Jul 16, 2024 6:00 PM - Redding City Council - Regular Meeting

>> Good evening, everybody. Welcome to the regular city council meeting for July 16. I would like to bang the gavel regarding closed session. There is no reportable action. I am serving in place of our mayor, Tenessa Audet, who is in Milwaukee at the RNC national Convention convention. We're excited for her for that. Before we start, I would like to express my gratitude that former President Trump was not more seriously injured and aloffered my sincere condolences to all of those families who are grieving, who lost loved ones either through death or injury, that were in the crowd. And I am appreciative of the call that we're hearing across our nation to unite and heal the divide, and am reminded that angry, hateful rhetoric can breed violence for us. But a wise person brings words that heal and unite. I'm hoping that we can all sort of take that position tonight of healing the divide in our nation. I am going to bring it back. Before we start with the pledge of allegiance, I would like to say if anyone wishes to address the city council on any item considered at this meeting before or during council's consideration of that item, please fill out a blue speaker request form located right there in the back in the lighted alcoves and submitted up here to the front to our city clerk. The city council will allocate up to a maximum of 3 minutes per speaker or each agenda item. Staff reports are available online at the Sooties website at www.cityofredding.gov and in the public view binder located on the podium at the north side of the chambers. I am going to have us do the pledge of allegiance, if you could all stand for that. And then we will have the invocation by Reverend Patrick Bluett of Simpson University. >> I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Heavenly Father, as we gather today, we are reminded of the trauma of this last weekend and with the national leaders of both major parties. We do seek a spirit of unity to be present among the american people. Help us lower the temperature of our rhetoric that we can work together in harmony towards the common good. We're reminded of another political leader who put it this way, King David. Behold how good and pleasant it is when brothers and sisters dwell in unity. Now let this council engage in discussions and make decisions tonight that positively impact our community. By faith, we trust that with your guidance and care and grace, we can maintain a sense of unity and we can work together effectively. And all of God's people said, amen. >> You may be seated. I'm going to go old school tonight and introduce something we used to do at council meetings. Excuse me. Yes, let's do roll call first. >>[CALLING ROLL] >> Thank you, everybody. That's awesome. I'm excited to be able to do a presentation. We are going to administer the oath of office to our new city council member, Joshua Johnson and our city clerk, Charlene Tipton is going to do that for us. >> You're going to repeat after me and you're going to say your name. >>[SWEARING IN] >> We welcome our new council member, Joshua Johnson, to the dais. Officially voting with us. we will move on to the next item number three, public comment for non agenda matters within the city's jurisdiction. Pursuant to the Brown act, city council cannot take action on public comment items. The city council will allocate up to a maximum of three minutes per speaker or 30 minutes total at the beginning of the meeting for public comment for non agendized matters within the city's jurisdiction. The mayor will determine the order of the speakers. If 30 minutes is not adequate to accommodate all of the individuals who've submitted a speaker request form to the city clerk, the council will trail this item to the end of the open session agenda. The remaining speakers will address the city council at that time. We have several speakers. Mister Nick Gardner, you are first. >> I was at the county supervisors meeting today and they either passed or brought it back for an agendized item to make it to where eminent domain can't be used to take one piece of private property from one person and give it to another private entity. I think that would be a good thing for the city of reading to do. As I understand it, the county ordinance wouldn't affect the city. For an example, say somebody's got a strawberry field down here on Bonnie View and somebody wants to put, put in a 711 or a AMTM. It doesn't seem appropriate to me that the government can say, well, we can make more money off of this AMTM. we're switching titles. I would like to see that addressed by the city council and maybe Joshua Johnson could then Mark Mazano could take that on and see what we can do with that. Thank you. >> Thank you, Nick. Our next speaker is Mister Jim Wadley. >> Vice mayor and council members, good evening. It's been a minute since I've been up here, and I don't want to be up here, but I do have some things I want to share. And I wanted to first ask our city attorney here if there's any reason why the city council cannot meet with me. I would like to set up some meetings with the council individually and pass some pressing matters. But today there was a couple of items over at the county that I think were deserving of attention. And I just want to encourage this council to consider that there's some things that I think if you can join forces with the county on a common objective, I think some pretty great things can happen. And I'm just asking that you give that consideration. But I will be reaching out to you individually and to share some additional information. that's all I want to say this evening, but I'll probably be back. Thank you. >> Thank you. And our last public comment speaker is Miss Mimi Moseley. Take us home, Mimi. >> She has too much energy. >> Hi, all. Thank you much for having this opportunity for us to speak. I was here a couple of weeks ago, and I was listening to some of the public comments, and two women came up and they said, we don't do anything in this city for the homeless. And I was sitting over there. I wanted to go, wait, hello, we do. But I went back to the mission I worked for, the good news rescue mission, and I said, apparently we are not getting the word out as well as we could. We have been doing a few things the last two years, and it's something called Redding restart. The very first one we did was addressing homelessness as a whole. And then we've done one on housing, mental health, the drug crisis. And this is strictly to inform the community of what's being offered here. And our next one is going to be on Friday, August 2, at 09:00 a.m. in the Scoe developmental center, which is over off Innsbruck. And it is going to be on addressing partnerships. I thought, I would love to just let y'all know what's happening that we're doing that on August 2. It's a free community event. You can just go to the reddingrestart.com and register. But it's a great opportunity to find out all the many partners in this community who may not necessarily work with the mission, but they work with each other and with us and with a lot of other people. it's going to be a great event. Again, it's free. You just have to register. I just wanted to share that. And if you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer. >> That's at Scoey. And what time is that on August 2? >> Yes, 09:00 a.m. until 12 noon. We'll have you out of there by 