Folsom City Council Regular Meeting

>>> we will reconvene the special counsel meeting for folsom city council. We have one action in respect to item number one. We decided to deny the application. >> with that we will adjourn the special meeting and convene the regular meeting for tuesday, May 14. Roll call: gaylord, kozlowski, sheldon, howell and aquino is absent. Please 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.. Do we have an update on the agenda? >> no update that a mayor. We will moved to business from the floor. We have one request to speak. If there is anyone would like to speak about something that is not on the agenda. Please hand is a blue card. That would be great. Or if you want to speak on something that is the intent of the same blue card does apply. >> good evening mayor howell. I wanted to draw your attention to last months issue of the business journal that had a headline rejuvenating the historic waterfront. I don't want to disparage my friends but our waterfront is just as historic as that there is is to them. Your general plan allows you to do the work to create a historic district, and I encourage you in the next couple of years to attain on and do the work that needs to be done to improve the recreational opportunities for our residents. To remind the environmentalists. Lake natoma is a reservoir. It's not a pristine lake in the middle of the sierra nevada's. It was made by human hand in the 1950s. It's a beautiful lake, but it is a was of our reservoir. Is located in the city of folsom. We need to be able to enhance our recreational opportunities on that leg. I would encourage the city to roll up their sleeves and get to work on that project. I hope the private sector, the chamber, and the economic development and rotary will roll up their sleeves and get to work on that project. So that our kids can look at lake natoma and access it. So that they can enjoy and go fishing that they should be able to get off and drive to hazel avenue to watch a paddleboard or kayak that is my request for the day. I hope it is a well received and that will have a chance to start doing that and the next couple of years. I'm happy to answer any questions. I can see that councilmember sheldon is happy to say a word or two. >> you can count me out. I have no desire to destroy the waterfront we have. There is no reason to commercialize it. If you look down there at the bridge and saw the 100 kayaks out there. There is a lot of recreation going on. We don't need to turn it into a commercial entity. Leave it alone. We are so quick to destroy. There is no reason. It's so phony to say you have to have access to the river. People go down to the river all the time. And spend millions of dollars to put that enhancement on the river. And you're all out there crying that had to be ada. A lot of people do go out there and that is good. The whole thing. I am amazed that you come and talk about the general plan of saying that the general plan would be considered in the future. There is no qualifications to carry on and do that. That the typical strategy for people that want to commercialize everything in this town. Let us be natural. We don't need to do everything to raise a back. We just enjoy nature for what it is. There are other things that are man-made. I'm sorry. I'm being frank with you. We are frank anyway. We always are. >> one second. Stop is if anyone's going over. >> thank you. >> I am sure council will allow me a moment rebuttal to councilmember sheldon impassioned plea. My recommendation. >> I have the right for free speech. and since my time is not yet up counsel. I think that's the wrong analogy. The analogy goes like this. We provide ballfields for our young people to play soccer and football and baseball. We provide courts to play tennis but when they get out of school and are moving onto other parts of their life we need to provide in the same level of opportunity on lake natoma. A boat house more access to the lake so they don't have to go to hazel to access the lake. That's all I'm asking about. Your talk about dollars and talk about kids and recreation. >> we have two other request to speak. >> thank you mayor and council. I didn't know I was going to speak tonight until I heard bob. Been a teacher for 27 years. And I want you to know that children need to be educated about nature here in the city of folsom. I propose that we put a learning center and a nature center next to the river I will be working on building a website tomorrow. That is where we need to go is a city. Bob is right. We need to educate our children and keep them comfortable learning about nature. There is plenty of access to the lake. He is spot on about the trail down there. The last thing that we need is commercialism. I ran for city council twice on the same issue. Not to commercialize it. i was hoping that I would be sitting next to ernie on this counsel right now, and we could get this job done. To smooth it over. Scooted over and let the city save it with three votes. It's going to be harder. Were going to get that army going and I'm not talking about the rotary or the eagles everything that bob is associated. And talk about regular folks. Citizens that I talk to every day. Thank you for your time. Heads up residence is happening. >> I have pamphlets for all of you. >> you can hand them to the officer at the end. We are holding the second annual 'brews for bug' event. >> you can do this. We will not bite.ACac%)Wwwwwww >>> we are looking for additional funding from the governor's budget. We are hoping to get additional planning money to help folsom plan for that higher number one succumbs. >> maybe this is more of a question for pam. At what point given that article that I read this morning . I'm not quite sure why we were not mentioned given the number of units that we have under construction. When do we get credit for those nearly 1000 units? >> some of them will be credited now. In the current cycle when we demonstrate what we have achieved they will have a new target and some of those units that are not permitted will be counted towards the next cycle. They will be split up based on that phase of construction that they are in. >> okay. >> this a cycle that we are talk about developing a methodology for. It's for 2021. Through 2029. Everything as mentioned is under construction right now is credited towards the previous cycle. While you're preparing the housing element we can counter. >> that was the extent of my presentation. In October that is when you will have your final number hopefully from the board. >> my question is for a combination of you and pam. Where are the major levers that you can pull to achieve these goals assuming that they are large ones. In the thought exercises that you have been doing what is different than what is been used in the past? >> I will pull up the objectives. Many of these are similar to the last cycle. The objectives were similar. That further word is nu. It's a higher threshold what we did last time was considered many of these. And the methodology we adopted focused on the regional income parity idea. We talked about other options but that is what we settled on. That will not slide this time. Because the state is reviewing it, and there is litigation at risk. We need to make a good faith effort to further each one of these. Some of those. What I would say is the housing planner meetings that we've been having