City Council

You Do Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to start in just a few minutes with you. Just a second. Dressing up some administrative things And Heard All right, ladies and gentlemen, welcome. We've got a echo somewhere We get started. Page here. I'd like to welcome you all to tonight's special meeting. This is August 11th, 2026, and it's a special meeting. I'll call the meeting to order. And advise everyone that the meeting is being recorded. The recording will be made available on the city website and wish that you'd all please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance 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. Thank you. Can you please proceed with the roll call ? Members of the public may participate in this meeting. In person at the location listed on the agenda or via remote attendance. Using the information listed on the agenda. Public attendees participating remotely are automatically muted and are not viewable on camera. I will now call the roll. Councilmember Aftab present. Fitzsimons Present. So present. Vice Mayor While you present Mayor Page Present. We have a quorum. And the agenda was posted on August 7. Thank you. Earlier this evening, the city council held a closed session on conference with legal counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation. And as I understand, there was no reportable action from this meeting. Our next item, our only item is the the Santa Clara County Sheriff's contract fiscal year 26 to 27 service levels. May we please have a staff report? OK. Good evening, Mayor, vice, Mayor and council members Tonight, staff is providing an update on our negotiations with the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office and most importantly, seeking council direction regarding the level of law enforcement service, we would like the city to maintain for fiscal year 2026, 2027. As Council knows, our previous agreement with the county expired on June 30th. The county granted the city a three month extension through September 30th to allow additional time to negotiate a new long term agreement So the issue before us tonight is primarily driven by a significant change in the county's methodology for calculating the costs of providing law enforcement services under the county's proposed model, maintaining essentially the same level of law enforcement service that Saratoga received last year would cost approximately $11.6 million. Representing an increase of approximately two point million or 2.6 million or 29% in one year. This is particularly significant because even though this before this proposed change, our sheriff contract had historically been increasing approximately 7 to 9% annually, which was already growing faster than city revenues. The new cost allocation from the county fundamentally changes how the city is charged. Historically, many overhead and support costs were incorporated into the hourly rates. We paid for law enforcement services. Under the proposed agreement, a substantial portion of these costs become separate shared overhead pools. those costs include areas such as investigations, records, information technology, personnel and training, and internal affairs administrator and other countywide support services Another significant change that I want to highlight for the Council is the previous agreement contained a mechanism that limited annual cost increases. The proposed agreement eliminate that cap. Instead, the County county's Office of Budget Analysis would recalculate the fully burdened rates. Each year. Therefore, our costs could fluctuate based on labor expenses, benefits, staffing, support services, workload and the county's allocation methodology. That creates a level of financial uncertainty that we did not have under the previous agreement. While the city has budgeted 11.6 million for sheriff's services, this fiscal year, maintaining this level of expenditure into future years will increasingly constrain the city's general fund and our ability to fund other city priorities. With that background, staff has developed three service level options for Council consideration tonight. Option eight Maintain that current deployment and service levels at an estimated cost of 11.6 million. This provides continuity in law enforcement services, but it also means absorbing the full 2.6 million increase this year. Option B reduces the estimated costs to 10.6 million through moderate reductions. In general, law enforcement and traffic enforcement hours. The tradeoff would be reduce patrol availability and option C brings the estimated cost to approximately 9.6 million, which is roughly comparable to the cost of our previous contract. However, achieving that level of savings would require more significant reductions In general, law enforcement and traffic enforcement hours as well as elimination of the school resource officer position. I do want to separately address the school resource officer because there is some positive movement in that area. Currently, Saratoga is paying approximate 76% of the costs of the SRO program, with the remainder shared by our school district partners. Staff has been working with both the Saratoga Union School District, and the Los Gatos Saratoga Union High School District. Regarding that cost allocation. Both superintendents have expressed a willingness to increase their respective contributions