Apr 15, 2025 6:00 PM - Redding City Council - Regular Meeting

>> All right. Call this meeting to order, Mr. Curtis. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Reporting out of closed session, the Council considered items 3a, 3b, 3c, and 3d. There is no reportable action on any item. >> Thank you, sir. We will proceed. If anyone wishes to address the city council on any item considered at this meeting before or during council's consideration of that item, please enter your name in the electronic kiosk located in the lobby. The city council will allocate up to a maximum of 3 minutes per speaker for each agenda item. Staff reports are available online at the city's website, cityofredding.gov or in the public view binder located on the podium at the north side of the chambers. Outstanding. Do we have any of these to go before? To go now? These two. Okay. All right. See the pledge and an invocation by Jen McCloskey and then roll call. Oh, yeah, we did already. >> Vanessa, Ready to begin? >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Good evening. Will you please bow your heads with me and join me in welcoming the presence of our father, God. Lord, we invite you here now in your word, Proverbs 16:3, it says, commit to the Lord whatever you do, and he will establish your plans. Thank you, God, for this encouraging verse to remind us to entrust our actions and our plans to you. And in doing so, you will help us succeed. As we gather today to serve our community, let's take this moment to reflect on the responsibility that you have given to us. And we come to you with gratitude for this chance to serve. We lift up to you our mayor, our city council members, and all of our city workers, including our policemen and our men and women and our fire men and women, as well as first responders. We ask for your protection and blessing over them and their families. We also ask for your guidance today. Help us as we make decisions that affect the citizens in our beautiful city. Grant us wisdom beyond our understanding, patience to learn to listen to each other, and humility to lead with integrity. May your wisdom guide our discussions and shape our decisions. May your compassion be the foundation of Our leadership, we acknowledge the diverse voices and perspectives in our city. Help us to listen with open hearts, speak with and integrity and act with everyone's best interest in mind. According to your ways. Bless our city and all who live in it, protect our families, strengthen our bonds and help us serve with compassion and justice. It is in your name we pray. Amen. >> Roll call. >> [CALLING ROLL] >> All right, Presentations. Child Abuse Prevention Awareness Month. I'm just going to read this little confirmation then you guys. Proclamation of the Mayor of the city of Redding, California, proclaiming April 2025 as child abuse Prevention Month, which I'm very excited to do and happy to give this proclamation, allow you guys a few words. >> Thank you so much. I really appreciate you guys recognizing this month as Child Abuse Prevention Month. Unfortunately, Shasta county is really struggling in this area. We outstripped the state average almost doubly. I will say that we have reduced our numbers previously. In 2022, our numbers were 715 substantiated cases. In 2023, it was down to 564. So the work that we are doing and the way that our community shows up is working, but there's still a lot of work to do. Our organization, Raising Shasta, works really hard to be preventative. We work with families and we do wraparound support around the entire family. And then we work really far to get ahead of that way upstream with youth through our teen centers and our mentoring programs. But ultimately, it takes a village. There is no way that one organization can make all this change. And it requires people like, like you, our average everyday citizens to show up and care about kids, to care about families and to support them. Well, everyone needs a little bit more help. It is not easy to raise children. It truly takes a village. And so when we can show up for our neighbors and our community members, that's going to be what makes the difference. So we really appreciate you and really encourage you all year to think about what child abuse is and how you can support your family and neighbors. But especially this month, being aware. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks very much. All right, public comment. City council will allocate up to a maximum of 3 minutes per speaker for 30 minutes total at the beginning of the meeting for public comment for non agendized matters within the city's jurisdiction. The mayor will determine the order of speakers. If 30 minutes is not adequate to accommodate all the individuals who have submitted their name through the electronic kiosk. The city council will trail this item to the end of the open session agenda. Remaining speakers will address the city council at that time. Okay. The consent calendar contains items considered routine and or which have been individually scrutinized by city council members. Okay. Sorry. All right, Margie. >> Council, city manager and staff. I'm Margie Cantrell. I'll let you do the math. My parents moved me here in December 1947 from Klamath Falls, Oregon. I have gone to Cypress, Sequoia, Shasta, Chico State, and as young, married, lived in Sacramento, Orville