with staff. It looks like the big ones that are being emphasized from that meeting is furthering the fair housing. That's what's focused the most. That's an obligation that we have two further each one of these. >> at the end of the day I think it's important having lived through this a couple times already. Some of the states, and the changes to state law have included dramatic increases in the density. I want to say the last go around was the minimum density that you had to allow. It was double what ours had previously been. That's the kind of things that I'm concerned about. >> that is the obvious, mathematical way to achieve additional housing capacity. Regional income parity. What does that really mean? Somebody saying I want to make the same amount of money is a guy across the street. What is it literally mean in this context? >> if I had to summarize it into a couple of sentence. It's that if you are a wealthier than average jurisdiction. You have more of a responsibility to plan for affordable units. If you are of less wealthy jurisdiction. >> so it's a spider-man rule? >> it's to have everyone trending towards a similar number of households. And avoid concentrated poverty and issues like that. >> that's troubling but okay. >> I would just add. That mayor I think you are spot on. It's going to be different this year we don't know exactly what that means. Trying to figure out what those a solution are. Because that is going to be higher. Coming up with creative solutions that May not have looked like a one-size-fits- all. You get 30 units to the acre. You have an affordable housing trust fund and you are done. It's going to be a little different in terms of a range of solutions and programs. It's going to be a narrative process with all of you as we move through that. We will engage a consultant to help us evaluate the numbers when they are presented to us. And they will be back in front of you to talk about that. We will start the housing element update process and evaluate the range of options. >> there's been a lot of threats coming from the governor's office. That you either meet your need or they will start withholding transportation. I'm finding out a little bit frightening. It was a very ugly process >> the vast majority of communities in california as you know from your last report. We did not meet the target. And we will not meet that target by the close of this cycle. Like 99% of the communities. That is a big deal to have that consideration. >> and for the purposes of people that are watching online or on channel 14. The way the rules were, we had to have property zoned they would facilitate the number that we were assigned the last time. Because the city is not a builder of housing. If the builders of whichever category don't come forward and want to build the projects. Historically they can hold the city accountable. That has been my fear since the last go around. Given with the governments office is threatening. We don't have control over what happens on the private sector. It's a scary thought to me. >> I think that's a super important distinction to make. The process as it was constituted is zoned to accommodate, it's not a construction mandate. Recognizing your point. In the vast majority of cases are not building housing. There's been quite a bit of pushback on the proposal. >> we have enough arguments in the region about the existing transportation, who is going to get what. And hopefully will find simple ways to work that out. But having the governor's office threatening to pull other funding is really problematic. >> I would like to make a comment. Councilmember sheldon has been a negative mood. So I can keep talking. >> until we get realistic and forget all the theories how do we get the young families into homes. Amigo unit number I heard. And 850 square foot house in our town. One-bedroom. No extraordinary yard, nothing for $390,000. They expect that to go up once the bidding starts. How in the held does the city council want to get people into the house. How do we do that? You're going to have to help us . The governor can say all he wants to say. But as a marriage and said. We don't build houses. For the first time in the history of folsom. We have two low income housing apartments. We have been trying. We understand that we have an obligation to build affordable housing. When he the rubber meets the road that's getting families into the housing. The young people. Aegis are starting out. Can do it. The governor can say anything he wants as to what he can do I appeal to most of the city's. If he takes away other money. And retribution then he can go to court with us. And we can go to court and see who will win this I. >> I think you need to run for government ernie. >> yeah right. >> is there any forecasted expectation compared to last time? >> I think it would be irresponsible to go for a range. We are in early conversation. And will make sure that we get it we vetted and that makes sense. I'm sorry can get any more than that >> I had to speculate I think it would be twice of what it was last time. >> one thing I could say is that there has only been one region that received a determination based on the new rules. And it was close to double. Much larger region than that. We will see if the rules are similar. >> once you get out of downtown, there is a lot of vacant land. >> I actually gripped her. >> I've been in weird places where you can't see anything. Nothing is close by. >> we don't normally do this but we do have a request to speak. From greg. >> I am with councilmember sheldon in regards to a lawsuit. What is mind-boggling to me. Moved here in 2003 to a very well-organized city. And somehow now I understand why I'm driving around, driving down iron point road near safeway and I see a massive apartment complex. And I'm wondering where did that come from? Doesn't match the integrity of the city. Or go down a bike trail and I see through the grass that there is another building back in the back that they built on marshland that was never supposed to be built on. And then I drive down east bidwell I look up on the hill on oak avenue parkway somewhere around there a mammoth four- story high building. All of these buildings are going up. And one by sutter high school. Read across the street are jammed together buildings. You have the governor of california, where it came from. I was privy to a little bit but not involved. That's what happens when you don't get involved. The city has been planned for all these years and we are going to find the place. Were just going pick a piece of land here. >> that's not how it works. If we are okay and we have lost our way. It was a lot our roads are really bad. And now we are slurry ceiling. That's old technology. Not to get off topic. It's a different than when we moved here. And what is going up and being built is completely different from the integrity of what the city was. That is all I want to say. >> any other questions? >> thank you. I guess we will be hearing from you and pam in the near future. >> we will be back to you in the fall. >> with that we will move on to the consent calendar. Is there anyone who wants to pull anything? If not a motion in order? >> I move that we approve the consent calendar as presented. [Roll call] >> will move on to old business. And appointment of members to the historic district parking solution ad hoc committee. As them manner of introduction