11:30. But it's the Scowie center that's over off 44 and on Innsbruck, not the one. >> Thank you. >> We are going to move on to consent calendar. Item number 4. The consent calendar contains items considered routinely and or which have been individually scrutinized by city council members and are anticipated to require no further deliberation. If a member of the public wishes to address an item on the consent calendar, please fill out a speaker request form and submit it to the city clerk before the consent calendar is considered. It shall be the prerogative that any council member before the consent calendar is active upon to one comment on an item 2, respond to any public comment on an item 3, request the record reflect an abstention or nay vote on an item 4, remove an item and place it on the regular portion of the agenda for delivery of a staff report and or extended discussion or deliberation. Do we have any public comment on the consent calendar? I do know that councilmember Johnson was interested in discussion. I don't know that you needed to pull it off, but you wanted to highlight an item, correct? Yes. If you could speak to that. >> I was interested in this item 4.2(a) because it's a grant that housing department goes after. It's a CDBG grant federal funds. I became a little bit familiar with the CDBG grants on the community action board, but I was curious about this one in particular because it's kind of a partnership going after funds from the federal government, the CDBG funds, that goes in part to fund fire. And it's all about mitigation and disaster mitigation for the community, but also education. to make our community more ready in the event of flood for flood mitigation and planning related to storm drains, and then alon the fireside, I thought it was interesting. part after talking to housing, which they couldn't be here today, about a million of the funds are going to go to a consultant for the storm drain and storm waters portion of it. But the other portion, about 1.5 million, would stay within the city of Redding for the fire department staff to do the work related to our community wildfire protection plan and education. I wanted to ask our deputy fire Chief Jay Summerlin, to maybe give a little bit broad stroke overview of what they kind of foresee those funds, how they might be used, and to kind of help us all have some insight of what we're going after as a city, which I think is pretty cool. >> Is that okay if we do this within the context? It's just for more information about the item. >> Good evening. Thank you for letting me speak before you today. The fire department is actively engaged in multiple grants at various levels within our community and with other divisions of the city. This is just one of them, actually. I think I just put in for a staff report. your next meeting, you'll be seeing one from AFG grant for acceptance for almost $900,000. But we're actively engaged at looking at ways to reduce what we use out of the general fund to do important projects for the fire department, specifically for wildland mitigation. What this grant is going to do, if we get it, is that it will continue our funding of our fire prevention specialist. She is already on a three year grant cycle. We're trying to extend that for another three years that when we're ready to do our community Wildland protection plan grant funding, we'll keep funding that type of position for public education. Specifically in this grant, we're going to be looking at the know your zone campaign and educating the public on how to evacuate in large scale disasters, be it wildfire, flooding, or whatever it may be for our community. That's the scope of this for right now, but it's important that we stay on top of these things, and we really appreciate the support of city council and all the divisions within the city that think about other divisions within the city when they're looking at a grant that doesn't seem like it would be good for. And then they look at one little paragraph and go, ooh, this might work for the fire department. And then they call and say, hey, come on and have a meeting. And we really appreciate it from the fire department. You guys have any questions for me? >> Any questions? >> Does that answer your questions, Councillor Johnson? Councilmember Mazano, what would you like to bring forward? >> Vice mayor, I'd like to pull 4.11(a) for discussion. Our public works director is in the audience. I'll call him up during regular. >> 4.11(a) will become 9.11(a). Let me get that in the right order here. Just a second. Any further discussion about the consent calendar? If not, I will entertain a motion. >> I'll make some motion. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> Aye. >> Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. We are going to move on to public hearings. Item 6.1, public hearings. A court challenge to action taken by the city council on any project or decision may be limited to only those issues raised during the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the city council during or prior to the public hearing. Our first item is 6.1. This is a public hearing to consider adopting resolutions regarding lmds for fiscal year 24 25. I think director Mini will be giving the presentation on that. >> Good evening. Thank you for having me tonight. we're going to talk about landscape maintenance districts, which is something we do annually to set assessments and levies. We'll go through a little background on those and some of the mechanics. Lmds are property based assessments that are authorized by the Landscaping and Lighting act of 1972. They consist of frontage areas, parks, open space, mostly in subdivisions with shared landscaping improvements, but they can albe shopping centers or other business complexes. We currently have 49 lmds that need annual adoption of assessments. And we have 64 locations and 3909 benefit units. Those are the individual properties that are assessed for this special benefit. The cost is split between all of those benefit units, which are then they pay through property tax to make that payment. Each year, our staff prepares an engineer's report, which is required to establish the maximum assessment and the levy, and they evaluate historical maintenance, upcoming maintenance expenses for that individual district, and then make the recommendation on what the assessment and the levy should be. The assessment is the maximum we are allowed to charge. The levy is what the actual property owners are charged for that maintenance. Most are adjusted annually. this is kind of an important thing. Most are adjusted annually by construction cost index, which this year was 2.7%. Last year was 8.9%. I'm glad that eased a little bit. But there are landscape maintenance districts a, b, and c, which do not have that built into them. They are not adjusted annually. You'll see in the report that they are flat for this year and every other year, because without a reformation of that or some other process, we're not actually able to adjust those. They actually don't quite receive as much care as we'd like to see because the fee stays low. The report, levies and assessments must be approved by council and filed with the county to make it on that property tax roll. That is what we're doing here tonight and the uses of funds. This is essentially, we have a contract that does most of the landscape, maintenance work. The fees pay the