and Vallejo. The city of Redding is our city of choice and Shasta county is our city. It was our county to live in. I am here because every time there's a new city council and I'm late this time because health reasons is because you have run for office for a reason. And I want to know what your agenda is. We've had two years of a different agenda than we've had for years. And now we have a new city Council. And I really want you to know some of the things that have happened in the past during my years here so that we don't have that type of thing happen again. Pat Kite was on the City Council. He was a very forceful speaker. We have forceful speakers to this day. And he talked City Council into big league dreams. And you are still dealing with was to build an absolutely wonderful ballpark facility in the north, clear north of Modesto, with nothing in between. And then he quit and went to work with big league dreams to build one between Modesto and Redding, taking away part of the facility use that we would have had. Mike Warren was our city manager. The property in the city belongs to the people of the city of Redding. And we have another number of assets. One of the largest assets we had was a collection that was paid for by a man of Indian baskets and artifacts. And it was all from the local area here. It was kept at the Redding Art Museum under strict rules when it was given to the City of Redding people to maintain it in a certain temperature. And those were given to the McConnell foundation, which they can sell, buy, trade, do whatever they want with. And we haven't seen them for years. The Cypress Avenue Bridge lighting, there was huge discussions over that. And one person made sure that we got those horrible lights. And to this day, they are not. They're not reasonable because you can't even buy bulbs for them, is the last I heard. If you believe anything in the record. Searchlight. >> Are you getting close to being done? >> Your time has expired. >> Well, now you're going to do lighting and, in the area, down by Turtle Bay. So, let's be reasonable. What we're going to do there. You're dealing with a 5-million-dollar deficit. >> I hear your time is up there. >> Your time is up. >> Anyway, I hope that you will be reasonable with the property of the city already. >> Okay. Good evening. My name is Reggie and I'm a single mother. And while new here to Redding, in some ways I also grew up here. So I'm happy to be back. Hi. I'm here this evening as a representative of a new growing local business and I want to briefly address the proposed changes to the food vendor permit fees for park access. My professional background is in community events and I've always maintained a strong working relationship with the city council and police chief in my previous community. And I'm eager to build that same positive report here in Redding. As a mom, I am deeply committed to teaching my children about real world challenges and the value of entrepreneurship. For this summer, we've designed and built an ice cream cart using an electric bike as our family project. We believe that having the opportunity to operate in the park would be invaluable as it would allow my children not only to sell ice cream, but also develop essential social skills, learn to interact confidently with a diverse audience, and gain experience in answering questions about their business. My hope is that our venture can serve as an inspiration to other young people in our community, demonstrating that entrepreneurship is an accessible and rewarding path. During the process of navigating the legal requirements for our business, I was informed by Parks and Rec about the proposed changes to the permit fees, moving from a $500 annual fee to a $50 per visit fee. While I understand the adjustment might be suitable for larger food trucks that operate sporadically at events, it prevents a significant challenge for small scale vendors like us. Our business model involves more frequent park visits, but we operate with limited inventory sold at modest prices. The increased per visit fee structure could hinder our ability to provide this valuable learning experience and connect with the community regularly. I'd like to suggest a tiered system with lower fees for smaller vendors who operate more frequently. Or possibly a monthly permit option would provide more flexibility. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Does Travis have your contact? Travis, do you have a contact information? Can you give our Parks and Recs director your contact information? Because I have more questions for you on that issue. You're not the only one that's brought it up, so I'm just interested in its resolution. So I'd like to. >> All right. Consent Calendar. The Consent Calendar contains items considered routine and or which have been individually scrutinized by city council members and are anticipated to require no further deliberation. The member of the public wishes to address an item on the consent calendar. Please enter your name in the electronic kiosk located in the lobby before the consent calendar is considered. It shall be the prerogative of any council member before the consent calendar is acted upon to 1. Comment on an item 2, respond to any public comment on an item 3, request the record reflected abstention or nay vote on an item or number four, remove the item and place it on