City Council - Regular Meeting

of Calistoga. It is 6 p.m. on July 14th. May we have a roll call, please, City Clerk?

Council Member Eisenberg?

Present.

Council Member Cooper?

Present.

Council Member Lopez Ortega? Present. Vice Mayor Gift? Present. Mayor Williams?

Present. You're welcome to join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

The next item on the agenda is oral communication on consent items or non-agenda items.

And at this time, the council welcomes comments from the public regarding matters on the consent calendar or of municipal concern not on the agenda. The speaking time allowed is three minutes. Please note the city clerk's time clock. According to the Brown Act, the council is not permitted to discuss issues or answer questions at this time. In other words, the public may speak, but the council cannot respond. Council members, however, are free to discuss issues with the public apart from these council meetings. City Clerk, are there any speaker cards?

Yes, the first one is Charlotte Williams.

Great. Charlotte?

Was that said with enthusiasm? Charlotte Williams, 59 View Road. I'd like to address the topic of missing middle housing and middle income jobs or businesses. Speaking to the person, salesperson for the Silverado Terraces some weeks ago, it's been several weeks now, she said to me that of the first 12 units that were built, most of them were sold as second homes. those are 600 to $800,000, I guess that's middle income housing, second homes. I estimate that it doesn't matter how much missing middle housing we build, if there aren't restrictions on it, Anybody can buy it and turn it into a second home. There's no guarantee. It's going to be built for working families or middle class middle income people. So I'd like to just stop this whole discussion of missing middle housing unless we have middle income jobs in this town, and that the Chamber of Commerce, the city the council are actively promoting middle income jobs or businesses that will produce middle income. Otherwise, right, it's housing that can be sold to anybody for almost any purpose. I think that's about it for now. I did have some other thoughts, but they'll come back later.

Bye.

Okay, thank you. Are there other speaker cards?

Yes, the next speaker card is Cassidy Harris.

Welcome, Ms. Harris.

Thank you. Thank you for your time, Mayor, members of council. Cassidy Harris, 26 View Road. Over the past several weeks, many of us have been trying to better understand how California's recent housing laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, SB 330, The state density bonus law and AB 130 affect the city's review of residential development projects. I recognize that the state has made clear policy decisions to increase housing production. And I understand that local discretion has changed significantly, but my purpose tonight is not to debate those laws or ask the city to exercise powers it no longer has. Instead, I'm asking for some clarity. Like many residents, I'm trying to participate constructively, but I don't have a clear understanding of which issues remain open to local review, which have already been determined by state law, and which cannot be evaluated until a formal application is submitted. So I respectfully ask the council to direct staff to prepare a brief public guide or matrix identifying the areas that remain subject to local review. For example, traffic and circulation, including the respective roles of the city and Caltrans where applicable, public safety, drainage and stormwater, water and wastewater infrastructure grading, applicable tree protections, objective design standards, objective, and other health and safety considerations. I think providing that framework for the public would help all of us focus our comments on issues the city can meaningfully evaluate instead of speculating about matters already governed by state law. I believe that transparency would benefit all of us, the council, city staff, applicants, and the public by making the review process more informed, more efficient, and more productive for future housing applications. Thank you so much for your time and consideration.

Great. Thank you for your comments. The next speaker card, please.

No more speaker cards. No more speaker cards. I do have somebody online when you're ready.

All right, fine. Is there anybody in the chambers here tonight who would like to address the council? Or let's go online then.

All right. Sage, if you can hear me, you have three minutes.

Hello. Can everyone hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

We can hear you, sir. Good evening, Mayor Canning, Vice Mayor, and members of the Council. My name is Sahaj Dakar, and I'm a 14-year-old rising ninth grader living in Fairfield, Solano County. I'm a member of the Fairfield Youth Commission and the founder of the National Association of Youth Commissions. This nonprofit organization works to establish youth commissions in cities where they are not already present, push for legislation beneficial to the youth, increase youth access to government, and provide a space for youth commissions around the country to collaborate. I'm speaking to you this evening on a proposal that I've seen work firsthand and is one of the best things that a city could do for its young people. I'm asking you today to create a youth commission in Calistoga. For some context, a youth commission is a group of young people, typically aged 14 to 25, who are to advise the city council and mayor on topics relating to the youth. This can range from small issues that affect a few people to citywide youth issues. Youth commissions are created with the purpose of bridging the gap between the youth of a city and the city's government. Right now, Calistoga does not have a youth commission, but what Calistoga needs is a standalone body that can tackle youth issues independently. A youth commission would be different from just another program in that this isn't the city giving to the youth, it's the youth giving to a city. All the city needs to do is give them the chance. Cities with youth commissions often see real change in new laws. For example, the Fairfield Youth Commission is actively working with the city to implement a tobacco retail license, which ties into the issue of smoking in our schools. And these are the types of opportunities Calistoga youth need, and this wouldn't even be difficult to implement. All that is needed is a resolution that would establish the commission. And there is minimal cost to the city, given that there would be no new individuals to hire as the only adults involved in the commission would be an adult advisor. And there would be very little administrative costs since the only real cost would be holding a monthly or bi-monthly meeting. Furthermore, through the National Association of Youth Commissions, I would be happy to offer the city free research on how things like exact costs, appointments, and scope of work would play out. I'm requesting the city council to direct staff to report back on potential routes the city could take in starting a commission. I would be happy to serve as a resource for the city during the process. The website for the National Association of Youth Commissions is youthcommissions.org. If any member of the council is interested, please contact me through this website and I would be happy to help.

Are there others online, city clerk?

No more online.

No more online. Would anybody else here in the chambers tonight like to address the council? Okay, let's close public comment, then we'll proceed to the next item on the agenda, which is our city manager's report. City Manager Celaya, please.

Thank you, Mayor and council members. I have a few items to talk about. One, I'd like, I wanted to share that this past Saturday, the Calistoga Police Department sponsored a active shooter training at the Calistoga High School. Some of you may have volunteered for it or seen it when it was occurring on Saturday. The training scenario required over 40 role players, community players, and involved over 50 members of EMS, fire, and law enforcement throughout Napa County to create a realistic training event. Additionally, members of the Calistoga and Santa Elena school districts were present. The successful event was months in the planning and required coordination from all groups involved. And this is just one example of how public safety comes together to prepare itself for critical incidents and so I want to thank the community for coming together and supporting this and being volunteers to make this training event successful so thank you I have a couple of events coming Friday July 17th Saturday July 18th and Sunday July 19th is the Flynn Creek Circus which is back in town at the Calistoga Fairgrounds they will be doing two shows each day you can go to you get tickets for the cricket and Wren Flint Creek Circus online at flintcreekcircus.com. We'll have that on our website for those people that are interested. The shows are 5.30 p.m. and 8.30 p.m. both on Friday and Saturday. And then on Sunday, there's a 1 p.m. show and a 4 p.m. show. So please come out. Have a little fun. Come to the circus. I want to warn, not warn, but just share that there is the family version of the circus, and then there's an adult version of the circus. So the 830 is the adult version of the circus, both on Friday and Saturday. But it's a lot of fun, so please come out and join us. And then I want to mention that every year, on the first Tuesday of August of every year, the police department sponsors National Night Out. It's a time when the police department comes out. It has a number of activities. And we pull other agencies together, both service agencies and law enforcement agencies. The fire department participates. And we have a good old time to get to know your local law enforcement and your other public safety employees. And that will be it for events. I do want to share some HR news. The police department promoted Corporal Mike Maselli to our newest sergeant. He started his career in Calistoga in 2020. He has worked at the UC Berkeley Police Department for 12 years before coming to the Calistoga Police Department. Mike is a training officer. He was a corporal in 2021, and he was instrumental in creating our bicycle patrol program he is currently a field training officer and he's currently he couldn't be here this evening because he's up at training at the field training officer update otherwise he would have been here this evening he currently works midnight shift from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. so if you see him around give him a give him a wave and I also want to share, please join me in congratulating Justin Davis, Dario Martinez, and William Lenhart on their promotions to full-time firefighter with the city's fire department. Each of these individuals started their careers as part-time firefighters and demonstrated professionalism, dedication, and a commitment to service to make them outstanding additions to our fire department team. We're excited to see them start the next step in their careers. A little bit about them. Dario Martinez has been with the city as a part-time firefighter for the past several months. He serves as an EMT with AMR before beginning his fire service career. He served in the United States Army where he developed discipline, teamwork, and commitment to service and continues to define his work today. He holds a bachelor degree in clinical nutrition from UC Davis and is fluent in Spanish, bringing valuable skills and experience to both the fire department and the community. We look forward to his continued growth as a firefighter. William Lenhart, he joined us as a part-time firefighter just a little over a year ago. He brings an impressive background that includes service with CAL FIRE, volunteer firefighting, and the United States Marine Corps as a first lieutenant logistics officer. Combined with his education in fire technology, an MBA, and numerous firefighting certifications, William's experience and leadership make him an outstanding addition to our team. And then last but not least, we have Justin Davis. Justin has been serving the city as a part-time firefighter for the past several months. He brings a strong background in emergency services, including experience as an EMT, an assistant drill instructor with the South Bay Regional Fire Academy, and a seasonal firefighter with the Marin County Fire Department. His passion for training, mentoring, and serving others make him a great addition to our team. Justin Davis was able to come this evening. The other two are on their time off and aren't able to make it tonight, but I'd like to offer Justin an opportunity to come and say a few words if you'd like.