as separate from tonight's service level discussion. Negotiate options on that agreement itself. Are continuing the three cities that would ourself Cupertino and Los Altos Hills continue to negotiate collectively with the County Council on the contract language. While each city independently determines its own service level and fiscal priorities, we are very close to finalizing the agreement, although there are still some provisions being negotiated. Our intent is to take the direction Council provides tonight, continue negotiate signs with the county and return to Council on August 19 with the final agreement I want to emphasize that approving a share of contract for the coming year does not. And the broader discussion about Saratoga long term law enforcement model maintaining uninterrupted law enforcement service is our immediate priority, regardless of the long term model ultimately selected. Saratoga will continue receiving law enforcement services from the sheriff's office during the coming year. At the same time, staff does continue evaluating longer term alternatives, including discussions with the Los Gatos Monastery and police department. In closing tonight, staff is asking Council to provide direction on the level of service for the Sheriff's Office for Fiscal year 26 and 27 based on that direction, we will finalize the contract negotiations and return to Council for consideration of the agreement. With that, I do want to let you know that we've got our Administrative services director, Ryan Henchman, available to answer any questions I also want to welcome Undersheriff Mike Doty and Captain Neil Valenzuela, and should there be any questions to the sheriff, They are here to address that. And this concludes my staff report. Thank you very much. Are there any clarifying questions from any of the city council members? You know Leslie, thank you so much for the staff report. And members of the public who are here. A lot of them have also been engaged for quite some time in this discussion. The city has been working on this from the beginning of the year. It's a challenging time for the city with our very limited budget resources that we have. So most of my questions have been answered I've been working with you, Leslie, as you know. I one question before the sheriff's department just one clarifying question. If a captain could help me with that. Captain Valenzuela. And thank you so much, Undersheriff Doty, for being here this evening So I would like to understand what is the nature of the calls that you typically get for the general law enforcement hours that have been outlined in the report So good evening, Vice Mayor. Can you hear me? Yes. I provided an email to the city manager just but I tried to see if I could have top of my head here. Essentially, the deputy sheriff is deputy sheriffs that are assigned to patrol in the city of Saratoga. A responsible for essentially all calls for service So no one calls for service. If somebody calls 911, whether it's for fire and EMS emergency or some other issue, our deputy is available to respond and be the first primary responder. They are the first on scene for any investigations. So if somebody calls for an identity theft, fraud forgery or a burglary, they will take that report and start processing evidence for any crimes that occurred in the city. Additionally, they do respond to calls for service that are emergencies, whether that's an active shooter, a robbery in progress calls for service involving weapons, a domestic violence incident. That's another function of their of their patrol services They're responding to all deaths in the city. That includes whether it's natural or a homicide just to begin the original investigation on that also has been available to any member of the public that needs assistance for whatever reason, whether it's, you know, their have an animal and lives inside their house to a stray dog, to a tree, fell down on the middle of the street. A power line is out Essentially, we have a gamut of things that our deputies do to assist members of the public and be there as a first responder for the city. I hope that answers the question. If it does. Thank you so much. So the county sheriff's office has been providing law enforcement to the city for 17 years now. And most of the residents have been very happy and very appreciative of the support that the community gets. So one question is, as the Council evaluates the different service levels, which is a very difficult thing for us to even consider, but we have to manage in terms of our budget limitations. Is there anything you would like to share not just with me, but the residents of our city based on what has been outlined here in the staff room? Yes. So the service contract level is based on hours that are used up by the deputies in town. That includes the general enforcement, which we just discussed, and the traffic enforcement, which handles more of the traffic needs for the city. I don't want again to the specific semantics of staffing numbers just for the purposes of making sure that everyone knows that there's a deputies in town and we're driving around. But there is a way of method to minimize all of those hours by allocating deputies to different areas that will not necessarily incur a direct cost to the city of Saratoga. Thank you so much Is there anything you would like to add, Undersheriff? Yes, absolutely. Mayor. Vice