a regular portion of the agenda for delivery of a staff report and or an extended discussion or deliberation. Anyone want to pull anything? Go ahead. >> I just have a couple Questions on item 4.6 C. I don't need to pull it. Maybe just a couple questions for the City Manager. Saw $4,500 per week is what we could be authorizing to open up the coffee kiosk at the city hall. Just doing rough math up front. That's a lot of lattes. And I know I've had discussion with you earlier today. To me, it's important just to know that this is going to run budget neutral. It's not going to cost anything to the general fund. But maybe you can answer a few questions or give a better explanation to that. >> The $4,500 per week has nothing to do with coffee. But we are opening a coffee kiosk in city hall. We've had one there for years. In the last year and a half that's been absent because we've had difficulties finding a vend. So, we're making a run at doing it with a recreation employee. And so that individual will be able to sell coffee. And the coffee itself will just be absolutely net zero. There will be no cost. Her salary or hourly wage will be paid for by the sale of coffee. The item that's before you today is that we also would like to be able to sell food from various vendors around town so that, you know, maybe it's a breakfast burrito, maybe it's a sandwich at lunchtime. And we don't really have that in our policies. The ability to just go around and buy, you know, food for resale. And while arguably we probably had the authorization already to do this, we think it's best to anything we're going to do something a little bit unusual to bring it to the council and have you opine on it. So really what this is up to $4,500 for the ability to go purchase. This is per week food items for pack, prepackaged for sale so that individuals within the building or visiting have the opportunity to buy a sandwich, a breakfast burrito or something of that nature. The intent is it's absolutely cost neutral. If we find that, you know, in a few weeks that nobody wants to buy, you know, a sandwich, we'd stop selling sandwiches. So it's absolutely cost neutral and it's just simply a recognition that it's a little bit odd and we wanted to make sure council was okay with it. >> So potentially on the food orders, it'll go conservative in the beginning just to make sure that we're not over ordering. >> And oh, for sure. I think the first thing you do is you buy a couple of pizzas because everybody buys, you know, orders pizza and wants a pizza. So, you know, you kind of build it. You also have to make sure that you build a consistency because people are, you know, going to trust that you, if you have food that they will rely on that. If you don't have it, then, you know, they'll stop coming. So we want to make sure that we're building it over time. And then obviously we've been connecting with city staff along the way and make sure that people are interested in that. And by far, people are interested in having an opportunity to not have to leave the building to get some. Some lunch. >> Thank you. Entertain a motion. >> Motion to approve the consent calendar. >> I'll second. >> All right, all in favor? >> Since we have one member participating remotely, I believe we need to do a roll call vote. >> The system, I'll call out each council member's name. >> [CALLING ROLL] >> Computers are just not my thing. All right, we are moving on the. >> Exciting. Mr. Mayor, just. Yes, please. If I. Just so we can make sure we put the votes up there when we have them. >> Thank you. >> All right, we're on to the exciting 5.1 Mayor Jack's considerations for the appointment. And as you've seen, I recommended Blake N. Again to the Planning commission to serve. And also I. I changed from Josh Johnson to Aaron Ryan, who I believe is here. I see you're back there to make the appointment as well. So. Questions? Do we have any? I'm trying to figure this thing out again. Meeting management. Okay. Susan, Murray, you're up first. And Lane, you'll be up second. All right. Need some water. >> Thank you for letting me speak tonight. In the near future, there will be one of the most critical decisions to be made for the City of Redding. The Riverfront specific plan. Brandy Green and Aaron Hatch have been very much involved and are well informed since sitting as planning commissioners for the general plan. And they are already familiar with the Riverfront specific plan. I understand that it is the mayor's decision to appoint people to the planning commission appointed two new people to this position who would have to play catch up. Is this a wise decision at this time to appoint these two new people? They will not have the vital information that has come out over the last almost three years, such as meetings, community engagements, workshops, etc. And speakers that were in those meetings expressing their questions, thoughts and desires in what they want to see in their community. For the Riverfront specific plan. Brandy and Erin have invested their time and have the knowledge with the decision making in the position of planning commissioner and serious decisions in regards to the Riverfront specific plan. Even though these two appointments may have a fresh perspective, is that what we really need right now? I have attended numerous community meetings, workshops, planning commissioner meetings