to this item. The council will be doing this based on the ballots that we have received. I am hoping that we have extras here. >> can I make a comment? >> what I want to say is I want to pay my respects+++ ath0to the mayor. Getting to)U*Cx:wwwwwww >>> councilmember kozlowski votes for phil, councilmember sheldon votes for bolduc. Phil is appointed. >>> in category a. We have councilmember sheldon voting for loretta heading chair. Vice-mayor aquino votes for kyle middleton . Mayor howell votes for gary richard. Vote for brian sonnet. Worcester sonnet is appointed. >> he has to have three. He is tripping yet. Will send the ballots out again. If you would cross out your ballot if you are voting mayor howell votes for kyle middleton. Councilmember sheldon votes for loretta. Vice-mayor aquino votes for kyle middleton. Councilmember kozlowski votes for brian sonnet. Councilmember gaylord votes for brian sonnet. We have a tie again. >> we could continue to do this for a long time. >> and we lobby? >> you certainly May. So there are 11 people total on this committee. I think the only person that we have under the age of 50 ISmhq q1f charlie who is about 30. >> not that this is about age discrimination.H<)Gjw wwwn > I think we want to have a good mix in there. >> I think you're right. I will change my vote. >> same. >> wow, that was easy. I'm persuasive. >> it's going to be a win matter who was on this. It appears that the council is in agreement that kyle middleton is appointed. >> and for a business owner outside of the district? For category f.Councilmember sheldon votes for matt, vice- mayor aquino votes for steve, mayor howell votes for steve councilmember kozlowski votes for steve and councilmember gaylord votes for steve. >> that was almost too easy. The last category professional planner that is a folsom resident and has professional expertise? >> vice-mayor aquino votes for joe, mayor howell votes for joe, councilmember kozlowski votes for canton, and tran for councilmember sheldon votes for canton. It appears that canton is appointed. >> I want to thank everyone that apply. This was a big list of people. And I hope the committee works well together. As soon as we know when the meetings will take place to those of you that did not get appointed. I encourage you to attend these meetings they will be public meetings and I for one for the people I have supported to get on this committee. I would appreciate if you would attend these meetings. >> I wanted to say thank you. I emailed most of the applicants on here. And the responses I got back were fantastic. The more participation the better. Every one had really great ideas. It was incredibly hard to pick who to appoint. But I appreciate everyone for putting the time into this. >> can I ask you one thing. On the instructions to the committee. I would like to be sure that they can meet in a quiet, private place. Not a restaurant or bar. >> the ad hoc committee? They will not be meeting in a bar. It will be at a civic facility the meetings will be facilitated likely inside this building and will be staffed by our staff. >> that segment. They are encouraged to not have discussion in bars about the subject. >> we are in the final stages of recruiting a professor facilitator. And several senior staff members will be present to provide expert guidance when it needed. We will share information as that first meeting comes about. It is open to the public. >> there will be no partial meetings in bars. >> they can still go on their own. >> they can do whatever they like. Thanks for that comment to ernie. With that we will move to the public hearing portion. >>> resolution no. 10280-a resolution adopting the city manager's fiscal year 2019-20 operating and capital budgets for the city of folsom, the successor agency, the folsom public financing authority and the folsom ranch public financing authority. >> mayor and members of the council. I'm the assistant city manager. I'm going to be brief with my comments. There have been no changes to the proposed budget that was reviewed on April 23. It is exactly as presented. We do have one item that we are asked to bring back with information. Regarding the playground shade structures. >> jim just do whatever krista says. Life is a lot easier that way. >> on the shade structures. Some basic information. There's 51 existing playgrounds. And separate swim apparatuses. Currently there's only one playground that has a shade structure. the other playgrounds natural structures, trees and those things. But only one with an actual structure. There are issues with the time of day and who is being served and so on. That go into putting up these structures. There are three basic types. The fabric roof that runs 89,000 the top picture. The metal roof that is hundred 38,000 and then the shade sales that are about 100,000. That would be the bottom picture. We did have a bid for the fabric shade sales. That came in at $100,000. If you did the entire existing playgrounds you would have a cost of about $4.527 million. Obviously there's a lot of alternatives between doing it all and doing just a few and putting them in. In addition, in terms of future park development. That can be added as an alternative future bids and with that that's all I have in terms of presentation you can go to the public hearing and I will be glad to take questions. >> thank you. And we look on those options some of the schools that were redone. It the play structure there is attached counties that have a significant amount of shade that comes down on it. >> I believe we did. The parks and rec director can correct me if I'm off base. It would be about $6000 each. We did get the comment they have to tear down existing structure and rebuild. it would be providing true shape. >> did you say 6000 >> that's what my big issues. Not there would be the same. It would be sufficient for most families to plan. I feel like there is a better option than these are extremely expensive. And there is the element of which parks you look at doing. Some have natural shade and some do not. I would like to see more of a discussion on actual pricing that fit each part. So that we can incorporate those overtime. >> I would respectfully suggest that that is a decision unless you want to have that discussion tonight. The companies to go back to the parks commission. >> I am more than ready for to go to the parks commission. My problem is that this would be the third year that we said we're going to take it to the parks commission. By the time it actually goes to the parks commission I'm worried. If that's the route we are going to go that we should let it go through and get an allocation for it. And incorporated into the budget. >> we could definitely send it down to the parks and rec commission for a meeting. Ultimately the decision will have to be made in terms of what you want to trade in ways of capital improvement projects for shade if that is the decision. Rpf& y. Wwo w ~what would be the instruction, ultimately making recommendations to us. >> I think we have one councilmember that has expressed interest in shade structures. Can you look at your existing capital and maintenance budget and let us know. How you suggest we go about paying for picketing to the day you have to look at the long-term parks and rec capital improvement budget. Their maintenance budget. It's all significantly short of what's in the master plan. Something