Mayor. Members of Council and City Administration I'm Mike Doherty, the undersheriff of Santa Clara County. And on behalf of Sheriff Johnson and our entire organization, first and foremost, we want to acknowledge the lengthy process and hard decisions that you are all faced with regarding our law enforcement services to your city. With that being said, I want to provide a commitment from the sheriff and I that we will continue to work with you to ensure that the service levels that your community expects and deserves are maintained in a way that we can provide as much cost savings as possible. And the captain and I have had conversations on how we can think creative, Lee, on how to allocate our resources to your city, to ensure that those services are maintained while also being very cognizant of the fiscal impact that that has to your city. So I wanted to provide that commitment to you tonight. And we appreciate that collaboration up to this point. And look forward to being able to provide that service moving forward. Certainly able to answer any additional questions that you may have. But thank the captain. As stated it very well that I can't underscore enough the importance of understanding that as we deploy our resources we're well aware of how we need to be very mind full of what mutually aid response consists of from our partnering cities to include Cupertino and our other partner cities and unincorporated deputies. And how those hours should be allocated and charged to the city and having those parameters in place is something that's very important to us, to ensure that those costs remain where they should be. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Any questions? Yeah. I have a quite a few questions. First one for Leslie. So you mentioned earlier that our two school districts are willing to pay more for the as our officer. How much are we currently paying and how much do you know How much are they willing to pay for the SRO? Sure. So the i don't have the exact number, but off the top of my head, what we are currently paying is about $350,000 a year And I'll have Ryan stepping up just in case I'm inaccurate. But about $350,000 a year we're paying. And that's about 76% of the cost What we are looking at doing is we have asked the superintendents if they could contribute a little bit more. And so what we're doing is we're looking at probably about anywhere from $100,000 to $150,000 savings that we would chip off that 350. And I'm going to have Ryan stepping up our administrative services record just to kind of talk a little bit more about Cops Grant that is associated with that. And kind of how that money is allocated for SRO as well. Sure. Thank you. So those numbers are fairly accurate. The cost to the city, as well as the to participate participating school districts were still those discussions are still ongoing. We have a goal to reduce that cost. As she as the city manager stated, the grant that we receive we receive each year is for supplemental services sort of above and beyond your normal patrol. We've been applying that grant to the SRO position. So we're cognizant of that as we reduce those costs. That's their grant funded at least partially. So it's a it's a detail we want to share with Council a kind of just continue a couple of more questions. The second question is, let's say you know, we are given Three options to look at tonight. Let's say, you know, if we were going to reduce their service level, let's say, between B or C and in case I want to kind of see that, you know, if we can get like a quarterly report at we reduce their service level, I want to see what kind of impact that will have on our city if we want to go back there. Service level. How long would that take? You know, sheriff's department and to stop the deputies and how long can we, you know, adjust any of the number of hours ? Good question, Councilmember. Yes, We are switching to a CAD stated billing system, which is more real time. And so we do have the flexibility to go even week by week, day by day, if we need to. We will work with the city manager and make sure that we're up to date and let you guys know where you're sit on the current our usage in case we need to pull back or upgrade depending upon crime trends. So that's an ongoing conversation that we can have weekly, monthly with the city manager So even when we you know, currently let's say if we choose a level that, you know, level C, but we can still request more hours, I just want to make sure that we are not locked with a limited to hours. That is tied to this service level, not necessarily. We can I mean, we are implemented to the point where we could go over on the hours. However, that will be a cost to the city My my job obviously, I try to stay within the budget restraints for the budget budgeted hours. So that we don't exceed the contract. We can modify those any up and down. However, just going from the level C may have some operational impacts. So we may have to do just because of the big reduction with level B, which is the, I believe the 10 million option. We may be able to continue to provide the same level of services just may have may or may not have impact on some response times or some other kind of service levels. But I don't foresee that at this point in time. OK. And is there a cap, let's say you mentioned that you don't want to over the budget. Is