and city council meetings. Some of you are new to this city council. So why am I advocating for Brandy and Aaron? Well, for all the reasons that I have stayed and I have a stake in the Riverfront specific plan. I have lived in the Garden track for over 30 years and this specific plan will greatly impact the Garden track and the City of Redding in a good way. Or it could be in a bad way if the wrong decisions are made with the experience that Brandi Green and Erin hatch have. Please, Mr. Mayor, consider your appointment and appoint Brandy and Erin for their second term. Thank. Thank you. >> Hello, Mayor Munns and fellow council members. My name is Elaine Richard. I'm here speaking today in support of Erin Ryan for the Planning commission seat. I've had the pleasure of knowing Erin for the past decade. And I believe she would be a fantastic advocate on the Planning Commission and be very dedicated to that seat. Thank you. Appreciate that. Leslie Sawyer. >> Good evening. Thank you. I'm extremely disappointed in what I saw at the last meeting regarding this. And I hope that that type of confrontation and divisiveness does not continue. Like it or not, this is Mayor Munns choice. That being said, one of our greatest presidents of all time, Ronald Reagan, said trust but verify. So when Tanessa said it's not unusual for people to serve one term, I went and did my homework. And it is not unusual for people to serve one term. What is unusual is to keep people on. That has only happened less than a handful of times. Lastly, I've worked with Erin Ryan. I support her for this. Can she be hard headed? Can she be difficult? Yeah. But that's what makes her a great leader. That's what makes her good for this position because she won't back down when she believes in something. She also knows government better than probably most of the people in this room and she cares about our environment. If you follow the work that she's done under Douglas Malfa, you will see that she has put more time into environmental decisions and things that affect our community than most people in this room. So she is a for sure bet. And if you are choosing her, then I'm trusting your judgment on your other selection. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Benjamin Norwayne. >> Good evening. So I'm here to speak on the proposed appointments to the Planning Commission, specifically Blake Nance and Aaron Ryan. Now, this is not about personal attacks. It's about whether these appointments serve the public interest or reflect a pattern of political favoritism. Now, Mr. Nance has no prior experience in city planning and has never attended a planning commission meeting. His background as a supervisor in Beverly Hills Police Department includes overseeing a task force that made over 90 arrests, 80 of them black individuals, with only 10 prosecuted. His memos referenced rap lyrics and gangsters in a way that many saw as racially charged. Now this raises concerns about judgment, not just about qualifications. Now, RA Erin Ryan is a well known political activist and radio host. Her program has aired conspiracy driven content on Covid, cannabis and transgender rights. She has every right to her views. But it's fair to ask if someone with that level of public partisanship can approach land use decisions with neutrality and respect for all perspectives. Now, what's at stake here isn't just two seats. It's whether this commission remains a place for thoughtful civic service or becomes another battleground for ideology. This council has an opportunity to show that appointments are made on merit, not political alignment. Now, I urge you to reconsider these nominations and seek individuals who reflect the full breadth of our community and serious responsibilities of that role. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Mr. Mayor, if I could. Yes, please. This might be an opportune moment to ask if there's any public comment at the remote location, and my apologies, I forgot to raise that with the prior items. You might ask if there was any public comment that should have been raised for those as well. There wasn't. Ms. Reznor sent me a note. There was a guy and she was going to ask him and he left. So. Aaron, is there anybody there now? >> No. >> Okay, thank you. All right, we'll entertain some conversations. I don't. How do I look? Where? I don't see anybody. No, I mean, Anybody have anything to say? Paul? Aaron, or should we just vote? Let's ask Aaron. Does she have anything to say? Yeah. Ms. Resner, you have anything? >> Well, I was going to attempt to not lead the way from afar, but I do have a couple of comments. Can you hear me okay? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Tonight I will be supporting the appointments to the Planning Commission. But I also want to take a moment to speak to the broader role we uphold as council members. We weren't elected to serve special interest or uphold the status quo when it's convenient. We were elected to be free thinkers, people willing to critically assess what's best for our entire community, not just for select few. That responsibility applies equally to regulation and oversight as it does to freedoms and opportunities. Rules and traditions cannot only matter when they benefit us and be disregarded when they don't align with our narrative. That's not leadership. It's selective accountability. I received an email this week suggesting that advocating for a wide array of voices on a commission was a, quote, DEI move. Let me be clear. Seeking diversity of perspective is not about checking a box. It's not about appointing someone simply because they're a woman or because of the color of their skin. It's about recognizing that different life experiences, professions and viewpoints contribute to more balanced and thoughtful decision making. The Planning Commission plays a vital role in shaping how our city grows. Reviewing land use for proposals, zoning changes, development projects, and more. Their recommendations have a real impact on how our neighborhoods feel and how they function. That's why it's so important to have people at the table who bring different lenses. Business owners, residents, parents, renters, property owners. Because thoughtful growth doesn't happen in an echo chamber. The reality is we have. We have limited options for these appointments, in my opinion, because of the lack of applications. So while I will be voting in support tonight, I also want to issue a call to action. I'm aware that I am not present and this is just my voice in a room, but if you care about the direction of our city, if you've ever thought about serving, now is the time. Please consider applying for a board or commission. Our town truly works well best when a variety of voices are at the table. Above all, I will continue to stand firm in my resolve to represent the best interests of the residents of this city. I will not be swayed by peer pressure, intimidation tactics or raised voices. My commitment is and always will be to thoughtful principal leadership that puts people before politics. >> Yeah. Just to recap, a couple weeks ago, you know, it was contentious. We had debate and my intent was just to pause and just give time to reflect. And I gave a proposal to bring back one commissioner and then we would support one of yours. The came back two weeks ago and I felt like you tried to meet us in the middle a little bit. You obviously took some time. You came back with a different nomination. Am uncomfortable seeing two spots leave open for the next four years. That would never be my one goal. >> As far as having two commissioners just carry over for the next four years, that sets a tough precedence for the future as far as what would happen in the future when one of us potentially is the mayor again and we bring forward nominations. And so that's really important to me to know that it is the prerogative of the mayor to bring forward these nominations here. I guess the only question I can think of as I've taken time to reflect over the past couple weeks, is putting us one in your shoes in the future as a mayor. If we bring forward a couple names to nominate in the future, would we have your full support as well? Thinking specifically, what if we even brought back Brandy or Hatch or, you know, somebody from just anybody else out there, would we have your full support because it's the Merritt's prerogative. How would you answer that? >> So, well, we'll see what happens then. But I would say probably. >> Yes. >> I mean, absolutely. >> That's your choice if you're the mayor. >> Okay. That's all I need to hear. >> So should we take a vote real quick? >> No, I have. >> Oh, yeah, please do. >> We have Mr. Nance in attendance here. What? You are one of the nomination. Is Mr. Nance, right? >> Blake Nance? Yeah. >> Is he here? >> No, he's on vacation with his family. >> Well, I do have some concerns about this because I have not met Mr. Nance and I take your word, he's a fine gentleman and know him. However, during these two, either of these meetings, he has not been in this room. So I have a little bit of concern about that, so. Well, that is not the case. The second question was as Mr. Littao, you were saying that mayor could leave one person on the commission from the prior appointments and could nominate one person, but I don't see anyone being left from the prior commission. So right now, both the candidates are new. >> Yes. >> Right. So that's not what you had suggested last time, is not what's happened. >> What he said was, I met you halfway in the middle and took down one and brought another one. That's different. >> Right. But it was not about Mr. Johnson at all. It was about meaning in the middle and place in, you know, keeping at least one of the past two commissioners on and bringing one new. >> Those weren't my nominations. >> I understand that and I absolutely respect your prerogative for that. Okay. That was my questions. I do have a comment now, and I kind of echo a little bit Aaron Rezna here. Rather than selecting someone or just working within a small circle, we need to widen our Circle and work for the entire city and all its citizens. When you guys nominated me for the vice mayor after the election, I respectfully declined it and promoted other people because I'd seen the damage being done by the people neglecting other people or fighting over appointments or titles because I was hoping to set up a new culture. So it's kind of sad for me to see that kind of again happening here. Other thing I see is people, rather than fighting with each other, as a member of my club or my party or my sport team, I would encourage people to fight whatever common bread and butter issue for every citizen and fight the arrogance of power. The