has to go. I would want to hear from the parks commission what they want to eliminate. Or if they want to eliminate? >> it raises a larger issue of a wish list that was provided. It's overreach. Based on available funding in general. >> I would suggest that it's not a bad idea for the parks commission to take another look and what the anticipated revenue stream is going to be. And frankly I would like to see them do that on an annual basis when we know how much money is going in and how far that money is going to go. I don't know the last time that the parks commission read prioritized where they were spending their money? That's my recommendation. >> not to mince words. But the language the you are using seem like that these ideas have to originate with the parks commission. >> I don't think they need to but I think it would behoove us as councilmembers to get input from the parks commission. Unless councilmember gaylord s}$]Www*(S wants to make a motion to take x amount of dollars and put it into the budget cycle. And then tell us what he wants to take out of budget before it. >> that is a problem. Outside of a variance of $6000 I wouldn't even know where to start unless I hire a consultant myself. What I am asking from staff. Is for us to look at our inventory and understand how much it would cost to provide shade for the ones that need it. From their fine tune those dollars on what it would actually cost to do it and then bring that to the parks commission. My understanding is the shade is beneficial for health and for kids it also prolongs the life of the play structure. It minimizes the amount of damage to the son structure. I don't know where to start with that. And that's what I keep tossing out there and it keeps coming back we don't do it. Maybe you can give some clarity? >> the only thing I can say, in 20 years if we could figure out how to put shade over the structures we would've done that. Without moving the son you can never get the right time. Sometimes parents need to decide that if it's hundred and 5 degrees that the child doesn't go on the playground. Or you pop up a tent or take an umbrella. Something that protects them. Is just something. In October the park commission made a determination on shade structures. I think it one of the meetings. >> I think you are right. And I believe that they weighed in on that and chose not to do it because we were planting 400 trees in the park. >> what about bringing up a budget to do a test pilot on the park to see if we can do that. Allocating certain amount of money >> it would be helpful at a starting point to know what dollar amount we are targeting. It helps us understand that priority. If you are wanting to spend $50,000 and you see the range of options. That's a wide range but the parks look a lot different. And there is no easy cookie- cutter solutions. I wish I could just say that you can shade each park for $6000. But that's not an accurate statement. It would be help will if I could get consensus from the council to arrive at a dollar amount that we could work with staff and be commissioned to save what does $50,000 look like and what you want to trade. It's not something that has been contemplated. You can see to get into the millions of dollars. I need to know that there is consensus and >> I think it goes back to what you said early on. I don't know if you want to chime in. Some of the existing playground structures that could be shaded for $6000. Is that two, and the rest cannot be retrofitted, so it would have to be completely replaced. I know that the playground equipment and mitchell is at least 15 years old. So retrofitting on that one is not an option. Maybe some of the newer ones are. But the newest one is economy park. And the chose not to spend hundred dollars on that >> we are content to go place shade. We want to understand how the council wants to spend on that. And it's going be pushed back as a result. >> what if we took a peek at $60,000 to see what we can manage, if we could find to parks and start to do stuff like that. To see where we get. To come to the realization that we can't do it, that we can push forward with the newer parts. We could incorporate that moving forward. I am willing to give-and-take. >> as a city manager I'm happy to implement that with direction. I think I heard the 60,000. If you're looking at the capital improvement program and you're going tell me what were going take 60,000 out of that's very helpful. As far as future parks. We will provide in our specs an alternate for shade going forward. That's always at the commission's discretion whether that will happen. >> I like to make a comment. In 20 years as a park commissioner. If the council made a decision like what we are talking about now. And bring them into it. I would be incensed. I would've thought that I can do the job for the council. >> I came to the council with the idea of pitching an idea. And I didn't have anything tangible. Want to give the commission something not tangible. Something that's not vague. If we picked a budget amount and we start there and give them something to work with they could digest that said just saying we need shade. >> I think what ernie is suggesting one is to come up with a number and send it back to the parks commission I want tell the parks commission that you're going to spend $60,000 on shade, tell us we can cut that out of budget. That is what ernie is upset about. I do not like that either. If you have a suggestion where you want to find $50,000, propose that the council. >> that is what I'm going to do. That's the whole deal. It's hard to always say you need to go do this and that. I am asking where we can do it. And I'm totally fine with going to the commission. I'm not saying that you have to find $60,000 out of your budget. I'm saying let's work with it. I will look as well. As decision-makers we understand that this is something we want to look at. >> we can have them look at it moving forward. What is in front of us tonight is this budget. If you are proposing a change. >> I'm asking you if you want to change this budget? What he wanted change? >> I need more time to go through it. >> roger can I offer a long- term solution? I am not opposed to putting shade structures over parks. There is a way to do it. Maybe our parks commission needs to take a field trip to look at other cities. I am assuming that it is more expensive to go back and do this retroactively than if it was planned for the beginning.V{ r*dwwo: I'm very skeptical that we could go back and put shade anywhere for $6000. I know this isn't going to solve the immediate problem. But what if we say going forward when we look at the south at 50. I don't think every part needs to have shade. But maybe one out of three? >> there were two things that I recommended for every park going forward. One was a cctv. So going forward I absolutely agree. i would like to look at some of our existing inventory to see if we can provide shade. To your point. I'm sure it's not going to be $6000. If we did that build on structure it'll be 10 or 20. I don't want to go through another year of budget where they say here's a budget you have now. So let's talk about what were going do later. We are the council. The parks commission is the parks commission. They recommend. This is something I want to pull through. Because I know the parents wanted. >> what happened to that $30,000 ? It remains in the