that, because in the past, we have a cap on how much you can increase, but now because the methodology is changed. Instead of doing the overhead or calculate based on the chewed up at the end of each year, but now the cost allocation is kind of using 50% of case volume plus 50% of the service hours Does that actually do we still have a cap? That's my question. I don't believe there's a cap on the current contract. The previous contract did have a cap of how much how much we can exceed by the hours. But this one does not. OK. If you don't mind if I interject so to your question with the caveat moving forward, you know, if we determine a certain service level. And we say we're going to have a certain amount of hours, perhaps we go to option for optioneering is kind of where we're at right now. And if we go down to option B and reduce those hours, if we go over that allotment, we'll pay for whatever we go over in that cap and balance of those point. It's something we've been in discussion with that moving forward, we are going to want to meet on a routine basis I wanted first and foremost ensure that our residents are safe and make sure we're applying what we're providing, the level of safety, we need to. But if we see an area where we can pull back because we're a little bit over, then we'll want to monitor that as well. Yeah. If I can just also add One more point to that. And I think this is maybe where you're going with your question. If we are if the city chose to take a reduced to service level. And that resulted in deputies being re destroyed unit or assigned to other parts of our organization, if it got to a point where you decided to increase that service level again, would we be able to accommodate that. And how long would it take? And the answer is yes, absolutely We do have position is throughout the organization. And we would move those deputies to. But in the event you came to us and said, we want to increase those hours, it would be very seamless for us to take those deputies and transfer them back into Saratoga and with the understanding to the captains point that it's not an extreme reduction where we would have to make that transition Thank you. Another questions. Maybe this is for either Ryan or Leslie, because, in the past. We're talking about the the overhead cost was chewed up at the end of each year. So now moving forward, it's going to be 50% of case volume. Class, 50% of service hours. Does that translate more to say, you know, I mean, if we reduce our service level. What does that mean? So is the cost. I'm trying to understand It's is this. Let's see if currently, we use 50% the case volume plus 50% of the service. Our are we still going to be at 11.6 million are is going to be more or less using the new model with the same level of service ? Sure. So there's an attachment in the staff report, which includes the service level options A, B and C, and in that attachment, it shows the breakout of overhead costs. There's direct and indirect costs. Now, the way that the methodology is calculated uses a three year average for those two components. So with a three year average, it will take time for the overhead to adjust. So in the proposal from the sheriff, there is a reduction to the overhead costs. It's a very small. So if we were to go with the reduced service option, there is a corresponding reduction in overhead, but it's very small. Most of the cost is really going to come from the reduction in hours. So in a way, this. I guess then I so the overhead is pretty much stayed the same. Doesn't matter what the level of the service that's we are going to choose. Yes. OK. So that's one thing Should I let some other ones to ask or do you want me? Can you? Yeah. Keep going. OK. All right. I just kind of more I'm reading. I just have a little the more questions on this. So for this One and we're talking about in the future, the increase is going to be based on projected current salary and benefit average. So is there any projected increase every year or this. I'm just kind of curious because there's no number associated with that future increase Oh, excuse me. The projected increase. I believe, is currently around 5%. The sheriff does have a contract in place with the majority of its bargaining units. I forget the time frame, but it is years into the future. So we have a 5% projection currently So it's safe to say in the future, you know, you know the sheriff's department you know, negotiate with their unions, it's stayed roughly around 5% increase every year. It'd be depending on the outcome of those negotiations. I think the broad concept, it's important to understand is actual costs get passed on to the city. If there's a fluctuation in those costs that's above or beyond the 5% that would ultimately be passed on. Right? In the past, it was about 7 to 9%. Right? This is actually you're talking about this is a lower than the previous increase. And for the past couple of years the 7 to 9% was inclusive of all costs. And that was a different methodology, which also had a cap on costs So that 7 to 9%, there were times when we had our capped costs. And so the cost did not go above that cap right? So it really is a shift and a difference in methodology. Now, those salary increases in the past were ultimately passed on to us. There may have been years where there was a large salary increase that wasn't fully passed on to the city. So