problem people have is that when we get power, we don't hear others out. That's what I would ask everyone to fight. The arrogance of power. What I would recommend is. Anyway, we can take a vote, but I would recommend is that we take two separate votes on both the nominations. >> We're going to take one together. Are you ready for a roll call? >> No, I will. I will pass a motion. I will suggest a motion then. >> Okay, I decline your motion. I can just do whatever I want. >> No, I would suggest. >> We need a second. >> A motion. A second. >> I have a motion that we split the two nominations separately and take one at a time. >> I'll make a motion to approve as written by staff. >> I'll second that motion. Char, do we need a roll call vote? All right, let's go. >> So I don't have a second, right? That's what you're saying. Nobody's seconding my motion, correct? >> No second on yours. And so we'll take a vote on. The motion was made by Tennessa, seconded by Mayor Munns, and to approve the staff recommendation. And so we'll go by council member. >> [CALLING ROLL] >> That passes for one abstain. >> Well, four yeas and one abstain. Okay, thank you very much. All right, we'll move on to item number nine. Fire department consider uncodified ordinance adopting the state of California fire hazard severity zone. Chief Van Landingham, how are you today? >> Good. >> Welcome. >> Thank you. Good evening. Mayor and members of Council. We should have a map up here for you here shortly. What's before you tonight is a recommendation to approve an uncodified ordinance adopting the State of California's fire hazard severity zone map pursuant to government code 51179, local responsibility. That's us, the City of Redding. Our fire hazard severity maps identifying very high severity zones have been being produced by the state since the mid-1990s as a result of the devastating Oakland hills fires in 1991. New legislation in 2021 now requires the local adoption of all three fire hazard severity zone classes which are moderate, high and very high. Local jurisdictions are required now to make their maps available to the public for comment within 30 days of receiving the maps, adopt an ordinance within 120 days and submit that ordinance back to the state within 30 days of that adoption. So far we're on track to meet these requirements of us. Most comments that we have received back from the public have to do with not having a clear understanding of why and how these maps came about and of course how's it going to impact my homeowners insurance. I can tell you that we did post the maps on our websites within 30 days of receiving the maps. Every comment that has come through the portal, we have responded back and in those comments back to the public members that made comments were comments from us along these lines. These hazard maps are different than risk in the fact that risk maps take into consideration population density, building, clustering, fuel reduction, defensible, space or lack thereof, building, construction materials and features. Whereas hazard maps look at physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30 to 50 year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, recent wildfires or fuel reduction efforts. Further, the key elements of these fire hazard severity modeling are fire history, flame length, terrain, local weather and potential fuel. Specifically, in the urban setting, the model considers factors that might lead to buildings being threatened, including urban vegetation cover, blowing embers and proximity to the wildland. In terms of insurance, these maps will not specifically impact homeowners ability to obtain affordable insurance. Insurance companies use their own maps and they are risk maps rather than hazard maps to make their determinations rather than the hazard map. So they're a little bit different. So the City of Reddings fire hazard severity map changed from the last version in that it actually removed approximately 4800 homes from the very high threat zone area. However, it did add some 1200 properties to the very High zone that were not previously listed. The properties that are new to the very high threat zone are located mostly along the western from the northern area of the city to the west down to the south, specifically along the Lake Boulevard corridor between Quartz Hill and Santa Rosa Way, the Manzanita area between Foothill and Shasta street, the Placer Road corridor around Mary's Lake. And outside, moving out to the of the city. Excuse me. Along Cedars Road, along Clear Creek Road, east side Road north of Metz and the Mountain Lakes to George Drive area. So the recommendation before you tonight is to adopt the uncodified ordinance for first reading by title only, and waive the full reading. Adopting the state of California fire hazard severity map zones pursuant to government code 51179. And that completes my report for you here for any questions you may have. >> Thank you, chief. Anybody have any comments? >> Mr. Mayor, would you like me to read the title at this time? >> Yes, please. >> An uncodified ordinance of the city of Redding, California, to designate fired hazard severity zones. >> Motion to approve. >> No, no public comment. >> Motion to approve. >> And for the benefit. I'm sorry, of the recording, if we could just confirm whether there's any public comment at the remote