Yes, Mr. Davis, welcome.

Thank you.

Good evening, everybody. My name is Justin Davis. I'm very happy to be here. I've been given a wonderful opportunity that I will not take for granted. I just wanted to say that I said it during my interview, and I'll probably say it till the day I retire, that the city of Calistoga has given me this chance. And every day I come in, I'll prove that their faith was not misplaced, and I'll give you everything I have. But thank you all for being here, and thanks for letting me say a few words.

Great.

Mayor, I'd like to wrap up with a couple comments from Public Works. We'll be between cedar and washington on lincoln avenue that's going to cause some significant delays so i ask the community to please bear with us as we get through this important project i also want to share that on 2400 grant subdivision project they'll be installing a 48 inch drain installation on grant street uh This is going to begin in the next two weeks and it's anticipated to be completed in August. Now, I mention this because Grand Street's going to be significantly impacted. We expect that there'll be a lane of traffic and there could be some detours in the area. Just a heads up for that. Otherwise, that's it for my city manager's report. Thank you.

Thank you, city manager.

Council members, questions or follow-up here?

And Council Member Lopez-Ortega, you're welcome to chime in.

No, I have no questions or comments. Thank you.

Very good. Council members? Okay. And then for me, city manager, thank you for that report. Your agenda may show a presentation from the Recreation Department, but that's being postponed, and so we will proceed to the consent calendar. There are four items on the consent calendar, and I will entertain a motion to adopt those items unless any council member wishes to pull one.

I move to adopt the consent calendar.

Second. We have a motion and a second to adopt it. We are obliged to take a roll call, I understand. Yes. Yes.

Council Member Eisenberg. Aye. Council Member Cooper. Aye. Council Member Lopez Ortega. Aye. Vice Mayor Gift? Aye. And Mayor Williams?

Aye. Thank you, Council. And thank you, staff, for organizing that. We'll go to item 8.1. And the subject here is a proposal from Harts and Hands Preschool to utilize a fairgrounds residence. And we have an extensive staff report on this. And Deputy City Manager Stepp is here, I believe. We're moving right along. Yes, good evening. Sorry about that. No problem. Take a moment if you like. And I just introduced the subject of the item 8.1, the proposal from Hearts and Hands Preschool to utilize the residents, a residence on the fairgrounds. Would you like to introduce this to us?

Yeah, so I prepared a little series of slides that I'll go through. So again, this is a proposal from Hearts and Hands Preschool to utilize the small house at the RV park. If you're not familiar with the house, that's it right there on the screen. It is the one on North Oak. SO WHAT STAFF IS SEEKING TONIGHT IS DIRECTION REGARDING WHETHER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT OR TO CONDUCT ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS OR DISCONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSAL. IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT HEARTS AND HANDS PRESCHOOL IS THEY DO PROVIDE A VALUABLE COMMUNITY BENEFIT AND THIS WOULD BE A POTENTIAL LOCATION TO CONTINUE SERVING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES IN THE CALISTOGO COMMUNITY. And then also, since it is a city-owned property, the staff conducted a preliminary review of all of the regulatory, operational, financial, and long-term planning considerations associated with the proposal. So essentially, the proposal is looking at taking that existing house right here and transitioning it to a space that they would be able to use for their program. And right now, their program is licensed for up to 30 children. And presently, they're serving about 15 to 17 children between the ages of two to four. And then I'd also like to add here that we did look at the historical uses of the fairgrounds, as that was a stipulation in the purchase and sale agreement with the county. And if you look at the listed historical uses, school classroom instruction is one that's listed. And we worked with our city attorneys to determine that this would be an acceptable use according to the historical uses. This requested use would place an operating preschool on city-owned fairgrounds property under a formal license. And this is, you know, it's a reuse of a city-owned property, not building a new structure. In our review, staff determined that this would likely be classified as an I-4 institutional daycare facility, and that means they serve more than six clients of any age for less than 24 hours. There was an option that they could potentially be classified as Group E. In order to do that, though, EVERY CLASSROOM WITHIN THE STRUCTURE WOULD NEED TO HAVE AN EXIT TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. SO THAT WOULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT EITHER ONE OF THESE PATHS, I-4 OR E, WOULD REQUIRE OR IT WOULD TRIGGER A LOT OF CODE CHANGES. SO IT WOULD ACTIVATE BUILDING FIRE ACCESSIBILITY AND LIFE SAFETY STANDARDS. And then just to kind of get into some of the things that would be required if this building is transitioned for this space. So the first thing that's really important is the 35 square feet of usable indoor activity space per occupant based on their license capacity. So currently they have a license to serve 30 children and then they have five staff members. So that's a total of 35 individuals. And the total usable space cannot include hallways, kitchens, restrooms, storage, or other support spaces. It can't include any of that in the calculation. So basically, if you take that area out of the RV house, the house itself is about 580 square feet. And then there's an additional 250 square foot garage. So that brings the total to about 830. Based on their license of those 35 individuals, they would need about 1,225 square feet under that Class I. And then additionally, there would need to be 75 square feet of dedicated outdoor space per licensed child. So that's about 2,225, I think, right around there, 2,200 square feet of outdoor space. And then in addition to that, the outdoor players must be securely fenced, accessible, and compliant with applicable codes and standards. And then additionally, there would need to be a commercial end NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system and monitored fire alarm. Then ADA improvements including accessible parking, path of travel, entrances, restrooms, and kitchen. Then of course, to make the space usable, there would need to be some interior reconfiguration including probably adding onto the house to meet that square footage requirement. And then additionally, we recognize that there would need to be some water service work done. So that's another issue that has come to light. And that would be installation of a new dedicated water lateral, water meter and backflow prevention assembly to provide meter domestic water service, support the required fire protection system, and then establish water and sewer utility service for the facility. So that's kind of the requirements based on the change in the usage. And then we can kind of get into some cost estimates that staff put together. And I just want to be really clear that these are really just estimates from city staff. We didn't engage with contractors. It's our understanding that Hearts and Hands would be taking on the construction. So that would be up to them to engage contractors and get actual quotes to go by. But city staff identified that it would probably be about 300 to 400,000 in building conversion. And then an additional 35,000 to support the water infrastructure that I spoke about previously. And then the construction timeline is approximately six months following the permit approval. And then we just wanna get into a little bit about the uses on the fairgrounds and how this use could potentially impact those. I think most people know there's a functioning RV park at the fairgrounds and the house, it's located right adjacent to that. And the fairgrounds and the RV park is supporting year-round activity. This includes overnight guests, vendors, service providers, and then special events like races and rodeos, festivals, and carnivals. So there's a lot going on there that this could potentially impact. And then also, if this proposal were to move forward, you know, city staff would have to kind of work with the preschool to determine how would drop off and pick up activities occur within the same operational area used for fairgrounds operations. And then also, there is discussion in potentially expanding the RV park and looking at ways to generate more revenue and just where this house sits and the adjacent areas, those have been kind of identified for potential future RV and lodging related development. then kind of the last thing i wanted to touch on um so the fairgrounds over the last 10 years has been utilized by cal fire for two major fires and then also utilized as an evacuation center one time that i'm aware of and during the time of the base camps this entire property was utilized by cal fire so we would need to be mindful of that taking into consideration the preschool's operations. So just kind of an important note to make and topic to consider is just the usage of that space in an emergency situation. Oops. And then just to kind of wrap up, we have heard from preschool staff that there would not be any city costs involved for the actual building conversion or site improvements needed to support the preschool occupancy. That's a cost that they would take on. There would be some administrative time, oversight, and cost to negotiate a lease and work through all of those things with city staff and then also city attorney time involved. So again, just to kind of recap, there's a couple of choices or things to consider in this item, and that is direct staff to negotiate terms of a lease, request additional analysis that we would come back with, or decline to pursue the concept. and that about wraps it up.