besides the projected current salary and benefit, the increase, what else will be added on to? Because now we're talking about pretty much a fixed cost. So what are the costs? Because it's not going to be trued up cost to us anymore. What other potential costs that I don't sure that could increase. I think the attachment in the staff report does a pretty good job. We have a bit more visibility into what those costs are. And it's across the board right? You think of dispatch costs, training costs overhead costs, such as IT, finance, all of these costs are really identified on line item detail in the attachment and any one of these could fluctuate, but that's that cost already incurred incorporated into the fixed costs as you know, adjusted to wherever the cost is to be sure. So it's already included. I'm just asking, as in any additional weather that we don't have it here potentially So are there costs beyond what what are included here that could be passed on to us potentially? I would be speculating what those costs could be Legal costs, some type of other costs incurred by the county that ultimately, through their allocation methodology, could be passed along as well So it's not something that listed in the contract that the do we have to agree with those cost? That's why I'm saying, you know, I kind of I'm not sure I want to like certainty, but I like to know what is going to come to us. Well, unfortunately, the certainty with the costs cap or ceiling is no longer built into this contract. And with a little bit of research, I think that that component of the contract will continue in the future. Now, if there's a large cost that's going to be passed on to us with our meetings with the sheriff, hopefully we would get sort of a notification of those costs. But in terms of I identifying exactly what those costs are, we wouldn't know at this time. OK. Thank you And just for. Yeah, Ryan was correct. If there's something really significant, there is going to be notification from the sheriff's office where we have this heads up and a discussion about it. Right. Because, you know, once we, you know, a finalize our budget, right. So I definitely want to know if there's something that is going to be passed on to us. And we'd like to know ahead of time. Yeah. OK. All right. Thank you That's it for now. And the other questions below and a couple of quick ones. Prior to this fiscal year I believe we used to have the psychiatric emergency response team per and in my understanding, that is not factored in here. Right. Or isn't I guess. Yes, that's correct. We did had to we did have two psychiatric response teams The county behavioral Health eventually took back their I guess, her employees. And so there's still available to us. But they will be dispatched to us when we need them essentially. All right. Thank you. And two questions, I guess, are probably for Ryan along lines of what we were talking about. So you may not know the answer to this. And maybe we can get the answer partway through But so, for example, we with our running with our employees, we have pensions, right? And we have pension obligations. Those pensions obligations change on a year to year basis based on the performance of the market. Let's say, for example there's a bad year. Our obligation goes up because we now have to make sure we're covering, you know, when the market goes up, the outperformance helps cover the pension obligation So let's say in a bad year, our pension obligation goes up in that same year, would our costs or would we see the cost per hour, potentially go up here as well? So let me make sure I understand the question. So in the event that the sheriff's pension increases, will the costs and the cost to the county increases as a result, will that cost be passed on to the city? Yes, I think the answer is yes. OK. And I'm just trying to understand. Sure. In the spirit of a council member, I was asking, what is the range of other increases that we could potentially see here while recognizing that, Yeah, I guess my next question is yes. Is it possible to know all of the expenses? And I guess what. You said, what are we saying that we're saying we're not going to be able to know what is or isn't possible in terms of our expenses Is that accurate? I think that's accurate. And I think that creates an increased need to monitor the monthly reports which we will be doing with the sheriff on a monthly basis to make sure that we're on track. But yeah, I think I think you're right. You're correct to characterize that. We it will be difficult to identify the complete universe of actual costs that could increase. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions ? I have a couple. I'm sure. Yeah. And just and follow up to that, I just want to also mention that the county and our office have been very thoughtful and making sure that what we are putting into this contract are the costs that we would be expected to be reimbursed for. So I just want to just underscore that there shouldn't be any significant surprises of costs being passed on that you already are not aware of based on the language of the contract But to your point, can we absolutely with certainty sit here and say that there would not be anything Of course, we wouldn't be able to do that. But I just wanted to provide that assurance that a lot of thought has gone into this contract to ensure that the language is as transparent as possible. OK OK. Again, you know, I got. That's be I'm sorry. So I mean. Okay, if, let's say if we choose a, you know, either level B or level C, what about the response time and can we still expect same kind of you know, response time as we are having right now. Right now for operationally we're trying to see what the responses lay. But average response times are pretty good within the numerosity reduction of staff can impact some of those response times. But with at least from what I'm looking at with option B, we should be still on par with the same level of response times for priority one, two and three calls. Okay, So I guess we will be it's something that we can be a monitor and we are going to get that report. The council among monthly reports. So we can just make sure that. Correct and we provide that every month to the tab to the city. And we provide the average response times for all the probably one, two and three calls. And when we start on those on those levels of response times. So what I heard earlier from earlier saying that if we needed to be adjusted let's say, if we're not happy, you know, residents not happy with, you know, reduced to, you those hours or response time, we have the capability of course, you know, if we need to increase hours or deputies. And of course we have to pay for. But at least we have this option. Absolutely. We're very flexible as a city's needs may change whether it was and as you go, give you an example, when the issues came up with the speeding down big basin, we were able to shift some traffic enforcement to that area And those are the kind of things that we can the city manager. And I can work on a weekly or monthly basis. If needed, to make sure that we're providing the appropriate levels of service for the city Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. OK. Anybody else? I have a couple of questions. Captain, I think you're probably be up first and specific, actually, regarding the traffic deputies, which are pretty much the motorcycle deputies on the motorcycles. I think it was 214 when we first started discussing adding a motor deputy. And I think that went into effect in the 20 1415 budget. I'm not 100% sure, but I remember having those discussions, the other the patrol officers also are they can make traffic stops and they I've seen them, you know, watching for stop sign runners and red light runners and things and just wanted to see if you could elaborate a little bit to make sure that everybody understands that, you know patrol isn't only patrol and motor isn't only traffic. Absolutely, Mayor. So, yes, we do have our general enforcement deputies are also capable of taking action reports, responding to accidents and doing traffic enforcement. And that is part of their job During the day on weekends, for example, we do not have any traffic coverage for most of the city except for some for Saratoga, just because of the issues on big basin. But the traffic issues usually arise between Monday through Friday during the business hours when the traffic influxes go up, accidents start occurring and that those deputies are specifically trained to invest to get traffic collisions. Not to say that our regular deputies can't investigate traffic collisions, but if we do have, for example, severe accident over the weekend, we do have our traffic team that is also on call that can respond to come out and take the action report, which is our sheriff's traffic response team. And they can actually be on call and come out when when, when needed. OK. Thanks. And I think this next question is for the undersheriff I was wondering if you might put your take out your crystal ball and put on your desk in the magnificent cap and think about as we move to the future. I mean, I tools are everywhere. Are there ways that air tools and other technology can help both to, you know, improve response time. And and maybe cut down the overall cost once the initial outlay of the technology is done in terms of report writing or analysis or getting a drone on site, things like that. I was wondering if you might give us a little bit of projection. And now that we're going to hold you to it. But no, absolutely merits it's a valid question and without a doubt, I think that we all recognize that air technology is an emerging trend and society and is there an application for air technology to enhance public safety? Absolutely. Our agency specifically and we are taking steps to explore what that may look like. You know, we certainly have county policies and protocols surrounding privacy and things of that nature that we're bound to. But, you know, the sheriff and I are also very committed to making sure that our deputies have the necessary tools and equipment that they need to provide the most effective law enforcement. And I do see an arena in our law enforcement profession, specifically with our agency, where, hey, I can be utilized to create more efficiencies, whether it be drone as a first responder, whether it be online reporting, whether it be creating efficiencies for our deputies to have their reports written through a I with them as a final review or have that document before it's submitted to the district attorney. These steps can certainly create opportunities for deputies to be available and engage more within the community versus being at the substation or the office writing the report. So there's