fund? Could be real allocated. >> I think we decided that the money is to go to enhance the collins golf course because users came to counsel and were talking about the upkeep. >> drinking answer the question is the parks commission has discussed the issue of shade structures? >> good evening mayor howell and members of the council. We have discussed it and it was discussed at the subcommittee level. >> with the capital or rehab? >> the renovation committee. We did discuss it. What we did outline and that subcommittee meeting. Was the various types of shade structure that we are aware of that minister francis went through. And also that $6000. I apologize if I didn't make it clear to the city manager. The 6000 is generally what the add-on would be if you went to buy a new structure. Your buying the structuring you want to add on the little wings are this small amount of shade cover over the top of the slide or the landing is. The top part where the kids go down. >> that is an add-on. >> what is the cost to go in and add. Are there less expensive options for adding shade that is not shown on the powerpoint? >> I would have to look into that in terms of retrofit. The information that was provided to me was all the play structures are different. All different ages, types, some are metal, some are plastic. I don't know if there is an off- the-shelf ad on for one type of structure versus another. We can certainly research that. >> I would be surprised if those things don't change annually. >> that's one of the things that we are tasked with. >> I was surprised that you could retrofit them. >> and were not 100% sure that you can retrofit them. But that was typical for one or two. >> I think the comment was that it would take several. And that could impede play and it would take a lot to be more than that. >> the add-ons. That's $100,000 there. There is obviously different options. I am more than happy with the staff investigating and looking into what options there are. Feeling I keep asking the same question. The subcommittees are getting together. And it really did take that cycle for it to land in the renovation committee. It has arrived and they have discussed it. We did put that in the context of the larger challenges. With unfinished parks. New parks that have not been built yet. A funding stream that we are certain is not as robust as it had been in the past. That is a large challenge for the parks and rec committee. We are working with them on the renovation of the master plan. How do we put our arms around and prioritize what little money is coming in to start parks, finish parks, that is the next round of discussions over the next couple of months. >> to that end we clearly don't have enough funding to do everything that we would like to do. We don't have the prospect of enough funding to do everything that we would like to do. I think one thing that's going to make a couple of people less happy. I think the idea of adding to our collection of parks by building a park is short sighted at the moment. If we have a new park plant we need to put a pin in that and look at what maintenance, upgrade, projects we have a NEATDdDdq to get done to make the best used of parks we already own. We have a magnificent collection of parks and trails and outdoor spaces here in folsom. Adding 2% of park space to that collection seems like digging the hole deeper rather than making good use of the funding. To the extent that we can I think we need to change the timing of the new parks that is planned. That May ultimately give the parks commission an opportunity to revisit the master plan for how to spend the money. And open up funding for councilmember gaylord's idea. >> I would like to go back to my first comment. I think it would be a good idea for the parks commission to take a look at what is on the master plan. With regard to what you were talking about. You can tell the neighborhood that is your plan. I will not be with you when you do that. >> it's going to make some people unhappy. But the realistic solution here is to not keep digging and deeper hole. Unless we have another funding source. And I don't see where that is coming from. Because they decided that the tax measure was inappropriate. >> that need need to be reconsidered sometime in the future. Right now we've been very blessed with the parks that we have in the schools we have. Police force and safety that we have. That's all good. But you can get complacent and it's going to get away from us if we don't pay attention. >> I'm not suggesting never building. I am suggesting making it happen in the next 12 months May be a short site. >> it's not going to happen in the next 12 months. We don't have the money now. >> budgeting a significant amount of money for that park in the next 12 months. >> I believe it's 24 months. >> interns, the amount of budget that has been proposed is half of what we would need to construct. 2.5 million. It's 4.5 million to build the park. >> remember in the east area there were five parks scheduled on the master plan. And we've only finished two. When you say we don't need +$+$+it, maybe the east area doesn't agree with you. >> let me clarify my statement one more time. I'm not suggesting that we never build it. I'm not suggesting that we don't need it. When I'm suggesting is that it is not the best economic choice to make when we do not have enough funding to do all the other things we would like to do. >> I'm only suggesting that I would like to have the parks commission way in. >> I'm suggesting giving the parks commission an opportunity to revisit the master plan and reallocate some of that funding. And reevaluate the timing. >> I've always been a fan of that. Frankly I think we would get $40 million worth of stuff on the master plan that we will never be able to pay for. I am a big fan of having them read look at the master plan annually. We do it for a lot of the things that we do whether it's public works or whatever. We have to look at that priority list and what projects are going to stay and I would like to see them do that a little bit more frequently. >> mayor howell they do. That is a yearly evaluation. Both the renovation committee will bring forward the renovations that need to be done and the existing parks. That is reviewed with the parks and rec commission and the master plan. They do help us prioritize. We give them a big list of what needs to be done and then the projected revenue that we know is coming and then they do prioritize for us. >> if we adopt this budget as is. Which is 2.6 million for the park. That gives you a green light to start planning and hiring architects, designers. And some of the monies going to get spent? All that money's going to get spent. >> one of the ideas that we are working with is that there is enough money. I think 400,000 that was a set aside the year prior. And the 2.6. That would be enough to do the design engineering and construction of the upper tier which would be a parking lot, a bathroom a play structure and then the field at the lower end. And not do anything in the second tier on the upper portion of the park. We feel like we can get half of the park in. Make the field programmable so that it satisfies the youth athletic leagues and whatnot they would use that field. We fill it we could take a decent amount of money and make it a usable part. >> not only in terms of the field but that parking lot is in hot demand