location. >> Yeah, there is no public comment here. And Aaron, any public comment over there? >> Nope. Still crickets in here. >> Thank you. All right, we have a first from second. We have a first and a second. All in favor? >> We'll do take a vote. >> [CALLING ROLL] >> Thank you so much. 5-0. Thank you. Chief Anahan. Wherever you went, are you back? Right over there. All right, so we'll move it on to item 11. Council Mobile Travel reports. I don't think we have. >> Aaron has a travel report. She was in D.C. right. I go in another week. >> All right. >> At the end of April. >> All right, thank you. And then item 12, suggestions from council members related to potential topics for future city council meetings. Yes. >> Well, since. Since we are. We have canceled our April budget meeting. And I know that it's. The Next one is May 6, along with the other marathon of things that we're going to do. Is that right? >> The next general fund budget update will be on May 6th. >> Same as at the council meeting. >> So I know that the council has said that they want to make the cuts as they've been suggested, but I'm curious if you would be willing to have other options presented to us at the May 6, other possible cuts that could possibly not take away 12 officers or even just three. Or there could be other things that you would want to see what those actual options are. >> There. We're already 12 now and more. >> Right, I know, but if we. The budget doesn't get voted on until June 30th. So if we wanted to say, actually we only want to, you know, a trip to nine, we want to fill in back, fill those others because it is an 18 month process. So we're really going to be very behind. And so I'm just curious if you would be interested in seeing other cuts that could possibly take the place. >> I support that. I think we should try to save money and wherever we can, I support that. You bring that. >> Did you have something in mind to come back and do a presentation or is this a request of the city manager? >> I would. No, we would be requesting it of him. But I mean, I, I don't. I don't know all of the. Those options. It's just that we haven't been presented other options other than cutting police, for example. >> What haven't we been offered? >> I think we got to be careful, you know, I think I understand the. The request. And so there's a Few ways that we could approach that. One would be sort of a more generic department by department that's affected by the general fund. What they do, what their staff is, what cuts to those departments would. Would mean. The other way would be just a direct one for one in terms of how do we save $500,000 through other cuts. My recommendation, if the council is interested, is that we would do the former and that way you would get to see every general fund department in their full glory, if they will. What they do, what the percent of general fund is, what their cost allocation methods are and what the ramifications of reduction would be. >> What I'm asking for is so police as we know, as I said Last time was 1 to 1. Parks is also 1 to 1. Other inter government funds and government is point is like 30, 35 I think is what you said on average or 30. >> Yeah, good numbers. 35% of, of. Of a. Like a finance department's employee would come from the general fund, for instance. But. >> Right. >> You know, so what I would suggest is we've done this in the past for previous councils is just each department is presented in terms of what their cost to the general fund is and what they do and what their staff is. That way you would have the full picture because all of that would be subject to your discretion. >> I think it would be pretty arbitrary. We want this person to go. I think they would know better if they were going to cut. And also I think we have open positions. So I also would want to know what positions could from those other areas where we actually have an. If we have an open position that then we're not firing anybody, we're just not filling that position and we're getting those budget savings as well. >> I think without getting into further discussion, I would suggest that they bring any cost saving measures we can, we can. >> So both one and two. >> I want to go. >> Well, number one includes the other one. >> No, because that would be like general information. It wouldn't be like. Like he came to us and said, I want you to cut three cops, it's going to save you 480,000. If you said, hey, the police department, you have to cut 500,000, you're not going to know who to cut from the police department. That's very general. And so if he's like, this is what we. Where we know as the departments have said you could cut this or this could not be filled. I think that'd be more specific. Other than us Figuring it out with general information. >> Well, I'm voting for option one. >> Yeah. My difficulty is that really what I present to you is what I see as the option. All reductions from other departments are going to cost or going to cause service reductions in certain things, whether they're legislative, regulatory, or just service levels. And that really becomes a policy call because we're performing those duties as directed by the council through your. Your policies and actions of the past. And so what I'm suggesting is that moving forward, if you want to reduce those departments, you would have to make the determination