a wide variety of ways that we're thinking about on how to utilize this. And we are taking steps in that direction Excellent. Thank you very much. Welcome. OK. I don't have any more questions. Anybody else have any questions? Okay. Then we will. Hearing no further questions. Will I like to open the public comment period? So, Brett, if you wouldn't mind explaining the public comment process and announce our first speaker. If you would like to address the city Council on this item you're attending the meeting in person. Now is the time to approach the podium We'll start with in-person speakers. First and then we'll move to remote public speakers. OK If you're attending the meeting via Zoom, then you would like to address this item. Now is a time to raise your hand As mayor. I am seeing no speakers. I guess that means it's all us. OK, so we'll close the public comment period and bring it back to the council when anyone like to open the discussion. Cookie thank you all for coming out tonight. And thank you to staff for your diligence on this complex matter. Public safety is a foundational value that affects each of us every single day. Our sense of safety in our beloved Saratoga the place we call home directly impacts our mental well-being and our overall quality of life. Tonight's meeting is specifically focused on providing staff with direction on the city's preferred law enforcement service level. I want to thank staff again for the thoroughness and clarity in bringing us to this point. Taking all factors into consideration. My preference is option B at 10.6 million. Thank you Thanks. So get the dice out. Yeah. All right. Thank you I agree with Councilmember Fitzsimons. I think, I'm definitely thinking of, you know, something somewhere between see and be. But I just heard, you know, if a drastic decrease might take longer to if we need to, you know, back to the same service level that might take a little longer or a little bit challenging. So i would be okay with 10.6 because I just did rough calculate and that's about 16% increase compared to what we paid last year. If we use the cap a dollar amount, not the one they proposed. So hopefully we stay with the cap, and then point 1 million. So that's about 16% of even though it's higher than what I would liked But I don't I think I want to make sure that if we can treat this as kind of a trial and to see if, you know, if we get the monthly report, I like to see, you know, if that silver is level, it's good or, you know, or if we can do even further reduction, you know, where are we? You know, I like the flexible. We have with Sheriff departments. So I'm definitely in favor of a, you know, currently I can go with the option B, OK Gina bluh Sure. I would like to thank the undersheriff and Captain gibberellins were like for coming here, especially undersheriff, for taking the time. I know you have a very busy schedule. It is very reassuring to the residents of our city that you do care for our city, which we know and we hear that all the time. But as we are grappling with this very difficult situation, just considering service level cuts, can cause some concern. What I really appreciated is your comments a few minutes ago, but there is room for adjustment. And that you and your department will be providing us regular reports weekly, monthly, daily if needed, to be able to adjust and respond. And so that there are no big surprises. I really appreciate your comment. Very. You're saying the goal is not to have any surprises and your respect in understanding our situation with the impact on our very tight budget afford the city deeply appreciate that. And also as was discussed earlier with the need to keep the response times reasonable. So that the community is safe, not just feel safe but actually is safe. And the other remark that Captain Valenzuela made about the or rather responded to the question about the general law enforcement versus the traffic deputies and how that area can be covered without. So we are not really taking anything away in a big manner. We just trying to adjust something and see how it goes. So with all of that, I feel comfortable enough to say at this point, let us go with option number B, but based on the reasons and the comments we heard from you and Ryan, thank you so much for working very closely on this and looking at, as I have talked with you, every $5,000 are something that we can because really for our city for a lot of cities, it may not be big, but for our city, every $5,000 means a lot. We can do something in our city that we need to do. So with that, thank you so much. And I'm sure Richard's office is busy looking at the contract very closely, which we will get next week. Looking forward to that. Leslie, thank you so much for heading this work and Mayor, thanks Thank you for. Thank you so long for partners for coming. Thank you to staff for putting together all this work. There's been a ton of work to see how we can be more thoughtful about this in terms of trying to lessen the blow of the overall increase at its core, this is a really fundamental partnership. And I think a lot of the Delta or the change in sort of the cost structure is arguably because the previous contract we had really was more favorable to the city than to the county because there were costs increases and/or caps in there that were then not passed to the city. And so at the end of that just