from the neighboring high school. And it helps to solve that problem as well and gets us started in a positive fashion. >> let me as another question and add another wrinkle. Have there been any discussions with the school district in terms of having any plans to expand this done? If they need to do that or want to do that that's the only logical place for them to do that? Is the district decided that they needed to expand vista. Make the school bigger. >> they have not approached us. Are you talking about purchasing part of the land designated? Those conversations have not happen. >> before you go. I hate to ask this question. I was told that there is a van for the senior center to go on trips a 19-year-old man that they are using? That's pretty dangerous. I couldn't find it in the book. Maybe I'm not looking in the right spot. is it there? >> we did propose replacing that van? It's in there. >> 19 years for nine passenger van is dangerous. We agree. >> is it practical to approve the budget with specific instructions to delay the start of the benevento structures until they can do a more thorough job of revisiting? I think that that would be appropriate to do that? You're making an exception that they didn't do a thorough job. >> with new instructions to revisit the master plan >> I think that is a fair assumption. Longs it can happen in short- term. >> I never hesitate about going back and taking a second look. >> that's all I'm suggesting. I'm just suggesting that we don't have the funding to do everything in the master plan. Building another park with more expense for us to maintain May not be the best use of funding we have available. I realize that's going to make people unhappy. That was said 30 years ago that we can build it because we can't maintain it. We didn't listen to that attitude and we found a way to build them and we do maintain them. >> we still have a bunch of parks on the master plan that we don't have the money to build. I think that's the point that mike is trying to get too. I will support a motion to move forward with the budget as is with the codicil that we go back to the parks and rec commission and have them note that were going get that $2.5 million in suspended animation until they get back to us after they've taken another look with an update on the financial future. Maybe this changes of the state of california says we have to build 50,000 units and they backup with park fees. Hopefully that all doesn't happen. It could theoretically. I have no problem with doing that. >> I think that this counsel needs to sit down and be educated a little bit more. I went through that looking. When it's going to happen when it's not going to happen. It's even more complex than I thought it was. I'm not sure that I do understand it. That is why I'm not in favor of voting. I apologize I didn't have this focus yesterday. That is a complex issue. If you put it on there it's going to stay on there for two or three years and you never spend the money. And the money is there. That's what you're telling me. >> for which park? >> the money is there to build part of the benevento. Not finish it. Were not going to get to it. Were not going to spend it. If you're trying to find money for shade projects that something different. >> you can include that whole discussion as conversation for the parks commission. >> that's what I wanted to clarify. >> my concern almost has nothing to do with the shade structure. >> there is exponentially other things. >> we've had a lot of discussions trying to make sure that we are matching the projected available dollars available instead of just having a timeline. One after another. It's really not a realistic look at what we can deliver and it creates false expectations. >> it absolutely does create false expectations. >> it's appropriate to relook at the master plan. And lied of the fact that the measure did not pass. You have to get another funding source or revise a spending plan. I think going back to the shade structure. I am willing to support that. Not on every park. I think it's appropriate and I would be happy to go on a field trip and you can see how other committees and communities are doing it. >> so we can look at putting the dollars in suspended animation and talk about alternatives and relating the shade idea to that conversation. >> I would like additional input from the parks commission on both of those items. >> if you would like a motion I will make one. >> I recommend that we adopt the budget as presented with the caveat that we place the funding for benevento park on the shelf until we have further input from the parks commission with regard to potentially doing shade structures. >> I will continue to second that. >> is this a public hearing? We haven't had the public hearing. Will open it but we have no speakers. >> I also not sure I'm ready to pass the budget. I have one more question. I was brought up to maine and I want to look at different staffing levels with officers in regards to traffic enforcement and response time. I know that is a sink significant increase. I don't think I was ready to pass this today. >> I'm not ready to pass it today.>> councilmember gaylord on your comment about police officers. For the record you and I have had this conversation. But a fully benefited police officer ranges hundred and 65,000 annually to 215,000 annually. And that's just to start? >> that is the range. It is an annual cost. It needs an ongoing revenue source. Not one time dollars. The conversation that you and I had an I encourage the conversation to have. We need to understand I've done the best job to put forward a budget with the best cutting of the pie that we can propose. I need to understand if we are adding officers or if that is the proposal how are we reallocating that pie? Need understand where that is coming from? >> that's where any more time with the budget. I feel like we have a review that's not as defined. We can look through here. Just saying you be nice to have more officers. Just saying it doesn't mean I can go in there and strike out things that we do or do not need. I agree with councilmember kozlowski and that motion and I am fine with everything else on here. I just wanted to see if we could push it to one more meeting to have more time. >> I'm going to ask a question. It sounds like you had this conversation privately with the city manager. And what needs to happen we need to have these conversations in public. >> I didn't have this conversation probably. >> I said we want to talk about it on the dais. >> you need to tell us what it is you want I want more time on budget. >> does that mean you going come back and say I want four more cops? >> I like to know the reality of what we can and cannot achieve. If we were to look at this from a staff and holistic approach and say that the realization is we want three or four officers and we can incorporate one by removing this and we bring that for the council >> I want to hear what it is you want? What is your objective >> my objective is traffic enforcement in general. I want more officers on the street. With a red light running in speeding. It's a crazy. And the response times are close to 13 minutes >> I would appreciate if somebody could talk about response times. >> detective can I ask you to do that? Think you >> don't go away we are not done yet. >> eric for the chief who is out-of-state. We have response times