direct cost of maintenance, the administrative fees, and the utilities, because there's still water and power for a lot of those sites. And like I said, we have a contractor, which right now is McIntyre landscaping. There is some role for parks to play when it's major repairs. We do a cost evaluation of, is parks going to go out and do that work, or is the contractor going to do that work? And we're able to do that, you know, kind of on the fly as things come up, because I'm kind of jumping ahead in my presentation. But of lmds, that went up substantially, it's because of things like auto accidents and vandalism. Things still do happen, and we still do have to respond to those challenges. Tonight, as far as changes, our recommended levies average 30% below the maximum assessment that's done to keep costs low where we can, and algives us some flexibility to go up and down in the years. Like if something happens, if there's major irrigation that needs to be repaired, landscaping projects that need to be done, it can go up for a year, back down for a year. But overall, between all of the actual districts, we're looking at a one to 3% average increase in the levees, and some of them actually have quite significant reductions. if you look at the Shastina ranch area, it's got a 36% reduction and a 39% reduction at Rio, which is the Wyndham Lane area. That's really it for lmds. These are the LMD ABCs. The first map was all the other lmds. We don't actually ever put up a presentation for LMD's. it's our first one to be able to do that. But I want to show you where they all are and show you that's quite substantial. It's actually a lot of work. And we have Casey on my staff, who does a great job with this, and she put our report together tonight. Thank you to her. And with that, we recommend we have the public hearing and approve the maps and report and affirm the assessments and levies and file those with the county. And with that, I can take any questions about lmds you may have. >> Any questions? Yes, councilmember Johnson. >> I have a question. I understand when the lmds are put together, it's kind of analyzed and assessed by the city, what the cost for the maintenance. You kind of set the assessment from year one, and then it's a CCI or CPI type of increase on an annual for some of them, and some of them don't have that. Have we looked back at actuals? How are we doing over that map? How are we doing on LMD cost versus assessment revenue? >> The assessment's the maximum. The levy is what we actually charge. The levy is essentially a true up every year, and costs will vary throughout the years, up or down. The reason you see going down is we build up like a reserve. There's a reserve for play equipment or damage or some other type of thing. And it's just like a savings account that if something big happens, we won't have to raise rates again to be able to cover it. We do adjust that annually to be able to look at future projects and then the past year, we understand that we do true up and we evaluate those costs. >> Council member Mazano. >> Have anything to do with the parks? >> Yeah, a little bit. There's three parks in LMDs right now. I think it's Highland Park, Shastina Ranch, and Salt Creek heights. This is a good model for parks going forward because it does help take care of a lot of the maintenance in those, because the neighborhood receives the direct benefit of the park, either through property values or just having a recreational amenity. it does support those parks, but they're not fully funded by an LMD. >> My question revolves around a constituent that brought to my attention panoramic park and the tall grass growing up next to the property owner's fence, which you were able to mitigate. But in our discussion, it came to light that you don't have enough money to maintain all those parks. How are we going to get you more money? I mean, if that field would have caught on fire and set that person's house on fire, we'd be buying them a new house. >> In every staff report, we try to put the, you know, future maintenance costs in there to just make sure everyone's aware that would be a future expense. There is a mechanism by which people could band together in that neighborhood and establish their own district. We've not had a lot of great success with reformation or establishing new districts, other than in the development process, but we would love for a neighborhood to come together and do that, to be able to help support their area and get a little higher level of maintenance. Otherwise, that ends up being a park's expense, and it would be part of our budget. >> I am now going to open the public hearing on this item. Do we have any public comment on this item? We do not have public comments, I will close the public hearing. I will bring it back to the council for any further discussion or a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Councilmember Masana made a motion. And would you like to second? >> Yes, I'll second that motion. >> We have a motion and second. All those in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? Motion carries. >> Thank you, Travis. I think Director Michael Webb is going to be doing our next item. 6.2. This is a public hearing to consider our resolution regarding sanitary sewer maintenance districts on Hope Lane and seven bridges. I feel like we talk about Hope Lane and seven bridges all the time. Anyway, I'm not quite sure why, but I'll let you have at it, Director Webb. >> Thank you, honorable mayor, and good to be up here. Thank you and good to see you members of the community and colleagues. Similar to Travis, I'm here this evening to talk about a sanitary sewer maintenance district very similar to the landscape maintenance districts. And I have a PowerPoint that I'm going to run through to try and be brief, and then I will be here to answer any questions that you may have and then open it up to hearing and hopefully get this resolved this evening. Bear with me a second here. Very briefly, I'm going to touch on what is a sanitary sewer maintenance district. I'm going to touch on the two ssmds that we have in reading, Hope Lane and seven bridges. Then I will cover the assessment and levy information very similar to how director many did for the landscape maintenance districts. And then I will be happy to answer any questions that the council has. Jumping into that what is a sanitary sewer maintenance district? Oftentimes they include installation of a sewer lift station shown on the diagram here, which essentially means that the location of the subdivision that was developed was unable to connect to our existing sewer infrastructure and feed from a gravity perspective. In other words, the location of the subdivision is below the existing elevation of the sewer pipes that are already built nearby. And what happens in those situations is the development is conditioned to put in a lift station or a pump where the sewage from that certain specific subdivision drains and then gets pumped to a higher elevation and then is conveyed through the existing infrastructure to the wastewater treatment plant, treated and then discharged to the river. And because only those specific subdivisions require the lift station, that's why we have a sanitary sewer maintenance district to cover the costs of O and M and repairs and forth. We have two such sewer districts within the city of Redding, as Mayor Winter mentioned. One is Hope Lane and