Okay, thank you, Deputy City Manager Stepp. We'll go to public comment in just a moment, but first, are there any questions from council members clarifying or asking for more information about the presentation here from our Deputy City Manager? Yes, Vice Mayor.

Yes, thank you. Thank you, Deputy City Manager, for this presentation. I have one clarifying question in that We have owned the property for 2 years thus far and and we don't have any plans for this building correct.

There are no current plans I will make a note that Council did give direction, I believe it was in May of 2025 to potentially rent that space to either a city employee or a member of the public so that was previous direction.

previous direction. Okay. But nothing from there has been, has taken place besides like some small, some small renovations. Thank you. Yeah.

Yes. Um, I'm just wondering that three to $400,000 conversion costs. Did that include, um, a building addition to get the additional square footage?

So no, that was not part of that number. So that could potentially, that's a very good point, Councilman Isenberger, that could potentially increase that cost to make that space large enough to accommodate the 30 children. I don't know if there's any flexibility from the preschool to be able to lower their numbers at all so that they, to make the building usable. I haven't explored that with them. That is maybe another option.

Yes, Councilman Cooper.

Yeah, a quick question. Assuming the timeframe for construction is four to six months, do we have an estimate on the permitting time it would be if we did decide to approve this?

I did not receive that estimate. I'm sure that Director Desmond could probably provide that information.

Yeah, I'm just trying to understand the actual timeline before they'd be able to use the facility. Yeah.

Welcome, Planning Director Desmond. Good evening, council members. The permitting process for the project would require an entitlement of a use permit, and then also once the entitlement was approved, then there would be the standard building permit processing period. So that could take anywhere from six to nine months.

Okay. Before they could break ground on any improvements in the property? That's correct. Thank you.

Council member Lopez Ortega.

Yes. I had a question. So when we allow continue to allow the art center and the food bank to be still in the I don't exactly remember what were the requirements for them to keep using the facilities. So that's, I want to know if we are treating hearts and hands the same way that we did with the art center and the food bank.

So it's my understanding with the Art Center and the Food Bank, they didn't need to make any modifications to the buildings to continue their uses. So I don't know if we can compare those two in that sense. I think what we would be comparing potentially is if we're directed to prepare a lease, kind of what the terms would be in comparison to those other uses on the fairgrounds.

OK. Thank you. Of course.

I have a couple of questions. So the classification for the preschool is something called Group I-4. And how is that, or can you tell us, or maybe public comment can help us understand what's the difference between Group I-4 and another classification and how that matters?

Um, so I'll probably have our fire chief come up cause he assisted heavily in this, but I'll also take a stab at it. So the group I four designation was based on the number of kids and their ages. Um, so what we determined was, let's see here. They serve more than six clients of any age for less than 24 hours. And then it also stipulates that the caretaker cannot be somebody that's related to them. So it's not an at-home daycare. It's an institutional daycare. So that's how we kind of generated that classification.

And how would that make a difference as far as the operation of the preschool at this facility?

Well, so what it really does is it dictates what the modifications would be necessary to that building to bring it up to meet that classification or meet the code that's affiliated with that classification.

Okay, great, and fire chief is here to follow up?

Good evening. Thank you. Actually, deputy city manager did very well with that. The big difference is the institutional classification comes about because it is a group of humans in a building that can't really take care of themselves. And they are going to need assistance evacuating if there's a fire. So that results in the institutional classification there, which brings about much stricter building codes. Right now, that house meets the residential building codes, which are the least strict building codes that are out there. You don't have to have a bunch of fire alarm systems, don't have to have sprinkler systems in the age of that building. New homes do. So there are things like that. So once you get into bringing in a commercial operation and you're taking care of especially human beings that can't self-evacuate, those building codes have to go up.

So the group I-4 classification imposes stricter requirements than a residential, standard residential unit would entail?

Very much so, yes.

Thank you. And on this topic, Vice Mayor, did you have a question on this topic?

I just had one more question because I understand that the presentation seems to be based on their license capacity of 30 children but that's that would be a question for hearts and hands of if there would be any capacity to operate within the current like building structure that is there and that is a big question for me as we move forward since the building has not been used for two years and we also don't have plans for use of the building.

So yeah, the way that number works is it is based on the license like you said. So I think that would be a further conversation with Hearts and Hands to see if their operation could be viable serving less children. I know that currently that 15 to 17 number, it includes the TK program that comes over from the school. So I think that would immediately kind of bolster their numbers. So that is one thing to keep in mind. But that would certainly be a conversation that we could have with hearts and hands. OK. Thank you.

Yeah.

Perhaps public comment will enlighten us on some of those questions too. I have further questions then. And can you tell me again what square footage you are working with at this time?

Yes, so if you take out the hallways, kitchens, or kitchens, sorry, bathroom, closets, that gives us about 580 square feet. And then, you know, there is that garage, and the garage is around 250 square feet, so that brings us to about 830 square feet. These are kind of rough numbers, so, you know...

So at 35 square feet per person, that's the minimum amount of space that must be available. So 830 divided by 35, so there's going to be, let's see, 20 or so people, 20, 23 people, something like that.

City Manager Celaya might have that figure for us. 23.71. 23.71. Thank you.

Okay. So as it currently is, that's assuming the garage is available. We'll make that assumption for now. 23 people. Yeah. Kids and adults.

Yes. It's based on the number of individuals, not just the children.

And then the ratio of kids and adults, there's a required minimum if there are

i don't have that figure um i think hearts and hands might be able to provide that to us i know that currently they have five staff members for the you know up to 30 kids that they could be serving but i don't i i don't recall having the figure of what the what their required ratio is according to their license

Okay great and let's see then I guess I will hope to hear from hearts and hands let's see the costs basically the capital costs just to get in the building are going to range I understand it's a broad approximate number in the 300 to 400,000 range and then subsequent to that there would be operating costs entailed rent and you know utilities and so on like that insurance presumably.

Yeah yeah.

Okay, great, perhaps public comment will address those kind of things too. Other questions, council members? Okay, let's open it to public comment on this topic. Are there speaker cards? No speaker cards. No speaker cards? Would anybody in the room here like to address the council on this topic? Yes, welcome.

Mary Ann Salinger. I'll answer questions. Our licensing is for 30 students or 30 kids, but we generally like to keep in the past, we've kept it to 27. It's just a much more manageable number. Ratios are, it depends on the ages, can be anywhere from eight to one or 10 to one. so and in the past we've always worked with ten to one we have three full-time employees on the floor at one time at any given time even though we have five staff members some are part-time anything else you're welcome to use three minutes if you like to address any other topics Well, just that the numbers don't surprise us. We knew that the house was small, and we do have some funders that are ready to cut their checks as soon as we get an agreement. So we feel very confident that we'd be able to handle the financial setup of it. So, thank you.

Okay, thank you. Would anybody else like to address the council on this topic? And is there anybody online?

Yes, I have one person.

Great.

Mr. Tallarico, if you can hear me, you've got three minutes.

I can hear you. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Yeah, we can hear you, Mr. Tallarico. Welcome. Thank you. Sorry, I can't be there. I'm completely opposed to this project for seven main points. I submitted an email last week that I think was uploaded to the city website today, along with another fellow citizen's email, which I agree with completely. Here are my seven main reasons. The estimated costs... at least 300 to 400,000. It's a private organization that has already acknowledged the lack of financial viability. That tells me this is a foolish risk for the city to take. Its own board acknowledges financial weakness by finally shutting it down. They tried for five years to keep it open. Note further, it cannot afford to pay market rate rents by its own statements. And finally, note that there are at least another $35,000 in direct city costs. We can expect these costs to be higher, and from what I heard some of the city staff say, they will be higher now. My second point is that the... The staff has stated this follows historical use. I find that hard to believe. I think rather than speaking to our own attorneys, we should perhaps speak to the Napa County attorney to see how they feel about this, because that could be an issue that could really put a crimp in this or any other plans. My third point, there's a vast amount of space required. I calculated it at 30 children, 1,000 square feet indoors, 2,250 outdoors. There have been recent fires where the fairgrounds and the RV park were indispensable to take up that much space from something that really serves the city to me is ridiculous. I think safety, my fourth point, safety would be seriously compromised for both the children, especially, but all other users. And I think the staff report actually brings this out. To me, that's common sense. Why would you want kids around a place where you have vehicles coming and going? Fifth point, there are many businesses already providing the proposed preschool services in the immediate area. Sixth point, the city has far more pressing matters than this one and should focus the city council on at least three main issues, the fairgrounds financial stability, the high water rates we pay, and the city's infrastructure. Seventh and last main point, There is nothing in the recent survey that the Fairgrounds Advisory Committee put out that even mentioned a preschool service on the fairgrounds. I thank you for your patience with me. If I went over three minutes, I'm done.