based on the time that the call comes into the dispatch center to the time that the officer arrived on scene. Most of them do the time that the officer is dispatched to the time they arrived. The differences that lag time when that call comes in. If that is putting the pending status because there are no officers available that if you do it the latter way you're not capturing that data. If you look apples to apples our response times are not exactly what you are seeing in your publication. So apples to apples when the officer is dispatched is about seven minutes and 12 seconds. As opposed to the nine minutes and 32 seconds. >> so it's nowhere near 30-16. >> there's a wide variety. And you can correct me if you're wrong. So wide variety of response times depending on calls. When you merge those together and average them out you're going get very different numbers. >> and on injury accident. >> you could have a commercial call which is false 99% of the time. That would be a lower priority from a domestic offense. It's a more honest way of looking at the data. If you're looking at the time that they are dispatched the only variable is where the officer was when he was dispatched to the call to when they arrive. If you're looking at the total package the system calls and says I need help. We capture that data from the start. And that is the expectation of our community. They want to know when they called 911 how long until that officer is on scene. When you look at most agencies in our region and they throughout those numbers in terms of response times for the most part you're looking at apples and oranges. I think the way we do it is more honest reflection. The wide variety is the different calls for services. That's going to dictate a different response time. We will not clear and officer from a report call. We will probably clear and officer if it is significant for services and we have to free up officers to respond. >> my goal is to be able to have that traffic enforcement and not reducing the response time. Right now on current staffing levels what is the average staffing level during the day? On average >> right now in the traffic world, we have five people in training, and we will add two more traffic officers to the traffic bureau once all five make it through training. That will be the first plan to address those traffic concerns. The chief knows it's a priority. Were going to take those and put them into the traffic bro. There's really no formula for how many officers. >> eric I ask you with the question in a different way. More often the police department staffing is a ratio of 1000 citizens. That is probably the first statistic that comes up in any jurisdiction. What is the ratio to citizens. And what is ours versus everyone else in the region. >> we have a population reporting at 70,000. I will offer that formula. >> I know it's old school. But that's historically what the measure was. >> it's a huge range. And it's predicated on what the violence in the city looks like. There is a city of 600,000 people. The 1000 is a huge a variable it's a slippery number. But we are one per thousand. Are we adequately staffed hopefully in the next couple months will get to full staffing. Right now we are I-76. We haven't had full staffing in 6.5 years. Where we have been able to fill all the positions allocated. i would suggest that it would be a good measure down the road to see where we are at in terms of having those officers on the street. We had a on-duty injuries where we had a lot of people on workmen's comp. That will impact that number. It's been a challenge the last 6-12 months with all the injuries we've had not been able to hire and fill all those positions. I'm confident that we can fill those positions, hopefully before the fiscal year starts. I think that's going give us a good idea of where we are at. Before the recession we were allocated for 93. And now we are allocated for 70 in my premature and asking for us to analyze us. >> by answering a question let's go back to the mayor's one and five. I think a better way of looking at this. If we had 78 officers this is what we could do. If we're allocated additional officers, rather than saying a number, what are those additional bodies going to do for the community? I would offer that that's a better measure. >> tell us? >> my goal, I really want to focus on traffic enforcement. I want to focus heavily on that. We are a cuts through city. It is no secret that east bidwell is getting worse by the day. How many motorists do we have daily? Or how many traffic motors? >> did you look at the other departments with detectives? >> this is so hard because you look through each page. And I'm not ready to say here let's do it. >> you had the budget for two weeks. >> when you go through this and you start analyzing everything and you hear from different things in different people. You want to look at every stone and say I like to know where we can make changes and what things we can look at. Specifically if you are saying. I'm not seeing you have to speak for everyone. But if you think we are adequately staffed that is fine. I want to look at options for increasing traffic enforcement. It not as much time as you think. But running through a budget takes a little more than two weeks. >> maybe I'm used to it because I've been doing it for 20 years. >> we could take a step back and I want to remind city council that jim francis and I put forward a budget that recommends no personnel agreements. Where no police was singled out. In a perfect world I would've loved to present a budget. You can always take more police officers. More firefighters. I would love to have more solid waste truck drivers, librarians, engineers. You could go through the whole list. and mostly engineers. Of course mayor howell. The fact remains we did up with a budget where we had close to $300,000 in discretionary money. That doesn't buy much. You have to focus on the one time stuff. It comes back to heat to be that boring broken record. It comes back to that that is a wonderful and we love to have more police officers. We need to understand what we are taking out to do that. We don't have an ongoing revenue stream to pay for additional personnel. Right out of the gate we had 2.6 million dollars of a pers bill that we had to pay before we can get to the fun stuff. And just as a reminder I don't want to make anyone feel that the police were singled out. >> I appreciate all the work that everyone does. And I'm not saying that the police department is lacking. We just have a little bit of time to look at this. There are things that we independently want to look at and consider. >> I am happy to wait two weeks. But when you come back you need to be prepared to tell your colleagues where you want to find the $400,000 or the shade structures, you need to be prepared to come back and say what you're going to cut out of the budget >> those are the discussions with it's hard with us. Because they have to be here to have those discussions. On so when I go to lane and salmon look at this or that it's tough to your point you had this for two weeks but sometimes you need more time. You could pass this without me on board and they'll be totally fine. I am just saying I like to have a little more time. And I appreciate you stepping up and giving your opinion and we can go from there. >> I asked the city manager about response times ahead of time. If