the other is seven bridges, and they're shown here on the map, with Hope Lane being right here, just a little bit west of old Oregon Trail, and seven bridges being a north part of town off of Oasis Road, maybe two or 3 miles east of I five and Oasis. Both of these sanitary sewer maintenance districts were conditioned at the original time of the development, and they are formed under the improvement act of 1911, which is part of streets and highways codes and in other statutes similar to the landscape maintenance districts. The sanitary sewer maintenance districts, excuse me, cover costs associated with our staff heading out and routinely inspecting the facilities, providing routine O and MH, as well as having funds on hand in case parts fail and need to be replaced. Because we do not want these systems to fail, that would not be a good situation. Here's a quick diagram of sanitary sewer maintenance district one seven, alknown as Hope Lane. This was, excuse me, this sewer district was formed in 2008 and serves 52 parcels. Of note, 48 of those parcels were originally included in the subdivision. However, there are four that were not part of the subdivision that were later include, and I'm highlighting the area here with the pointer, were included in that sewer maintenance district as part of an adjoining map. There are 52 parcels, all in this sewer district. This subdivision is completely built out, meaning there are no other available lots to be developed. Currently, this sanitary sewer maintenance district has their parts replacement fund funded 100%, which is good, which means that we do not need to collect any additional funds to build that up, and they are estimated to have a carryover of roughly $21,000 from the previous year. And I'll highlight those numbers when I get to the end, talking about the assessments and the levees. The next sanitary sewer maintenance district is 1-19, alknown as seven bridges. This is the northern one that I described a few slides ago just off of Oasis Road, a few miles east of I five. This is a newer sanitary sewer maintenance district formed in 2019, currently serves approximately 74 parcels in the area that I'm highlighting here on the screen. However, of note, there are a number of parcels, roughly another 53 or that have yet to been developed on the north side of Oasis that are part of the planned development. And that will be a key point that I'll dive into here in the next few slides when I talk about assessments and fees, because you're likely noticing down here at the bottom of this slide that the proposed levy is right at the maximum assessment. Here I have two charts to demonstrate or to illustrate, excuse me, to illustrate the historic and current maximum assessments as well as the proposed levies. And then I'm also have a trend line showing the CCI that director many explained is essentially what drives the max assessment once it's initially been established. And you'll see here on the top left chart, this is the chart for Hope Lane. You'll see that in year 2021, our max assessment was hovering here around $430 annually per property tax. And you'll see that that orange line is increasing over time. It's increasing over time due specifically towards the CCI rate, which is shown there. Then you'll see that our levy that we proposed and moved forward with has always been beneath the maximum assessment. And it's been going up and down over time, mainly due to, as Travis explained, historical charging from staff, making sure that our reserve accounts have the appropriate fees, and essentially making sure that we have the resources we need to take care of those infrastructure. And you'll notice that we're roughly about. Our proposed levy for the next fiscal year is roughly $260, which is about half of the maximum assessment. Now, you'll notice on the bottom right, we have a little bit of a different story with seven bridges. Notice that you really see only one line for both the max assessment and the max levy, because essentially they're right on top of each other. This subdivision, because it is not completely built out and still has roughly half of the lots remaining to be developed, we're having to keep the levee at the maximum assessment to make sure that the city is recouping its costs from staff heading out and maintaining the infrastructure, as well as having the required reserves for parts and emergencies. And our hopes are that as the development continues to move forward and those other, the next phases move forward, the map is approved and lots are built on. We will start seeing more property owners and the individual levy can be reduced, and the city will still receive the funds that needs, excuse me. To take care of our responsibilities out there. And again, you'll see here the blue lines, the same CCI curve showing up for Hope Lane. In closing, our recommendation is to move forward in the 24, 25 year with a levy for Hope lane of $258.66 per lot. And then on seven bridges, a levy of $189.31 per lot. And with that, I will entertain any questions that the council has. >> Thank you, Director Webb. Do we have any questions by council members? No questions for staff. I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing. We have any public commenters? We do not. I will close the public hearing, and we will bring it back to council for further discussion. >> Councilmember Mazano. >> You didn't get that far. >> I got some steps in. >> Isn't that 7 bridges? Isn't it development that Dr. Horton took over? >> Yes. >> What's the likelihood that they're going to build out there? >> I would say high. I think there's been some ownership changes with that, with the owners of that subdivision, and our hopes are that they move quickly on it. We would like to see it develop just as much as they would. >> Great. Thank you. >> Councilmember Johnson. >> Can you explain a little bit about what are the scenarios that would cause a pump to need to be put in? You talked about the elevation, the subdivision is lower than the sewer maine. It's not typical what I've seen throughout the rest of the city. It seems like the main is at an elevation that when developments go in, they have fall as opposed to gravity as opposed to having to use the pump. What happens on oasis and maybe out by Hope lane? Is it because it's at the edge of the city, our service area, or nearing that, or is there other things at play? >> We already have a gravity main that flows down Oasis Road. Just simply the topography of the parcel that was chosen to be developed could not flow into that existing line without a pump. And oftentimes it just depends on where the development occurs. And it's not uncommon to have to put that infrastructure in. We have booster pumps throughout the city for water pressure. We have lift stations that are owned and operated by the city as well. This does happen from time to time. These are the two that we have right now. It's my understanding that there are two or three subdivisions that are currently being kicked around by developers that would very likely need lift stations of their own and would require their own ssmds. >> It could be needed more in the future. How did the levees work? Just for our education, it gets put under a tax bill. Does it go somewhere else and then come back to us later in the year or at some point? You know, that portion is the city of readings. How does that work? >> Yeah. After you close the public hearing, and