You're fine. Thank you, Mr. Tallarico. And we do have your letter. We have received that. Thank you. city clerk is there anybody else online no more hands raised okay and is there anybody else here in the community center who would like to address the council on this topic public comment is still open yes yes

Christy Fitzpatrick Webb, 1814 Lake Street. My children were the first kids to do the program of Hearts and Hands. It's a wonderful program. I strongly feel that there's probably a better place for them to be rather than the fairgrounds. As much as I love them, I think something will come that would better serve them and the community. Thanks.

Thank you. Public comments still open. Okay, let's close public comment and bring it back to us council members.

Would it be possible to hear from Director Wright, get a little insight from her into the question?

We have no input. Let's see. She's not here. She's back here tonight. The staff report, I think that there's a lot of information. I'm expecting it came from perhaps Director Wright participated in that. I don't know.

SHE'S IN THE BACK ROOM IF YOU WANT TO ASK HER A QUESTION.

WE COORDINATED WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THE FAIR GROUNDS DEPARTMENT. GREAT.

AND DIRECTOR WRIGHT IS HERE. WAS A PROPOSAL MENTIONED TO THE FAIR GROUNDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE? DO WE KNOW IF WE HAD INPUT FROM THEM?

WE DID NOT RECEIVE INPUT FROM THE FAIR GROUNDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. I THINK SINCE WE HAD RECEIVED DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL TO BRING BACK THE PROPOSAL, WE BROUGHT IT STRAIGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL.

Great. Councilman Eisenberg.

Yes. May I ask a few questions of Ms. Salinger? Still some things that I'm not certain about. So going back to the last comment is is this really the only choice. I mean it's pretty scary reading the staff report is of course we want to keep hearts and hands. It's a great program. It serves the community. It's wonderful. Is there any other possibility that one wouldn't cost hearts and hands so much money and the impact to the fairgrounds.

So we have reached out to every church in the community. And they are the ones that have the facilities are not interested. There aren't any homes that we've looked at that would be able to support our program. And You know, we have to be out by September 30th. So our only option right now, in all honesty, is trying to get this facility and then looking for another temporary facility that we could be in between September 30th to whenever the house would be ready. Otherwise, we just shut our doors down on the 30th. There's nothing else left for us to do here in the community because there's nothing else available.

Okay, because I had heard that there was a possibility for the Adventist Church.

That was a great possibility, but the board met last week, and they decided that there were too many, well, I'm making the assumption, but they turned it down. I just think there were too many costs for them to take us on.

Then, were we to come to, or as we would be preparing an agreement, is there any way you could show the financial responsibility for the cost of the renovations?

At this moment, no. I don't have all of them, but I do have some, but sure.

Okay. And then you would still have to find a temporary space until construction is complete. Correct.

We're in a tight spot.

OK. Thank you.

Well, yes. OK. Vice Mayor.

Yes. So thank you so much, staff and Ms. Ellinger. I think that I would like to take this back to our city manager, who honestly has been working on this for about six months now. If you could give us just a quick oral history for the community of everything that you've done and all the steps that we've taken just like very brief from they had a portable know we've looked at a lot of options we had many meetings with um board of supervisors members education boards we tried really really hard so i think that's really important before i move into my comment for you to like kind of give a history because you've worked really hard on this tireless pro project which is not a city this is not operated by the city so yes and thank you for those uh kind words uh vice mayor so um

Back in March or February when this came up, I worked with the board to try to look at alternatives. not in any particular order, but we met with the county, with the supervisors, we met with nonprofits, we met with the school district. They were all involved in a lot of the meetings we had. We thought we had an alternative or an option of going to the Satoui school. They were looking to expand their footprint, and we thought, well, this would be a wonderful opportunity to place their module, which Hearts and Hands had at that time on the site, when I spoke to the county they were they were more than happy to have that discussion but when we met it turns out that their expansion was moving forward and they already had commitments for the space to improve their space so it unfortunately didn't lend itself for hearts and hands to move their modular there. That was unfortunate like Ms. Salinger had mentioned she'd made contact with a number of and stuff to look at their properties and that just didn't come through. And looking at the fairgrounds, the large White House was an option to look at. That is in dire shape. It has even more issues associated with that. It's going to be quite a much more to fix that. And it would be facing some of the same challenges that the small RV house would be facing. My involvement was mostly brainstorming, facilitating, and meeting with parents as well as the hearts and hands board for that. The amount of effort and work the board has taken has been extraordinary to try to find a spot. And the reality is that we just haven't been able to find a viable location.

Thank you. So I guess my comments to the council would be with lack of a vision for that house at this time with verbal financial commitment to expand, I honestly would express my support to at least explore this opportunity. My microphone is the worst. Childcare is one of the biggest needs we hear from families in Calistoga. This is the last public preschool that we have. I'm just gonna talk like this. Sorry, I'm gonna get yelled at. But I think this kind of childcare is the last opportunity we have. We have Visa 2E, which has financial thresholds for it. Obviously they're coming to us in a place of desperation. I'm not saying that maybe we totally commit to a lease, but we continue to explore this opportunity because Hearts and Hands has been serving the community for many years. We do not have plans for this house. We are filling a need in our community and we do not want to not support the last community preschool that kind of preserves and strengthens access to early childhood education. um in our community and that's where my biggest concern is am i saying for us to sign a lease with them not necessarily but would i advocate for more exploration as far as seeing what their funding could be since we as a city do not have plans for this house that's where my position is today

And I have a question. I'm sorry to ask you again Ms. Salinger but so do I understand that that the school will have to cease functioning at the end of September because even if this council makes the house available that's six to 12 months away between permitting and construction and so on. And so you have a space until the end of September is what I understand. And then there's no space available after that. I'm sorry, would you mind coming to the microphone then? There's the folks who are online and they, yeah.

We still have two other options we're exploring. So until we eliminate those, yeah. So we have.

So there are other options?

There are two others right now, yeah. that we're looking into.

That might be available after September?

Yeah.

So you're at St. Luke's until the end of September? Yep. And then there are two other options? Correct. Can you let us know about those? Can you tell us more about them?

Because we haven't, I can't discuss it right now because we haven't really come to any sort of agreement yet.

Okay. So it's fairly, so... So you may cease functioning then at the end of September if those options don't play out and you've explored options so far pretty widely across town and none has played out so far?

Correct.

Okay. Okay, thank you. So I'm not feeling supportive of this proposal. I think it's possible to be supportive of hearts and hands and not be supportive of them using this building. And I have a number of thoughts on this. One of the main ones is the loss of flexibility at the fairgrounds. And it is true that we have no specific use assigned to that building at this time. But when we authorized proposals for golf, we actually have authorized a big picture look at this property. I've spoken with many of the developers and they look at the entire property and the summary term is golf but as they look at it they're looking at various pieces of it and have expressed interest in using that residence and now we're not at the point you know we're still developing you know a general a general vision a master plan we're still in the process of doing that but I don't want to take that resource out of the discussion of these folks who are looking at possibly bringing a master plan and a bigger vision to the council. So that is one big concern, and the developers have expressed interest in both the buildings, both the houses. SO I DON'T SEE TAKING THAT OUT. NOW, SOMEDAY, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER WE GET THE BIGGER PICTURE, WE'RE FARTHER DEVELOPED AND PERHAPS THE HOUSE WON'T BE NECESSARY FOR ONE OF THE OPERATORS AND IT MAY BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC USE OR OTHER USE. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND EMOTIONALLY WE WANT TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF HEARTS AND HANDS AND I FEEL LIKE THAT AND THE COUNCIL IS SUPPORTIVE OF HEARTS AND HANDS IN THIS COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT PROGRAM. And in all the efforts, I'll say that city staff has put into trying to help this out. And this is an excellent report, I think, that you were prepared for that. So we wanted to be supportive, but we can't be supportive of every organization in every way. And so I'm also concerned about the logistics for the fairgrounds and the various uses there. We're talking about you know, an RV park where people are coming and going, all kinds of people are coming and going there, and a preschool right there is not ideal, excuse me, not ideal, and we have rodeos, we have all kinds of activities, and putting them, putting the preschool right next to all that kind of traffic and activity, I think is a safety issue, I'm envisioning parents dropping kids off, picking them up. They're just logistical issues there. So I cannot be supportive of assigning or letting this building out at this time to the preschool, supportive as I wish to be for the preschool, and I've personally been supportive of it, But putting that school at this property at this time, I think seems to me to be a mistake And a councilman a vice mayor gift is offer her ideas and other council members I would I would actually like to make a motion to meet you halfway while I See where you're coming from very much and

It seems that the preschool may possibly have two other opportunities. I don't think that we should shut it down forever. And so I would like to make a motion that we reconsider this at a future date if they are lacking the support. Because while we haven't used that building in two years, we also have no immediate future plans to use that building or contracts or a master plan on the property.