you look under the police tab on page 4. It shows the response times they were projected. They are going in the right direction it was nine minutes and 34 seconds from the time they called and it looks like it's going be about 8.46. >> I will offer the response times. We did a complete realignment. And now that we have south of 50 that's a whole separate beat. All in our five beats there was an inordinate amount of calls for services. By changing those beats the geography the response time is starting to come down. I think that is been a very positive thing. It's on our radar and something we are working on. And once we get the trainees into police cars that will help as well. I don't think that there is any chief on the planet that wouldn't see I could use more cops. >> I think that there is more to this. I think what roger is really asking. Response times don't have anything to do. And correct me if I'm wrong. He wants more cops on motorcycles hiding behind a tree at an intersection. That's a very different thing from response times. >> it is both. In discussions with response times. I'm not making this out of thin air. It was something that I was told is a concern. Stuff comes up in conversations if this was your job to look through this and put it together , long story short I need more time. And the police farm and is one of the focuses in response to traffic. I don't know what else to say. >> public hearing? >> let's get to the public. >> we're going to open the public hearing. I have no blue cards. Does anyone want to come forward and ask question? Or state their opinion on anything? >> we have a board everyone out of the room. I think we have no public comment on the budget. With that we will conclude. Does anyone make a motion? >> given the opportunity to reflect on something. A question came to mind. I think this May be for you. The line item for the southeast connector is that funding specifically for that project or is that the gap funding money ? They don't get the additional funding? >> that is correct. The $3 million collection. It's alone and he gets paid back. >> in the event that they don't get the additional funding. >> I was remembering that correctly >> thank you. >> I don't think it requires a motion. I'm more than happy to let people digest this a little longer. I would say personally I would like to have more police officers. But I really do appreciate the city staff and prior councils holding the line on hiring and being very thoughtful about adding new positions. Until we get to the peak of this pers contribution and we start come down the other direction it's fiscally responsible. >> the other thing I'm going to remind everyone and earning noses because he was here in the staff knows this at the beginning of the last economic downturn the city of folsom had 600 employees. We are down significantly from where we were before. And my personal opinion all the services in the city of folsom despite those dramatic differences have improved dramatically. I think we need keep that in mind. We know what it is like to be bleeding the cost of staff and all the rest of it. We have an amazing staff with the city of folsom. Many were here when those positions were shuttered. It's easy to go back to having way more employees than you can function with. And I'm going to say that I'm so proud of the staff that we have had over the 21 years that I'm sitting here. You could always have more people. And the police officers that are here know that the chief went to a city that had three times more officers than you do and their budget just for their police department was twice of the city's budget. And they are eight square miles. They must be driving goldplated police cars. I am happy to entertain a motion to put this off until the next council meeting. >> second. >> [Roll call] >> if anyone has any questions I appreciate getting that information. We need to get this budget passed at the next meeting. If you have any questions or you need information please contact staff and get it. If the public has any questions of us or staff please contact us before the meeting on the 28th. With that will move to the city manager report. >> hello everyone. Tomorrow is the city works the day. From 9:30 am to noon you can hop into the cab of a garbage truck meet police officers this is a popular annual event where you get a chance to sample a wide variety. I hope you will be there. Beginning on monday, May 20 the road crews will resurface bike trails with a slurry seal. Which is applied to preserve and protect a payment structure. It will take place between monday through friday 7 am to 6 pm. On residential streets, on bike trails. You can go to the website www.Folsom.Ca.Us to look at a slurry seal location map. We will have a water wise workshop on May 29 where you can learn about climate appropriate plants that's May 29 from 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm at the community center. And you can learn more on our website. And finally I just wanted to share the the rainbow bridge in centennial event was a rounding success. We had 5000 attendees hundred 25,000 social media impressions. We were featured in 93 news stories reaching 1.5 million viewers. And we set a guinness book of world records. >> counsel comments. >> three quick things. We continue to work on developing the green is go program. Which effectively is asking the state to fill funding gaps so that the county can reach its greenhouse gas emission goals. Folsom led the charge in making a supporting resolution for that and I like to thank my colleagues and everyone that is continuing forward. I want to sink it your, that the world needs more engineers. And the comments. The staff did a magnificent job. I got to be the emcee of the bridge building contest with the popsicle sticks. We have a lot of smart kids here in folsom. >> did you get any photos. >> they were so good. The challenge was to take 200 popsicle sticks and one bottle of regular glue, and the team that won. The made a bridge that would hold hundred and 77 pounds. Which was hard to believe. Unless you sought in person. The point of this. The world needs more engineers. And a S.T.E.M. Event like that we should try to do that annually. Regardless of whether the rainbow bridge turns out. >> we just had a birthday celebration every year. Of bridge building contest. And we could get other contests that are fun. >> is that all you have? >> I am quiet tonight. I do want to reiterate that the bridge ceremony was amazing. Congratulations you did a fantastic job. I don't think I've gotten as many compliments as that one. It was great. Thank you. >> again kudos to the staff. It was great. We had a lot of fun. And I saw a lot of kayaks. I believe the lady told me it was a 300 member kayak club. And I believe that that is true. The gentleman that walked the wire. I met his family. His mom with a broken leg. His brothers and uncles. They were very good too. Thank you staff. >> first I will apologize for being tardy. My daughter was being recognized at the vista senior awards I. I appreciate you indulging me. Also I thought the rainbow bridge was a fabulous activity. We had a great time. In the evening event on the bridge was fantastic. Thank you to the historic district for planning that. One thing about my last meeting that May have be of interest. The city of elk grove was there with a sphere of influence application that