I, and we conclude with that, those levies will be handed over to the county and put on property owners property tax bills. And then we collect those semiannually and annually, and then they fund or essentially reimburse us for having our staff head out there and perform the weekly checks that they do. They sit in a reserve account. when parts fail, the pump fails, that we have the resources to go fix them immediately. >> Thank you. >> Councilmember Mazano. >> Who bears the initial expense of putting that pump in? >> The developers. The property owners reap the reward, because if that lift station was not put in, the development would have likely cost considerably more to develop due to trying to find a different engineering solution to connect the wastewater. This is a benefit to the property owners. >> Thank you. >> I think it's important, perhaps, director, this would be a great opportunity for you to speak to the fact that we, this is a modern way to actually recoup the cost that the users of the system are actually paying for the costs and that cost isn't shifted onto the other ratepayers. We have some older neighborhoods that were annexed into the city already, kind of out on the eastern side of town that are struggling, that are on septic systems or in sewer systems that. And they. Those people don't have a sewer maintenance district, and they're. They're in a hard spot right now because they're not connected to our sewers. Perhaps you could speak to what cost. What happens if we don't do this? >> Yeah, if we don't do this. >> Could you get a little closer to the mic, please? Thanks. >> If we did not form these through development, I think we would have more subdivisions that would be in that issue that you're describing with wooded acres north, where there's infrastructure that's failing that, essentially, we can't do anything until that development forms their own service area district and has an engineering study and figures out what the solutions need to be and then essentially forms a way for them to pay for the improvements. That way, the existing other ratepayers are not having to pay the burden for those folks to connect. It really is a way for the direct benefits. The folks that are receiving the direct benefits of the improvements are the ones that are paying instead of the other utility rate payers throughout the city. it directly aligns the benefit with the individual that pays. >> Councilmember Johnson, do you have another comment? >> Yeah, I just wanted to make a comment just from a real estate standpoint, when property owners go to purchase properties, when these kinds of levies are on there, it's part of the disclosures. even though it's $20 a month or whatever it is, which is a bargain to not have that back up into your house. I'll say it seems like to me, but it is something that most property owners would receive as a part of a disclosure. This is one of the items that be assessed under your property, like an LMD would as well. it's not a surprise to to them at the end of the day. >> I would be happy to entertain a motion to approve item 6.2. >> I'll make the motion to approve. >> Councilmember Mazano makes a motion. Do I have a second? Councilmember Munz second that. All those in favor? >> Aye. >> Opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. We have another public hearing. This one I have to follow a set procedure on. This is 6.3. This is a public hearing to consider renewal of the reading tourism marketing business improvement district. And that presentation is going to be given by our assistant to the city manager, Jason Gabilisko. Go for it, Jason. >> Thank you. Good evening. This is the third and final step to renew the reading tourism marketing business improvement District another ten years. The first step was on May 21. That was the resolution of intention. The second step was the public meeting on June 18. That is where we are to hear any public comment and utilize that for tonight's meeting. The public hearing. For the public hearing, we are to hear any protests. Protests must be made in writing and based on assessment. If protests do not exceed 50%, you are free to approve the agreement. I mean, approve the resolution. We alask that you approve the agreement with reading tourism Marketing group. This agreement outlines their roles and responsibilities. They administer and oversee the district on behalf of the hoteliers. The business improvement district encompasses all hoteliers in reading city limits and benefits those paying into it. Estimated annual revenue is $1.4 million and that is to be used for tourism promotion. We ask the open public hearing receive any protests, if there are any, and consider the resolution. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do we have any questions for staff? I am going to open the public hearing. Do we have any protests or comments? No comments. I do need to make the following statements to the public. Any person is welcome to make oral comment during the public hearing. However, only property business owners who will be subject to assessment are permitted to submit a protest. Only an oral or written protest submitted to the city clerk prior to the close of the public hearing will be counted as a protest. Only one oral or written protest may be submitted for each business that will be subject to the assessment. And if you already have submitted a protest, you may withdraw your protest, but only by notice to the clerk prior to the close of the public hearing. just one last opportunity. Any protests out there? I am going to declare the public hearing closed and no protests have been received. Our city clerk, Charlene Tipton, will take over the next piece. >> Thank you, vice mayor, honorable vice mayor, and city council. The election has been conducted according to assessment proceedings. 32 properties voted in favor of the RTMBid for 86% of the total assessment. There were no ballots submitted in opposition to the renewal of the RTMbID, and the levy of assessments in support of the district do not represent more than 50% of the total weighted vote. The proposed formation of the reading tourism marketing business Improvement District, RTMBiD and annual assessment has passed. I have certified the results, which are now submitted to the council. >> Thank you very much. I'm gonna bring this back to the council for discussion or motion. Council member Misano? >> Well, you know, the reading tourism is doing a great job, and I've seen it out there in the community. They're doing their very best to bring more tourism into Redding, and it's working. It's a tough time right now for a lot of people to come and travel, especially with the heat, but they're making it work. And because they're making it work, I am going to make the motion to approve this agenda item. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do I have a second or further discussion? Councilmember Johnson. >> I just have a question for our city attorney. I am curious. This is the TOT. I understand a 10% plus, is it 2%? The 2% part is what we're talking about right now. >> That's correct. The only correction I would have is that it's not technically the tot, because the tot is the tax component. This is an assessment component, but it functionally, it's the same. >> This is what people pay when they stay at our hotels. Do we require short term rentals that are Airbnbs, VrBos, to alpay the assessment above and beyond the tot? >> I might have to defer to the department as to whether they were included within the scope of the bid. >> Yes, all short term rentals under 30 days are required. >> Do the short term rentals have a vote in this process? >> Yes. the vote process is weighted based on relative assessment. their votes would be weighted relative to the expectation of what they would be paying. >> Like weighted as, like, number of rooms or something like that? >> Yeah. >> That's interesting, with kind of the increase of those kinds of things, how that would impact this. What is it, a ten year agreement? >> Right. >> Great. Thank you. That's all. >> I will second Mark's motion. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> Aye. >> Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. We are now going to pull in item 4.11(a), which is now 9.11. Councilmember Mazzani, you brought this one forward. This is an update regarding emergency repair and replacement of substandard sewer pipe and failing asphalt concrete pavement on Placer street. >> The reason I pulled this is because you give us weekly updates, but I want the public, certainly, that's watching this because of the calls and emails that I get on a regular basis about wanting the city to pay for their realignments for traveling down placer go unanswered. we're on track. Can you elaborate just a little bit as to what's going on out there and what we can look forward to on placer? >> Absolutely. Thank you. Monday was a great day. Our contractor was out and commenced making repairs to the underground sewer that we need to have repaired, and we're very happy that that's happened. Our plan is to get those completed as soon as possible and have the contractor then complete the remainder of the project, which includes repaving placer street, including striping and signs and other miscellaneous stuff. We really needed to fix the underground sewer before we repaved placer, and I understand that's very frustrating for the community. I want to thank them for being patient while we were able to bring somebody in to make the necessary repairs. I think, as I outlined earlier with the SSMD presentation, no one wants a failed sewer infrastructure. And the worst thing we could have done would have been to pave placer, only to rip it back open six months later. our end all goal is to have the underground repairs completed and have placer repaved by the onset of winter. And that is what we're working towards, and our contractor is committed to making that happen. We're very excited. >> We're going to go from two lanes in each direction to one lane in each direction with a two way left turn lane and no bicycle lane, but a wider shoulder for parked cars. Is that correct? I think part of that's brought about because of the fact that that particular area doesn't that exceed the national average for collisions for that type of a. >> It is definitely right up there. Councilmember Mazano. I don't have the numbers right in front of me, but it is definitely a corridor where safety is a one of our utmost concerns. Speed is an issue along that portion of placer site. Distance is obviously an issue there. With the grades, there are a number of issues there, and our traffic folks are pretty sharp, and we've looked at it and worked with our consultants, and we're confident that those changes to the traffic striping are going to result in a facility that is better than we have today. We alwould not be implementing those traffic changes if we were not confident that it could continue to serve the traffic volumes that are currently on placer or projected into the future. we're confident that the reconfigured geometry will work and be very successful. I have total confidence. >> Anything else? >> I'll entertain a motion to approve this item. >> I'll second it. >> I'll make a motion to approve it. >> We have a motion and a second. Did you get that, city clerk? All those in favor? >> Aye? >> Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much, Director Webb. Our last item on the regular agenda is 9.2. This is oral report providing an update regarding the reading regional airport, which airport has been in the news a bit, this is a good time for the council to get an update. This is an informational item only. We will not be voting on anything here. Mister Steve Babe. >> Thank you, honorable vice mayor, council members. This is a airport division update that is really a follow up to our press release from last week. And really, it's a report just to cover three specific items that have been pretty well highlighted in the community recently. And the first one is there's our FAA funding, which is our federal aviation and administration funding. That is our main funding source for capital improvement projects at the airport. And then ala Novello update. And then we will all give a brief update of our airport manager recruitment process. in regards to the Runway project, I think it's important to know that the Runway includes or the Runway project includes the rehabilitation or the reconstruction of our current Runway, which is 1000ft by 150. And then althe taxiway connectors, blast pad, pavement markings, Runway led lighting, electrical improvements, and then alnew signage. The city of Reading's airport division has been working on this project for more than five years, and we've been very patient. There's been a time, even in 2022, when they had to wait, and they waited patiently until 2024. But we worked closely with our FAA partners and even through our design process and adding additional design work even at the very end as we were heading into the beginning of this year. But with the FAA, they are a federally funded entity and they don't actually know their funding until later in the year, and they only get it annually. it is discretionary funding. And this year it just happens that they did not receive their full allocation. they had some funding challenges stemming from delays in the reauthorization bill, and then alsome, they only received some partial funding allocations through continued resolutions. And then alinflationary impacts on construction costs affected how they prioritized and distributed the funding to projects. We are continuing to work with the FAA and alour reading airport constructors along with our public works division, and working to see if we can consider an alternative approach to still have the project be funded over. It would be a two year cycle, it would be over this 24, or to be a 23 24 funding and 24 25 funding combined. And our right now we have our public works director, Michael Webb, and then alour consultant from our air development services consultant, Meat and hunt. They are actively working with the contractor and the FAA to see if we can get those funds secured. And if that is the case, then we anticipate in 2025 we would have the Runway project and it would be the full Runway project, including the shoulder work and the lighting. It would be about a $30 million project. we are patiently waiting with our FAA partners and working diligently to make that happen. hang tight. I think we'll probably know over the next, probably next month or six weeks. In regards to Avelo, I just want to be really clear that, you know, our city staff works very diligently with our airline service providers. And, you know, we've been working with Avelo. Once we found out in, you know, I think it was around June 19 is when we were made