Yes, and it's true. It's true that- I would like to make a motion. Fine, and we can discuss this too, and then we'll take a vote. And when I'm talking about the developers and operators who have looked at this, it's not a sure thing that they're going to use that. So you're quite correct about that. But it is, you know, it's a possibility. And we don't know, you know, we're still months away from getting proposals for the, what we call a gulp, which may well entail other parts of the property. The big vision, the big picture is coming, you know, it's forming itself as we receive these proposals. as we will receive them. And whether they'll entail the house or not is unclear, but if the house was important to them, I would hate to have it taken out of the possibility.

Which could be discussed during lease terms.

I could potentially support the concept, but the council spent a lot of time and energy selecting some very talented people for the fairgrounds advisory committee, and I couldn't make any decisions without getting input from them. I think would be a disservice to not hear their concerns of their support, but I think it's really important to get input from them before anything's done so I would be open to potentially a motion to continue this because I don't think it's the right time to make decisions, but I could find myself being supportive in the future depending on the comments.

So I will actually change my motion to tabling this item to a future meeting.

Okay we have that motion.

Can I make a comment?

Yes I was going to get to you Councilmember and we have Councilmember Isenberg but Councilmember Lopez Ortega please proceed.

Yes so it's a it's a very difficult situation that we are confronting here I'm really concerned about, you know, where the kids, they're going to go. I'm concerned about their safety. People is going to lose their jobs. So there are many, many worries. But also, we have no clear plan for the fairgrounds yet. I love the idea to have the kids, you know, in the little house, but with all the requirements that they get a chance in order for them to be there, it's becoming more difficult financially and financially. not only for them but also for the city, is a big risk for the city as well. The fact that they mentioned that they had three months basically to the end of September to be in the actual preschool, it gives them time to try to find out other places while at the same time we can explore some options, you know, also talking to, as Councilmember Cooper say, talking with the advisory committee to get more input for the community to give us time um you know to explore all the auctions all the get all the opinions uh all the different points of view and give also the border of the hearts and hands to put themselves together with a plan with a financial plan how they gonna pursue this dream, because basically it's a dream, how they're going to put all together and how they're going to be sustainable, not only for a couple months, but how they're going to be sustainable for two, three, four, five years from now. So I think we should put this on hold. while at the same time, you know, we can keep exploring what we can do.

Okay. Thank you. Councilman Eisenberg.

Councilmember Lopez Ortega expressed many of my feelings which is there are several unresolved issues that we would need to resolve before coming to a decision. I mean some of them specifically the safety plan for students in proximity to the RV park. a plan for emergencies would there be separation from the rv park and probably most important is proof of financial ability to make the improvements but and just in general some of the major things that are actually all the things that the staff report brought up that would need to be addressed before an agreement could happen but given all this if this is possible i think it would be at um I APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORTS TO FIND SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THE FAIRGROUNDS IS THE BEST CHOICE. IT MIGHT BE THE LAST CHOICE. BUT IF IT WERE THE LAST CHOICE, ALL THOSE ITEMS WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE THAT WE COULD IN GOOD CONSCIENCE AND HEARTS AND HANDS IN GOOD CONSCIENCE MAKE AN AGREEMENT. we would need to see a real plan for how things could be addressed. And I would truly hope that a simpler, less expensive for hearts and hands and less impact for us could be found. And I am actually open to providing assistance in helping Hearts and Hands relocate to a more appropriate location. We do want it to continue. The preschool is really important to Calistoga. It's just there are too many things to be addressed before we could say yes or no at this point.

Okay, thank you. So I'm thinking there are $300,000 or $400,000 available conceivably for remodeling for capital improvements. I'm wondering, and you don't have to answer now, but my question will be if that kind of funding is available, I'm wondering if putting that kind of funding towards remodeling another facility and I can't speak for them, you know, what requirements are for rent and so on, but I'm wondering if that kind of funding is available to go towards St. Luke's or one of the other facilities if something couldn't be worked out there if that kind of money is actually available. I'm fine with postponing this or actually we're taking no decision at the time. Is that your motion?

Was to table this to a future meeting.

No decision now.

No decision now.

And that's your motion. And we have a second. I'll second. Second there. And let's take a roll call on that, please.

Council Member Eisenberg. Aye. Council Member Cooper. Aye. Council Member Lopez-Ortega. Aye. Council Member Lopez-Ortega. Aye. Sorry. Aye. Vice Mayor Gift. Aye. And Mayor Williams.

Aye.

OK, thank you everybody who's been working on this and participating. And we'll go to the next item, 8.2.

So Mayor, I have to recuse myself due to a proximity issue on the Washington Street.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. And I believe that you're, I hate to say this, but I believe you're obliged to leave the chambers.

I am, and so is my sweet little son who's in the back of the room. So we will be back shortly.

