deficiencies were identified back in in 2004 from the development of the coal site and then subsequently we have the creek site center and city sports have also contributed funds and to date we have 544 000 in developer contributions additionally the project has been included in vta's long- range valley transportation plan since 2009 and by doing that that kind of that allows us to apply for grant opportunities and therefore the project was awarded measure b funds in the amount of 2.4 million dollars with a 600 000 local match in early 2026 the rfp for design services was released in which two proposals were received bkf engineers ranked most qualified based on technical review and interviews and so the scope for the consultant services would be includes the environmental clearance and the design which is the plan specs and the estimate um and then working with caltrans to get the necessary permitting so right now we're we have a a current funding gap of 256 000 so with that we went to v ta to um use a portion of our 2.4 million dollars enhance the um funding agreement with vta but the remaining funds that we have about 2.1 million dollars will be retained for construction so in terms of the project design timeline um we expect to complete the design and the environmental work through uh by december of 2027 and in early 2028 we will return to city council for the approval of the psne so what it allows us to do with a completed um design package is that it will advance the project to be a bit ready stage and it allows us to compete for future construction grants and so with that happy to take questions and i have aruna baduna our senior civil engineer here with me thank you questions for amy i actually have one one of the problems right now and i could only see it possibly increasing um when you exit that ramp if you exit um west on hamilton avenue um you're oftentimes stopped by the stoplight there and it holds the traffic for quite some time and I'm concerned about that and I'm just wondering if that would ultimately be part of addressing this whole matter because while it can help clear the lane, especially the right turn lane, it can be held up once again with the traffic light and also while persons coming off that ramp have the right of way in the lane closest to the side of the road that they turn into, oftentimes then travelers in the second lane over proceeding when they have a green light often want to turn right into the parking lot there to go to Poles for example and so consequently there are a number of cars that sort of jam up a little bit because of that and I just wondered if that whole issue of the stoplight and its potential adjustment will be addressed in the future on this matter. So the first step is for us to widen that off ramp right and then so by separating so currently we have two lefts and a through share left and a free right and so what we want to do is separate that share through left and have its own so creating three left turns and its own through and a right turn so really separating out the different phases. While doing that as I mentioned that's going to allow us some flexibility and adjusting the green time through the Hamilton corridor so while looking at timing for the other intersections nearby will not be part of this design it's definitely some of the things that we would take into consideration and ultimately we would do a timing of Hamilton corridor. Okay thank you. Any other? Oh yes, the vice or by me. Likewise, I had a question about the right hand turn because right now it it can be somewhat congested when you 've got people turning right onto Hamilton and you have people coming west on Hamilton they want to get over to make that right hand turn there to turn down El Marina and it's is there any way to have a protected a better a better configuration to avoid some of that confusion there? I think that's something that we can look at as part of this design I don't have that okay can't answer that right now just because once we have the design we can have the consultant look at that. Okay. Basically I have the same similar question uh building off of what you just mentioned it's it's it should be its own dedicated lane at least for a point and maybe I've seen other structures where you know you'll have um some kind of pylons you know the flexible ones or something so that because the main issue is that people like to dive over into that that lane when people are making right turns you know during the heavy traffic hours especially and so I think that it it we really should consider that I think it's crucial I I like the idea of you know the concept here of expanding and having one more dedicated lane but I think it would be absolutely critical to ensure that that we stop that that jam up that happens pretty much every day there um yeah thanks yeah we can certainly look at the um the facing of the the signal that's my lupus thank you um I also just want to offer some some feedback don't you know to pass on to the consultant but my biggest concern there um and and the uh the issue that I see almost every time uh I'm getting off that lane is um the the left turn uh for the uh and and uh conflicts between the second lane from the right and the third lane from the right that second lane from the right to turn left which it can go in in several different directions so but when people are turning left then that lane has the the right lane and they don't have I think people assume that it's gonna get on the other on ramp and so the third lane from from the right often tries to go over into that lane I see a lot of uh near misses I I've almost been hit many times um I only makes a lot of sense because if you just got off the highway it doesn't make sense that people would then be trying to get back on on the the other um uh on ramp unless they they got turned around