led to a sort of big surprise and balloon of type payment that led to our overall cost base increasing quite dramatically There are opportunities for savings in budgets, but I don't think all savings are the same I do think that, you know, we see a lot of data, right, and have had the opportunity to see some information on our staffing levels and how they compare to other cities of similar sizes or jurisdictions and even with our current staffing levels, it's arguably on the lower side than most. And so with that in mind, you know, recognizing this is a structural change in our budget going forward, the certainty that we had before in terms of maximum cost increases, that's just not going to be there anymore. I do worry about response times going down, and I also worry about the fact that we don't have our helpers right now that, to me, is a really fundamental or toolkit tool in our toolkit that we're not utilizing, we're able to utilize right now. And I worry that puts us at some risk. So I totally hear my colleagues and I, I sincerely hope that we'll be fine. The 10.6 level, I'm supportive of option A, I absolutely respect option B We budgeted for this while we're exploring our options. But I think like just keeping the safety of our residents in mind sort of at that maximum level especially while we're down a really important tool. I think is really important. Thank you And I want to thank, first of all, staff Leslie and Ryan. You guys have worked tremendously hard and long hours at this I know because I've been there a lot of it, but mostly you guys have taken the ball. And I appreciate that, really appreciate the undersheriff and expressing the sheriff's support for us. Captain, Well, thank you so much for your continued work with the city and provide the services that you do Over the 20 years that I have been involved with the sheriff from this dais or in various task force task forces, I have seen that our captain. And with the support of the sheriff and the undersheriff and the assistant sheriffs, been able to work with us to provide the level of service that we need to that end, I think that option b, the $10.5 million is right along the lines of what the sheriff told us a few years ago or the county told us we should anticipate as they move to this cost recovery model, it's right in line with that. So I think that that is a good model. I know that we have the ability to work with the sheriff if we should need some additional services. And we will tackle the budget as we will below. Thank you for putting it the way you did. Not all savings are equal and that is absolutely, positively the truth when it comes to law enforcement. I don't think there's a single person up here on this dais that's ever set up here that hasn't said that the safety of our citizens is a top priority And building community is the second. And so keeping that in mind. We have to maintain that level of law enforcement to be able to say that we're keeping our residents safe to that end, it's also a responsibility of us, the citizens, to do what we need to do to keep ourselves safe, lock our doors, lock the gates, turn on your alarms, make sure that we're doing the things. If you're going out of town, call the sheriff and ask for a drive by. They will come and do vacation checks on your home. It's really important that we do those things. If you don't have a neighborhood watch group, create one in your neighborhood. Get You and your neighbors watching out for what goes on for each other. This is the best way that we can keep ourselves safe because we are our first responders. Although you know, we don't want to respond, but we're going to be the first reporters of it to the sheriff's office. And so I'm in support of option B I think that it makes a lot of sense for the city. And it also gives us the flexibility because I know how the sheriff works with us to be able to be to amend it as we need to get the services that we need. If we find something is a little lacking or we're using something that we have we were paying for something we really don't need. And the sheriff's been really good about pointing that out with us. I talk about this periodically but I remember a time when we had a need for actually there was a lot of traffic accidents at certain times of the day. I went to the captain and I asked them, I say any way that we can do this, we're you know, we're tight on budget, as we always are. And that was when we only got 3.5% of property taxes. So we had half the general fund we got today and he came back a week later and said, hey, I got a way to do this. And it won't cost you a dime. I've never found a consultant to be able to do that in my life. Offer more services without paying extra. And they did so. I know that they'll work with us. And I'm thankful for that. And with that, I'll turn it back to Council for Motion or direction where do you want me to make a motion? Sure All right. I like to move the motion. Let's see. What? How should I make the motion? OK, I. I'll move to adopt a proposed to option B, adopt a option B option as listed in staff to report. Does that work? Yes, I second. All right. We have a motion in the second. All in favor. Please say I, absolutely. I. Any opposed. Opposed. Okay. And any abstentions motion carries for one. Oh, I guess it would be. Thank you. All right. With that we are adjourned. Thank you all for coming. Appreciate it