And someone will call for you when we're concluded. So that's the item 8.2. The subject is the possibility of paving Grant Street or Washington Street. And Public Works Director and City Engineer Derek Raynor is here. Welcome, Director Raynor.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, council members. The item before you is to discuss the grant and Washington Street paving projects with you all tonight and to seek direction on selecting which project you'd like us to bid and construct next winter and summer. So we probably bid it in winter and build in summertime. THAT'S THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE. SO THE KICKING OFF HERE, YOU KNOW, BOTH ROADS ARE REALLY OBVIOUSLY VERY IMPORTANT. THEY BOTH TRAVEL LOTS OF TRAFFIC. THEY'RE BOTH TECHNICALLY CALLED COLLECTOR ROADS. SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC VOLUMES, BUT THEY'RE HIGH PRIORITY SEGMENTS THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN OUR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN. AND JUST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A REMINDER ON OUR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN. WE DO THAT EVERY THREE OR FOUR YEARS. AND BASICALLY AN ENGINEERING CONSULTANT COMES IN AND THEY EVALUATE ALL THE ROADS IN THE CITY. THEY GIVE IT A RATING BETWEEN 1 AND 100 FOR PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX. WHAT WE CALL PCI. AND THEY ALSO REVIEW ALL THE ROADS IN NAPA COUNTY. SO THEY TRY TO KEEP IT CONSISTENTLY RATED USING THE SAME FIRM TO DO THAT. SO THAT IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING UPDATED. BUT OUR CURRENT FISCAL BUDGET ONLY HAS BUDGET ENOUGH TO COMPLETE ONE OF THESE PROJECTS. WE CAN'T DO BOTH. THE WASHINGTON PROJECT SCOPE, JUST TO GO OVER THIS QUICKLY, THE PCI OR THE PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX IS 33. SO THAT'S CONSIDERED POOR. THE PROJECT LIMITS WOULD BE FROM BERRY STREET TO NORTH OAK. AND IT'S ABOUT 1400 LINEAL FEET OR A QUARTER OF A MILE. AND THERE ARE UTILITY UNDERGROUND UTILITY REPLACEMENTS SCHEDULED WITH THAT PROJECT FOR BOTH WATER AND RECYCLE PIPELINES. AND THEN THERE WOULD BE SOME CURB GUTTER RAMPS AND OTHER WORK DONE. ESTIMATED TO COST ABOUT 2.2 MILLION BASED ON THE CURRENT DESIGN. AND THEN SOME OF THE PROJECT CHALLENGES WITH WASHINGTON ARE THAT IT WAS DESIGNED, WE ACTUALLY DESIGNED IT QUITE A WHILE BACK IN 2020. And the design right now has the bicycle classification of a class three, which is a share the roadway classification. So it's similar to downtown Lincoln, where you have the sharrows and the bikes go with the vehicular traffic. So that's the way it's designed right now. AND THEN IN 2022 NAPA OFFICE EDUCATION CAME IN AND DID A SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL WALK AUDIT AND DETERMINED THAT IN THIS SAME SECTION OF THE PROJECT THAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND CLASS TWO BIKE LANES ON WASHINGTON FROM BURY TO NORTH OAK. AND THE CHALLENGE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ROAD WIDTH TO ACCOMMODATE PARKING AND BIKE LANES AND GET IT ALL TO FIT. AND IT'S ABOUT A BLOCK AND A HALF. SO WE'RE NOT TALKING THE ENTIRE SECTION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD OF OF THE SECTION BASICALLY BETWEEN LAKE AND BERRY. SO IT'S ABOUT 500 FEET AND WE'D BE, YOU KNOW, IF CLASS TWO BIKE LANES GO IN RIGHT NOW OR WITH THAT PROJECT, WE WOULD ESTIMATE TO LOSE AT LEAST NINE PARKING SPACES ALONG WASHINGTON IN ORDER TO FIT THOSE. The Grant Street scope of work, it's a PCI pavement condition index of 22, so it's lower than Washington. It's considered very poor condition. The project limits are from Garnett Court near Centennial, and it goes out to the city limits, and it's about 2,500 lineal feet. I think we had that wrong in our staff report, but it's about a half mile long, so it's a little longer stretch. THERE'S NO UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PLAN FOR THE GRANT STREET PROJECT OTHER THAN SOME DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN AND AROUND THE GREENWOOD INTERSECTION. AND THEN THERE'S A MULTIUSE PATHWAY THAT IS PART OF THIS PROJECT. And it's similar to a class one, so it's a separated off the road, a separate pathway for bike and pedestrians. And it is part of an ordinance that the city had passed a while back to put that multi-use pathway in on the south side of Grant Street. SO JUST A LITTLE HISTORY THERE. AND THEN GRANT STREET, THE CHALLENGES WITH GRANT STREET, WE'VE KIND OF RUN OUT OF THE EASIER ROADS TO DO. BUT THE CHALLENGES THERE, WE HAVE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS WITH SEVERAL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND THOSE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS REQUIRED THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO HELP PAY FOR THE PATHWAY OR SIDEWALK FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THEIR FRONTAGE. THE TOTAL ESTIMATED VALUE BACK IN 2022 WAS ABOUT 150,000 TOTAL FOR THE DEFERRED AGREEMENTS. AND ANYWAYS, SO THE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS MAKE THIS A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED. ADDITIONALLY, BACK IN I THINK IT WAS 2020, 2021, WE HAD A COUPLE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS WITH AND A LOT OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS CAME OUT AND THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT SPEEDING, OBVIOUSLY AFTER THE ROAD GOT PAVED. AND THAT ACTUALLY INITIATED OUR PILOT STUDY ON THE SPEED CUSHIONS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, CAN BE USED TO MITIGATE SPEEDING PROBLEMS HERE IN THE CITY. So as far as timing goes, we have a little, although we have designs right now, shovel ready, basically, we have to finish the specifications, get those updated, and that'll take a little bit of time, but we could bid either project this winter the way it is right now. And then we could potentially procure the contractor in the spring and start building next summer. So that's kind of the forecasted OVERALL SCHEDULE. AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT WE LISTED IN THE REPORT, BUT I THINK AT THAT POINT I'LL KIND OF STOP AND OPEN IT UP TO SOME QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION.

OKAY. THANKS, DIRECTOR REYNOLDS. WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT IN JUST A MINUTE. BUT COUNCIL MEMBERS FIRST, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS YOU'D LIKE TO ASK?

DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE ON HOW MUCH TIME IT WOULD TAKE IF YOU DID TRY TO ENFORCE THOSE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS? IF THAT WOULD SLOW US DOWN BY MONTHS, IF NOT YEARS?

YES, IT WILL. WE INITIALLY HAD OUR CITY ATTORNEY TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE DOCUMENTS AND THEY'RE FAIRLY, THEY'RE OLDER. THEY LOOK LIKE THEY WERE GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING TO WORK WITH BASED ON THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY WERE WRITTEN WITH. AND SO, YEAH, IF THE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS, YOU KNOW, IF THEY ARE ENFORCED, IT WILL TAKE MORE TIME TO DO THE GRANT STREET PROJECT. THE GRANT STREET PROJECT COULD NOT HAPPEN AS QUICKLY.

Okay, so it could be delayed fairly significantly.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, yes, Councilman Eisenberg.

Back to the deferral agreements. When you gave $150,000 estimate, is that per parcel or for the whole project?

No, that was an estimate that we did a while back before we had one of the community forums. We did a PowerPoint slide and we had estimated about what the pathway cost was in total for the deferred agreements.

And that, so it would be 150 divided by how many parcels?

I think there were four, don't quote me on that, but four-ish, something like that.

Okay. Oh, Director Rainer said four. I'm quoting him. Oh, sorry. You've told me not to. Okay. I mean, when we get to discussion, we'll have a lot of questions about the bike path and feasibility. But I think that's probably should come later.

Great. Councilmember Lopez Ortega?

Yes. My question is, can you repeat again the difference price between the two streets or the two projects?

Sure. The Washington project scope was estimated to be about 2.2 million. And the Grant Street is about 1.8 million.

Okay. And we have grants for either one of them?

We would be funding it with some of the Measure U funds and SB1 monies that the city has. But it's only a proportion of the cost.

Okay. Okay. One more question. On Washington Street, is going to be necessary to do work underground with the connections, water connections and all of that, the sewer system?

Correct. Yes. So we will have some underground water work as well as recycle. And there'll be services for the water line to the customers along that route. And it's pretty much the entire length. It has both water and recycle in it, new water and recycle pipelines.

And do you estimate the time that it's going to take? How long it's going to take to complete the project?

I it's probably around 90 days, maybe 100 days. I'd have to look it up. I don't have the number off the top of my head, but it's probably around that timeframe of close to 100 days at least.

Okay. But for sure, it's gonna be is it will it can happen faster than they're gonna have any right?

Are you asking can Grant Street be?

I mean, yes, yes.

Yeah, Grant Street is less complicated, although it's a complete rebuild of the road. But there's virtually hardly any underground work that has to take place. So, yeah, it should be a little quicker job than the Washington Street project.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember. I just have one question. I'm on Washington Street now, and I'm seeing in the staff report that it's possible, perhaps possible, to accommodate both a Class 2 bike lane and not lose the parking that's already there, perhaps by shifting the parking to the other side of the, from one side to the other. But if the class two bike lane is placed there and the parking is maintained or preserved, that means widening the street, I believe, and it refers to spot road widening.

Right, so if we were trying to get everything both, you know, not lose the parking and basically get the class two in both directions on Washington, there would have to be some pocket parking is what we're calling it. So there is a landscaped section that's about 10 or 12, 10 or 11 feet out there. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME POLES AND ELECTRIC POLES THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY WE COULDN'T PUT A PARKING SPACE THERE. WE WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE A CURB THERE. BUT YOU COULD ACTUALLY BRING THE CURB IN CLOSER TO THE SIDEWALK AND HAVE SOME PARALLEL PARKING. AND THERE'S BOTH THAT VEGETATED AREAS ON BOTH THE NORTH SIDE AND THE SOUTH SIDE. so there's an opportunity there to potentially pick up the nine spots and put in the bike lanes and and you know potentially get both but you know again that has to be designed we'd have to go back to the drawing board and kind of repurpose uh dust off the drawings that we have now and take a look at what that would take to if we could do it or not and what the extra costs would be

Okay, so there's no sense of what extra costs would be involved if we wanted to go that direction.

INITIALLY, WE'RE GUESTIBATING ABOUT 35,000 JUST FOR THE DESIGN TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THAT WOULD COST. AND THEN GENERALLY, YOU'RE AT LEAST TEN TIMES THAT FOR CONSTRUCTION COSTS. SO YOU'RE PROBABLY UPWARDS OF 400,000. GOT IT. AT LEAST. THAT'S VERY ROUGH.

YEAH, SURE. AND THERE WOULD BE SOME LOSS OF TREES, A NUMBER OF TREES ALONG THAT. AND THAT WOULD ENTAIL A LOSS OF TREES, I SUPPOSE. CORRECT. Are the telephone poles fixed, or can they be moved, or is that not possible?