aware of, you know, some of their business changes. And we had a phone call, conversation with them and just to determine really what is, you know, what is the reason they are terminating their contract, which would be terminated as of August 26. It's Monday. And they're following through with that termination of service for the reading to Burbank service. And it was basically a two fold decision for them. One, of course, we've heard recently that they didn't have a baggage or a ground handling service that was available for them, but they altried a couple local vendors to see if they could provide that service that didn't work out. We were not contacted to help with that procurement process by any means. But then on the other side of it, the real side of it is it was a business decision. And as in the beginning, when they were able to keep their rates low, they were able to get a good load factor, and it was operating well. But as those rates went up, then their load factors went down, and it really wasn't working out for them business wise. And they had made that decision. They didn't just make it at the reading airport. They almade it six other locations throughout the United States in early July. we just happened. I mean, we're disappointed that we don't have that flight, but we're alwe alrealize that we have united, that services Redding to LAX, and we can still get down to southern California and still obtain other flights from there. that's really our, you know, and we've received that direct contact from Avelo with the representatives. Those are really the two factors that went into that. But it's really more of a business decision. And if there were to receive another $100,000 from any entity, it will not make a difference. They are moving that plane to another location and they're going to provide service elsewhere. Anyway, just wanna give that update and then alon the airport manager. we have been working diligently to try and find an airport manager for a few months. We are in our third round of that selection process. Really, in this round, we selected ADK consulting and executive search. They're a consulting company, and they were able to connect with more than 70 interested parties. We had 23 applications, and then we narrowed it down to six. And currently we're working with two candidates. And we are in the second phase of that interview process. And I anticipate that probably over the next week or two, we'll know what our direction will be for that. But in the meantime, we still have. Our interim airport manager. Rod Dinger is helping our staff. We alhave two assistant airport managers that are alworking hard to help provide the service at the airport. And I don't believe that they're missing a beat out there. They're all carrying a big load, but doing very well. That really concludes my presentation. >> I'll bring this back to the council. Any questions from Mister Steve Bain? Actually, Steve, I have a couple of questions for you. As you look, if you give us an honest opinion about our grant proposal to the FAA, do you feel like it's really solid, like did we not get the grant because there was weaknesses in our project or did we just not get the funding because they've had a reduction in their funding sources? >> It was a combination. one our project qualifies. We have the funding. We have the match. We are application was submitted correctly. It came down to funding and with the rise in construction cost and as they prioritize the other airports and their construction projects, there just wasn't enough money after the federal government made cuts and therefore we pretty much fell off the list. But they admitted to us, our FAA staff in San Francisco admitted that, hey, we know this is a very high priority project in Redding and we're going to make every effort we can to realize and get those dollars committed. They've been working very hard. We've alhad, we have a good representative out of Lamoff's office that has been putting pressure at the federal level. And, you know, Lisa Mauro with that office is not let up. And I believe that we're getting close. >> You're pretty hopeful that we get that and we'll know in four to six weeks maybe? >> Yes. It really is going to come down to, we're working out some fine details of the contractor extending the biddenness, how they're allooking at two different options within that bid process to see if we can apply the funding to make, you know, make the bid whole. And really that is going to come down to our negotiations that public works, you know, directors in right now, along with our consultant and the contractor and FAA approving this kind of, I would say the structure of that contract. We'll know soon. >> I would aljust like to comment on Avello. I would agree with the community. We're really sad to see Avello leave. It's disappointing. Do you feel like the city could have done more? Do you feel like if we did provide baggage handling, that would be enough to bring them back? Or are there other forces at play where they're committed to going to other markets because there's just more money there? >> Overall, I believe from what we heard in our February meetings, we had airline service meetings in Scottsdale, and they are advancing their market on the east coast. They are doing very well on the east coast, and they have a lot of short trips they can make up and down that coast. They are seeing where that has been a better business model for them. I think it is important to point out that Avello is a startup business. And if anybody can relate to startup businesses, Joshua Johnson is very well in tune with those. And I think there's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of risk in that, and they learn a lot along the way, and they're still a good airline, and they're just trying to figure out their business model. And right now, it's leaning more towards, I would say, that East coast and other locations right now, they did say that they would, you know, analyze maybe a seasonal market for our area and see if that might work out. But they gave no promises, but they said they'd look at it and see how it looks in 2015. >> Council member Johnson. >> Is it correct to say that Avelo was one of the flights that we didn't have to do a guarantee? Do they came to us and said they wanted to service our area as a startup, or did we do a guarantee with them? >> I think they did come to us, but I believe that there, I want to say there was some seed money, around 50,000. I would almost. No, there was nothing. I'm looking at Todd Jones. I was not involved with that deal at all. And Todd Jones saying, no, there was no seed money. I think what's interesting about that part of the history and story is that you have a startup airline company that says, hey, we want to try this out in California. We want to try and connect Eureka. We want to connect to Las Vegas, Burbank, some of these smaller airports, regional airports. And we said, yes, and that's great. I mean, we welcome them with open arms. They are an ultra low cost carrier, I understand, which has limitations because the Skywest baggage handling can't service. I understand ultra low cost. There's some challenges with that, but there are other carriers out there that we might be able to attract. I think it would be really important to hear our quarter quarterly update from the EDC next time they come for what they're doing to attract the right kind of airline