of what we wouldn't be doing anymore. So you mentioned parks, for instance. We'd have to determine that we are not going to maintain parks to the same level that we're used to. And so that's really a call for you to make at this point, because we are already woefully low on our parks maintenance. And so if we want to do a further reduction, I think that recalls that requires a policy call to do so. >> And so losing service for our police department, does that require something else as well that also requires us to say we want to reduce the level of service for our police department by 12. By losing. >> Right. So it's the same thing. >> Yeah, you've already done that in terms of the reductions that have been in process. And so we've already done that. And so it'd be similar. >> Well, item one is you. Let's say we, for example, we cut two people from clerk. Then we know exactly what they do and what the ramifications are. So item one is where I. >> And I think I've. I've got that sense. And city attorneys wiggling his finger around the speak button. So I think we're probably drifting too afar. >> All right. >> I would just suggest keeping this to essentially what you. What you want to come back. And it. Frankly, it sounds like the items are already. Like the agenda is well enough. It's just a question of asking for certain information from the city manager as part of his presentation. >> And what was your option two again? >> I thought option one was specifics, and I thought option two was general. >> Option one was to bring back all the departments, what they do, what their staffing is, what the component of the general fund is in terms of their funding, and what the ramifications of reduction of staff equals. Option two was. You were suggesting that I would just determine what that would be. That would be difficult for me because we are at a point where you would need to give Policy direction. >> So if, if the policy. Well, on. At our last budget meeting you brought us specifics of. We think you need to. For this department. You have to cut these officers, you should cut this budget. You gave us specifics. So that's correct. >> And which, and I'm at that point where actually on May 6th, my intent is that you will have a balanced budget. Absolutely balanced with what you've already directed. >> So we're going to lose 12 cops. >> So I would rather you're going to lose 12 positions. Correct. And so my intent is that, you know, my recommendation is what I would bring to you on May 6th. And in addition to that, if you want to make other reductions, that's going to require policy calls by this body. Yeah, yeah. And so I can present to you all of the information relative to what these departments do, what their cost is and what the ramification reduction. >> Would you make recommendations similarly to how you had before? >> I've already made that recommendation. I'm planning to bring it May 6 as to the balanced budget. >> So my question is, could you bring recommendations of where else we could be cutting when you bring that other information or. Because then we wouldn't be able to make a decision. We'd have to go back and go look through this. >> As I said, the reason that's difficult is that it would require you to change policy direction for me to make a recommendation. So I need the policy direction change before I could make a recommendation in the cuts. >> So the, the last, just for clarity, because I'm not, I'm not disagreeing, I'm just trying to make sure that I understand. So the last meeting on March 13, you said we recommend that you lose these last three officers is a $480,000 savings to the budget. And then we had to vote if we agreed with that that's a policy decision or that is a recommendation. So then why can't you make a recommendation for the other department? >> We've hit the point to where I am uncomfortable doing anything more without having specific policy direction. You've given me all the policy direction that I need to make a balanced budget. If you want to change the direction the council's already provided, you have to make additional policy discussions as to what. >> That would be and what's the best way to do that. So this request is not the best way to do that. >> Sure. I can bring back, like I said, what if you want to reduce other departments, you have to make the determination on what you want to not do. >> At the May 6th and then you would have to then at the end. >> Go back to that. >> Right, right. >> Okay, that's correct. >> Okay. Just, just, just for clarity to understand. >> We're not. The May 6th is not the final budget. >> Right, Gene? >> It's the final consensus, if you will. And if there's changes, then we'll come back with other information. >> So that's an appropriate place to. If we're going to change it from cops to something else. That would be the place to do that. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Is there a way for us to be prepared for that? >> Yeah, I'll try to get the information to you sooner than later. Like I said, we've prepared this before. It's just a matter of updating it. Going to apologize to Finance in advance because there's a bit of work to that, but we've already got the template, so we can just update that and provide it in advance with the packet. >> Thanks, Greg. Okay, we have it. >> Agreed. Okay, thanks. >> All right, here we are. Adjourned.