It's just a lot. They can be with enough funding, but it's probably unrealistic that we could make that happen.

OK, great.

yes yeah one last question i see from the financial impact of the staff report the finance the washington street require a budget adjustment to include additional enterprise funds for both water and sewer around 500 000 each for a million dollars so it seems that it might be more prudent to take on the less expensive project now and wait for the tot tax increase to come on the next year or so i don't know what impact that would have on a general fund budget but is that uh Does that have merit to that or is it?

Yeah, there's some merit to that. I mean, we do have to make that budget adjustment for the water and the recycle utilities. And that would come out of our enterprise, our water enterprise and wastewater enterprise. And so, but, you know, additional, I think the good part about the TOT or additional TOT could be if you know if the washington project were to um add this pocket parking and these bike lanes then you know there may be some additional funding there to to cover those costs thank you

And if the council wanted to go the Grant Street route, the question of the property owner's contributions would have to be resolved prior to commencement. So even if we said, right now, let's do Grant Street, that would have to be resolved. And how long it would take to resolve that is very uncertain. That's the legal question, I guess.

Right. I mean, the council has two options on that to either enforce the deferral agreement or not enforce the deferral agreement and the city covers the cost of the path. So, but yes, you're right. If you choose to enforce it, it will take more time. If it's chosen to not enforce it, then it can happen quickly.

Right. Council members, other questions or comments? Okay, all right. Let's go to public comment then. Would anybody like to address the council on this topic? Yeah, okay, we do have some speaker cards. All right, very good.

Yes, we do. The first speaker card is from Francis.

I would like to have my nephew go first. He has a speaker card, and then I can go after him.

The next card is Emilio.

You hear me okay?

Yep, I welcome.

All right. All right, we'll try to make this in three minutes. So thank you for having me, Mayor and Council. Thank you for holding this agenda item here. I appreciate the report from the Department of Public Works to kind of outline everything for us to compare. And I can see you guys are all trying very hard to be very impartial. It's your duty to do that. Of course, I'll be a little more biased, but as I introduce myself, my name is Emilio Tedeschi. Our family lives on Grant Street. I would like Georgia City Council to approve the repaving of Grant Street at this time. I recognize Washington Street's conditions have also deteriorated over time. but we've been waiting 20 years for this project to get started. I'm sure the Department of Public Works has heard endless complaints about the worsening condition of Grant Street over the past two decades, and the report provided by Public Works shows that Grant Street is in worse condition, so I believe it should be addressed first, just out of necessity, and then we can focus our attention towards Washington Street next. The PCI of 21, I didn't even realize is out of 100. 21 out of 100 is not good for anything. That's pretty bad. So I do feel that Grand Street is the entrance to Calistoga from the north. The city's own general plan talks about preserving the rural nature of the road, but in its current state, it is kind of embarrassing to locals and tourists. It poses significant safety concerns for both motorists and cyclists, and it would be well served to finally have a safe and presentable street for residents and commuters and guests to benefit from that. regarding the deferral agreements as Derek mentioned there was a town hall meeting a series of these meetings that was held back around 21 or 2020 I think Derek might have been there because we had the whole presentation the traffic measures is very Encouraging to see the city being receptive to complaints about speed concerns on the road And and seeing different options but that did to start the discussion about the deferral agreements and I would say that at the time YOU KNOW, WE KIND OF FOUND OUT THAT MOST OF THE DEFERRAL AGREEMENTS, WHILE UNIQUE TO EACH PROPERTY, WERE DRAFTED AROUND THE 1970s. THEY WERE PRETTY OLD, AND I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE ABOUT 30 OF US THERE WHO SHOULD PARTICIPATE, ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AND RESIDENTS, AND AFTER THE SERIES OF THESE MEETINGS, MAYOR CHRIS KENNY AT THAT TIME He was discussing these and I think at the end of discussions, Chris had told us all in the room, in this very room, that the city attorney had reviewed the agreements and believed the broad language and scope of the deferral agreements to be pretty outdated and would be difficult to defend and enforce. So we were told then that the city would sunset the agreements, which would really simplify a lot of things. Unfortunately, Chris left office shortly after and the sunsetting was never finalized by the city as promised. and we would like to say to honor its promise and formally sunset these deferral agreements as agreed so we don't have to keep coming back to these hang-ups every few years when we start initiating conversation again over grand street and i would also add just as a very end here that's if the deferral agreements are going towards the pathway i would also say we're giving up about eight to ten feet of our land which i think is also worth quite a bit when you add up all the the properties that are going to be contributing to that pathway

So we're at the three-minute mark, Mr. Tedeschi, but good. Thank you. Thanks for the comments. And other speaker cards.

Frances.

And welcome.

Thank you.

Speak into the microphone, please. There you go. Thanks.

My name is Frances Tedeschi, and I live on Grant Street. The deferred agreement started back in 1970, about 50 years ago on Grand Street. And in 1980s, they had started planning to widen the street and put in a path I have called many times and in the last two months to patch the patch holes and they have come out the next day to fix the patch holes and I appreciate the quick response. Thank you. But I must call again this week about the potholes. So for more than 46 years they have filled the potholes on Grand Street with asphalt and no change in the roadway. At this point, with all the asphalt they have used, they could have fixed Grand Street and Washington Street. So at this time, Grand Street should be paved. Also, with all the development starting and this is something to do about the new developments. Also, with the new development starting and going on, I suggest that the big semi-trucks, I don't know if you could enforce this or not, semi-trucks go down Tubbs Lane and then 29 and then to Lincoln Avenue that would save Grant Street and Lake Street. from causing more issues with the roads. Like my nephew Emilio said, please waive the deferment agreements in writing. Thank you.

Okay, thanks Ms. Tedeschi. Speaker cards.

The next speaker card is Carlotta.

Welcome Carlotta.

Good evening, mayor and council members. First, I'll address the poster. I am bringing forward this poster on behalf of Pamela Fratellizio. It was made by kids who are out riding their bikes in the community, and I'll maybe pass it around afterwards so you can look at it. My name is Carlota Sinotto, and I'm the program manager of the Napa County Bicycle Coalition. I would like to express the bike coalition's strong support for the addition of class two painted bike lanes on Washington Street. We, the Bike Coalition, and I personally worked on the Safe Routes to School Walk Audit at Calistoga Elementary School and its resulting report. What we heard from school stakeholders during the walk audit and what we are still hearing from the school community today as demonstrated by the parents who have proactively come forward to request bike lanes on Washington Street is the same, that young students need safer, more separated bicycle facilities in order to be safe and comfortable walking to and from school. The lack of bike lanes on Washington was ranked by school stakeholders as the third highest barrier to students biking to school in the walk audit report for Calistoga Elementary. As a key connection and routes to the elementary school, the junior senior high school, the Boys and Girls Club, Log V Park, and the community pool, Washington Street is an important travel route for students. Bike lanes are appropriate on collector streets like this that, as Director Raynor said, carry significant volumes of traffic. The way the street is currently designed, students are required to either share the street with vehicles or share the sidewalk with pedestrians. Neither is an option that encourages youth to bike. Most parents do not feel safe allowing their students to share the street with vehicles, especially when they are in elementary school and especially given the rise of large vehicles like trucks and SUVs on the road that pose a more dangerous risk to bicyclists and pedestrians. Riding on the sidewalk requires navigating around pedestrians and is unpredictable for drivers at crosswalks and driveways. By adding bike lanes to Washington Street, the city will be creating a more balanced street design that now provides space for bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists alike. This decision aligns with the Calistoga's general plan objectives and goals around complete streets to create and maintain a comprehensive and integrated transportation network that provides safe, comfortable, and convenient travel serving all types of users and enhance transportation modes that minimize pollution and congestion. This improvement will empower residents to travel by bike, improving community health, reducing traffic congestion and air pollution, and making it easier for those who cannot or do not drive to be independent and involved in their community. We support the request of Calistoga parents to add bike lanes to Washington Street as an investment in healthier, more independent youth. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Are there other speaker cards?

I have Pamela, but it sounds like she's gone. The next one is Christie.