that fits our market. I think that United has figured out in Alaska that size plane that makes sense for our area there. It just comes down to economics at the end of the day, and I think that there are airlines out there that will find a way to make money. That Avelo flight had a lot of people there, and we're using it we know the routes are right. And I think that's an interesting market indicator if we're learning some things there, and maybe the other airlines might be picking up on it. >> If this is appropriate, I will ask the city attorney. We have Mister Jones in the audience today. Would it be appropriate to ask him to come and speak to Avella from the EDC's perspective? Is that acceptable? >> Yeah, certainly the council's discretion, if you're willing. >> Mister Jones, I know, I didn't prepare you at all, but you're good at the mic. tell us about Avello and what maybe EDC is doing about air service. I'm sorry, Chamber. Yes, chamber of commerce. EDC. >> Got it. Well, thank you for having me. This is what I'm here for, just in case. For those that might not know, I'm not with the EDC anymore. I'm now with Chamber of Commerce. It's But you know, I was in that meeting with Steve in February. That was my last week at the EDC. I don't know if I could speak a lot to what the EDC is doing. I feel like that'd be a little bit outside my wheelhouse now. But I do know that the EDC is still working on air service development. I believe they're going to a conference in October, if I'm not mistaken. I believe Mead and Hunt will be there as well. I think Mead and Hunt is really the biggest part of this whole equation. Mead and Hunt does a great job of keeping in touch with our airline partners. Our longtime airline consultant, Trina Frehlich retired after 22 years, and she served the city of reading for that entire time. Just at the end of June. We have a new person that's in that role now who I don't know as well, but he came from American Airlines, he's very familiar with the industry. And again, I just, I think, I want to point out to Steve's point, because I can kind of say what I want to. I suppose I don't work for the city. Avela was, it was a business decision. They were running like a 60 or 61% load factor, which on that size of a plane just isn't enough to make it pencil out. And I think it gives us a lot of opportunities at that meeting that we were at in February, there was a lot of positive momentum with folks like Allegiant and other airlines that have smaller planes that can serve our market. And like Steve said, we've had, Avelo has left and started a lot of markets since they started. It's probably more than a dozen at this point now. But I do know that between Steve and the airports division, Mead and Hunt and the EDC, and of course wherever I'm able to help just from my knowledge or help with visit Redding, I think we have a really good market. We have a lot of momentum that we still have right now, and I think we're going to continue to see opportunities for our market again. The industry ebbs and flows, we've seen it here time and time again. But I do know that they are working diligently to get new air service. I think to the point on the revenue guarantee that councilmember Johnson asked, one of the things that you have to do, if you have a new airline coming to a market, you don't have to always offer a minimum revenue guarantee specifically for ULCCs. Allegiant doesn't typically require those, but you do have to offer landing fee waivers for two years. And we did do $50,000 of support for marketing. And that came from the EDC. Most of that money at that time came from what was left over from the revenue guarantee for LAX. We rolled over into marketing for Avello. And if an EDC, or if an other entity besides the airport does the marketing, you can market specific routes. If the airport markets a route, they have to really market all airports. there's some restrictions for what an airport or a city can do for marketing, you have to market all the routes equally. You can't just do one. I think the EDC or other entities, we're happy to all play our part to market the airport for sure. >> Thank you. Any other questions for staff? >> I think Mister Johnson wants to make an item twelve recommendation to bring EDC before us in the near future. >> Certainly if that's not already on the. Thank you. If that's already on the agenda. >> We usually do quarterly updates and our next one will be, I think in September. >> It's already scheduled. >> I think we'll probably, it depends on availability, but it'll be in September, the first 2nd meeting. >> Great, thank you. That was the informational item only. Our next item 11 is council travel reports. If anyone has traveled to any conferences or meetings that were reimbursed at cities, you can share with us about that? Nope. Then item 12. These are suggestions from council members relative to potential topics for future council meetings. Does anybody have an item 12? No? I have two. This was a conversation that I had with Director Webb. We'll see if there's interest in that. I would like to see if the council would be willing to have Director Webb form a working group of real estate, folks developers, but alregular ratepayers, including some of our low income folks. It might look like our ratepayer working group, but I would leave that up to Director Webb to look at how we derive impact fee, the whole process on impact fees, and looking at our comparative cities with a goal to see if we are on target with our impact fees or if we need to make a changes. It might be that director Webb, I think we had a conversation it might be three months before he could do that, if that's enough time. But I don't know if the council would be interested in looking at our impact fee process. Are you good with that, Director Webb? >> Yep. >> 3 months, is that enough time? >> I was thinking by the next meeting. >> I don't know if that's enough time. You gotta get to pull your group together. Thank you. that will come back. My second item is actually related to an event that happened today. Councilmember Johnson and I attended an open house, a tour that was sponsored by ReU at the Abtex center for NCPA, and alstaff legislative aides. We got to see, there were like 30 to 40 aides out there. And I was, they're young, all millennials, that are making our legislative decisions in the state. Some of them were probably in their twenties. And it was really fascinating to hear that interaction of the reality of zero carbon emissions by 2045 hitting the ground with, we actually don't have the technology available to do that at this point. I thought it might be interesting to have to see if we could have our REU director, Mister Zett, will come back and just give a report about that event and what we're doing legislatively, talking to the state about goals and reality, if there's interest by the council or just a brief report. >> I would say after hearing his presentation, that presentation he gave after you had to step out was phenomenal. He gave a great reality check, but alwith hope and optimism about what could be. I think that'd be great for us all to hear. >> He's kind of already prepared it which is nice in some way. >> Any interest? >> I think it's a good idea, especially knowing that his second in command over there in the audience is in favor of that. I would support that, Julie. >> Whatever appropriate time is for Director Zettel, he's not here