um but but having some way of making it more clear that that lane has the the they don't have to turn into the highway they don't have to turn into the highway and go the next thing over they can stay in the right lane to go uh east on Hamilton um so and I can if if it doesn't make sense I could draw a draw a map sometime we can follow up a draw diagram um but it but it's something I see almost every day and I'm sure there are collisions that do happen there yeah we're hoping that with the separation of the shirt through left that that might help with that yeah yeah yeah great I'll just uh join in through the conversations across the board on that that uh um it's you know I won't use the expletive but it's a um um it's a it's an experience that uh needs to be a lot safer so thank you one yes sure just one more quick comment also sometimes you'll see uh you know when it's especially congested there's so many lanes and we're even having one more lane that to just throw down some paint you know obviously more than the arrows like I think that if you have a lane I think a lot of confusion which uh Sergio was just talking about right now is that people don 't know if they're getting on the freeway or not so if we just drop a giant you know 17 south or something you know for for the particular lane on the on the roadway itself uh that might help it's just these are just some ideas to help with the confusion there thank you thank you thank you I'll also invite any members of the public that might like to comment okay seeing none um bring it back to the council for further discussion yeah I'll just make the additional comment that it's it's great that we're getting the funds and that we've been so successful in in uh getting uh some dta funding would you like to make a motion or maybe did you want to come no I'm sorry I'm ready to make a motion or oh okay sure I'm happy to make the motion I'll move the uh staff recommendation second okay so uh motion by council member Lopez second by council members Cazola both all council member Lopez aye council member Hines aye council members Cazola aye vice mayor bybee aye mayor Furtado aye thank you thank you okay we now move to item number 9.4 this is the adoption of the technology disruption policy in compliance with the senate bill 707 and the presentation will be made by assistant city manager uh Angelique Gaeta thank you honorable mayor and members of the council this evening is a continuation of the city's compliance with the recent amendments to the brown act approved by SB or senate bill 707 by the governor in October of last year um in June beginning of June uh June 8 th specifically staff actually provided the council with a memo and it contained guidelines for remote participation of council meetings um our council members and council meetings and this is a continuation of that effort to um make sure that we're keeping the meetings open and making information as accessible as possible so the first part of the resolution that we're asking you to adopt actually deals with uh technology disruption policy which actually tracks the language of the senate bill and um includes um the following requirements if the policy is adopted that the mayor or city clerk will announce the disruption that the meeting will be recessed while staff works to restore service that staff will make good faith efforts to diagnose and restore the disrupted service the meeting may also remain in recess for up to one hour while restoration efforts are underway but if service cannot be restored then the council can do one of two things they can either adjourn the meeting or continue the meeting upon making a finding that good faith efforts have been made to restore the service and that it's in the public interest to continue the meeting and that interest outweighs the public interest in remote access finally the city clerk would document the disruption the restoration efforts made by staff and any required findings in the meeting minutes so that's part the first part of the resolution we're asking you to adopt which specifically deals with that policy the second part of the resolution that we're asking you to adopt actually deals with the efforts of making outreach to encourage public participation in city council meetings and some of that is actually putting the information on the city council's web page most of the information that the bill requires us to share is already on our city web page but not specifically on the city council's web page and so in that regard we would ask you to um direct staff to essentially put the information on the city council's website and also the information that is currently on the agenda web page um including the email address that goes directly to the city clerk's office so that people can make a request for agendas and documents and also the information that is currently on the agenda web page but specifically linked to the city um council's web page would be information about how to participate in meetings um how to uh offer public comments how to participate in person and versus remote participation things of that nature and then lastly we would ask that the council direct staff to report back to you at a later date with additional ways that we can increase community involvement in meetings so this would provide the staff with an opportunity to just explore different ways um to reach out to different communities that aren't typically participating in council meetings and if we had the time to do that then we could come back with some ideas that we would recommend that you adopt and with that i'm happy to take any questions thank you any questions any member of the public like to speak on the matter apparently not thank you angelique um so it's up to the council not to decide here would you like to make a motion on this matter i'll make a motion to proceed ahead with the uh adoption of the technology disruption policy for staff recommendation i'll second a motion by council member hines uh second by vice mayor bybie roll call council member lopez hi council member hines hi council members scissola hi vice mayor bybie i'm mayor for tata fine thank you thank you there is no unfinished business and we now move to council committee reports so members of the council have reports to make council member hines i do thank you thank you mayor i i had a chance to meet with the los gatos al camino hospital leadership team i had the opportunity to attend the league of california cities hced where there was a significant discussion on the the backup ballot measure the baca ballot measure coming up uh the dcba car show fantastic event uh and then uh attended a bay area rule 11-18 webinar um a very extensive review of that i met with the pg e government affairs representative and uh excellent discussion there at an svce board meeting uh that was a good discussion we had on the sve programs that are planned and then we had the the service academy appointees review of the city volunteer appreciation today it was an excellent meeting uh and uh excellent lunch as well and still going and then finally a shout out to the doe zone uh in the prune yard uh recently having a chamber of ribbon cutting they're very proud of the ribbon even uh so i'd suggest to uh give out the the the dozo i had lunch there this this afternoon so definitely recommend it um i i i can share just uh uh uh very briefly um so i attended the uh cities association um summer membership uh event and um while it was a a long discussion the event went a little bit over the the the discussion was very substantive um in the area of uh emergency preparedness um with people who have a panel who have actually dealt with the issues um speaking very candidly uh best in our roles as selected officials um about what is and isn't helpful um and uh you know i basically in my own words i would sum that up as uh don't make yourself the main character uh uh the main character uh of of uh the incident and let staff uh do their jobs while helping um amplify uh putting out uh guidance that that they share but very worthwhile um event and really appreciate um um uh the cities association especially president tino walia um who really made that happen um in saratoga um you also had a vta board of uh directors uh uh meeting um and and the uh one thing that i'll just highlight there is um the vta is um what is taking a summer recess as is our ordinary practice um so there will be an additional meeting june 26th uh before going offline for for the month of uh july and part of august um and also uh attended the doe zone uh opening great uh great great event and um i know they're they're excited to uh and i'm going to have the chamber there and to be coming to campbell thank you here we comments well vice-mirable buddy wanted to point out that um i along with uh council member lopez attended the education subcommittee meeting last last week also the city's association general meeting and then the volunteer recognition event today this morning and i just want to recognize our all of our volunteers and how much uh the the council appreciates their service to the city and and their impact that they have on the city thank you i also just want to add to the comments made previously about our volunteer recognition today it turned out very nice um it was good that we were able to publicly honor and thank the volunteers for their countless hours of work and support on behalf of the city and i think it was a very nice event and also i wanted to comment um councilmember heinz uh you brief comment regarding el camino hospital we've seen in the press that el camino is planning to revise what used to be known as los gatos community hospital which they took over a few years ago and replaced that with a very large uh hospital there that should be very interesting and um you know we're very lucky in this area here to have so many great health care facilities of course we have the kaiser outplacing clinic right here in campbell and winchester bou levard there um sunny oaks um but then also um i was advised that sutter health is planning to come to 900 east hamilton avenue right over here and open a specialty pediatric clinic so that is very welcomed of course we have um county health facilities just a short distance away as well as o'connor hospital now owned by the county and we have good samaritan hospital so we have a number of um hospitals readily available to our residents and available to us and within close commuting distance and more and more outpatient clinics as well so i think that's great um i mentioned that i also wanted to attend i did attend the u.s conference of mayors meeting recently it was held in long beach a very good conference it drew a lot of mayors of course um city issues are sort of almost universal affordability of housing was a big thing for us um we talked a lot about the environment um there was a presentation by the american institute of architecture they have uh sort of transitioned or sort of uh specialized now in an area which i want to understand more about but it's regenerative engineering where they design buildings specifically with the ecology in mind and the environment in mind making them sort of healthy buildings and uh environmental friendly uh so really some very good talks talks about security um public health uh not public health but public official security and so on it was a good meeting and i appreciate the opportunity to attend so with that a very long meeting but we got through it here actually in relatively short order i once again thank the staff city manager city attorney and city clerk and the executive team and my colleagues of the council and i will adjourn the meeting of the city council