Hello, Christy Fitzpatrick Webb, 1814 Lake Street. I just want to say that I am absolutely in favor of improving our roads in our town because it's kind of embarrassing when my friends come to visit and they're like, oh, I feel like we're in a third world country sometimes. And you can chip your tooth when you try and ride your bike down some of these rickety roads. I am not in favor of Losing any parking so if I could address the Washington Street repavement There is a 12-foot what do you want to call it, green belt between the road and the sidewalk, which I'm sure is what they will be using to make the designated bike trail or lane for safety. And those telephone poles, I'm not an engineer, but I'm pretty sure you can either put the cable underground when you're doing all your other underground work, or I'm sure there's a way to move it so that it can not be in the middle of the road. Just saying. I know that's expensive, but... I strongly feel that the safety of the children, especially walking to the Boys and Girls Club, down that stretch of road, it's worth the cost of moving the telephone poles and to redesign however you gotta make it work where the parking can still stay on Washington so everyone can get around safely. So I hope both projects go through just as soon as humanly possible. Thank you.

Okay, thanks. Ms. Fitzpatrick. Yes city clerk other other speaker cards.

I have no more cards, but there's a couple online when you're okay.

Sure.

Let's go there Mr. Tallarico if you can hear us you have three minutes Thank you Just had a couple of comments on this First of all, I definitely agree with both of the Tedeschi's. They brought up some excellent points that I would have made, and they gave me some new points that further make me support their cause. I live on Grant Street. I'm about a mile away from them, though, so I'm on the opposite end of, I believe, where you're talking about doing infrastructure rebuild and such. I do think from my experiences living there and going back to when my mother lived on Grant Street back in the early 90s, I've always seen Grant Street as a more heavily used street than Washington. I think both streets can certainly use refurbishment.

Strong as public thinks it is, the mayors don't have that authority, but... the council does. And we can, if the council agrees, we can, I forget the language, we can waive them or forgive them, whatever is the appropriate language. And I agree, Washington Street, I don't want to lose the parking. It's unfair to the residents nearby for us to allow all those apartments to go in and then to take away parking as well. So I don't want to lose that parking. A BIKE LANE IS A NICE THING. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITY OF A BIKE LANE ALONG THERE, A CLASS 2 BIKE LANE. SO I'M AGREEING WITH COUNCILMAN EISENBERG AND COUNCILMEMBER LOBEZARTEGA THAT STAFF CAN AS TIME PERMITS AND AS MONEY ALLOWS, WE CAN LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF EXPANDING THAT STREET IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE A BIKE LANE WITHOUT LOSING THE PARKING AS WELL. And so in the meantime, Grant Street, excuse me, yes, Grant Street is ready to go, and we can knock it out. If it were only that easy, but we can address that. And Councilman Cooper, I don't mean to overlook you there,

Yes, no, I agree with all three of you. I think Grant Street is the most important project. It's less expensive. It's quicker out the door. And to quote the city attorney's statements enforcement on the deferral agreements may be time consuming and uncertain. Time consuming is guaranteed. What's certain is the cost of attorney fees to fight that. So we'd have to factor that in as well. And if the previous mayor attempted to sunset these, it was his intent. And if our mayor agrees and if we do have the ability, I would be in favor of that. Washington Street, I believe it does need further examination. I think that the safety of our children is more important than parking. But I think that also we can achieve both if we have the time and resources to do it. And that would be more time consuming. But again, I just think it's really important that corridor from Boys and Girls Club down to the elementary school is is an active corridor. And I think it's important to be cognizant of the safety of our kids. But I think we can do both. So long story short, I say grant.

So it sounds like we want to go to Grand Street. My concern is going to be the speeding. It already is a speed alley, and that's in its rough, very rough condition. And it's going to be a half mile or a mile invitation to race. And so I'm hoping, you know, there's a police chief around here. He's going to have his hands full enforcing the speeding on that is what I anticipate.

however it'll be a new street it'll be smooth the cyclists will like it so it sounds like the council wants to go ahead with the grand street project and director raynor did that give you sufficient input there yes that's very helpful i appreciate everybody's discussion and we will bring back an item to your council about waiving the deferral agreements

Great and thank you for reminding me as your public input. Those of you who sent letters or spoke tonight public input was very helpful and we do appreciate that. Let's take a brief recess and we will. Yes.

I believe we need a motion and then the second on Nancy.

Let's see, discuss item, provide staff direction. Let's see, well, let's move to, I'll make a motion to proceed with the Grant Street project as indicated in the staff report. Second. Thank you, we'll have a roll call vote, please.

Council Member Eisenberg.

Aye.

Council Member Cooper. Aye. Council Member Lopez Ortega. Aye. Vice Mayor Gift is recused. Mayor Williams.

Aye. Thank you. Let's take a brief break and we will recall Vice Mayor Gift and then we'll proceed with item 8.3 in five minutes.

You have a good dinner?

Okay, we will reconvene the meeting here. Let's go to the last item on our agenda, which is number 8.3. And the subject is additional workspace for city staff. It's called a modular office project direction. And deputy city manager step is here to introduce us to this topic.

Hello again. So you may remember at a previous meeting the council considered several options to address the city's office space constraints and following that meeting the council direction was to staff to PROCEDE WITH THE MODULAR OPTION TO BE LOCATED BEHIND CITY HALL AND THIS WOULD SERVE AS A DEDICATED WORK SPACE TO OUR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THAT WOULD KEEP THEM CLOSE TO OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AND SERVICES. SO FROM THAT MEETING WE DID SOME RESEARCH AND IDENTIFIED FUNDING SOURCES AND THEN ALSO RECEIVED A QUOTE FOR THE ACTUAL MODULAR. AND THEN ONE QUOTE ON THE UTILITY WORK AS WELL AS SOME ESTIMATES ON THE KIND OF ASSOCIATED WORK THAT WOULD BE WITH THIS PROJECT. SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE ORDER TO PURCHASE THE MODULAR. AND THAT TOTAL IS 358,317. And that's bid through SourceWell, which is a competitively bid purchasing program that the city participates in. And then the next step in the recommendation would be city staff would come back at hopefully the next meeting or potentially the one after with additional quotes for the utility work. Since it is the one quote we received, since it is over the $75,000 threshold, we do need to do a formal bid and receive at least three quotes. SO THE TOTAL PROJECT COST IS 503 OR APPROXIMATELY $503,000 AND 317 CENTS. AND WE HAVE IDENTIFIED IMPACT ADMIN FUND AND THAT AMOUNT WOULD BE 409, 978 AS WELL AS SOME FUNDING FROM CIRA GRANT FUNDING. and that would be $225,299 for a total of $635,277. One option would be to exhaust the admin fund first and then pull from the CIRA dollars. That way any money that's left in the CIRA fund can be used for other projects. So that is one way to look at it. I think that pretty much covers everything and I'm open to questions.

Thank you. I have a few questions on this one. First of all, are we looking at a new modular or a used modular?

It would be a new modular.

And as you explore the, assuming this is approved by council, can you look at the possibility of a used and what the quality of a used one is? And I'm thinking back to the park and rec modular where we paid another $150,000 for a new one which promptly lost its roof because there was nobody to, you know, the company went bankrupt and couldn't repair it and we were stuck with fixing the roof of a new modular. And so I'd be interested to see what guarantee is attached to a used modular as well and if there's any significant price difference. I'm saying this on the assumption that we're going to approve this but we shall see how it goes from here. Another question is let's see supposing the modular is approved. How big is it.

It is. Oh my gosh I'm blanking. It's 50. Director Desmond do you remember the exact dimensions.

IT'S ROUGHLY 1,000 SQUARE FEET. I PRESUME YOU LOOKED AT THE MODULAR THAT SIZE AND IT MAKES SENSE.

YES, WE DID. WE DID ALL OF THE MEASUREMENTS. WE HAD ASSISTANCE FROM OUR CITY ENGINEER, HAMID. AND THEN HE ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE WALKED THE SITE WITH THE UTILITY PERSON OR THE PERSON THAT WOULD somebody that could do the utility work and kind of laid it out how that would work with adding an ADA space, changing driveways, and that sort of thing, and it did fit nicely. We would lose most of the parking behind City Hall, but I think, you know, it's probably, I think it's seven spaces, maybe six?

So the modular that you're contemplating is the best size and the one that's bigger or smaller would not be as well positioned as the one that you're contemplating? Right. And then my next question is who will work there? What's the anticipated staff assignment and what will City Hall look like upstairs and downstairs assuming the modular is approved?

Yeah, so it would be predominantly planning and building staff. There might be an option to leave maybe one of the planning and building staff within City Hall. I think we could kind of figure that out as we go. And then what we could do is bring some of the finance staff downstairs, and that would allow easier access for people to pay utility bills, interface with the finance staff, and open up that space a bit to also, you know, we could have some meeting space in City Hall with some of the open spaces.

Is it anticipated, because we've been hearing now for some years and councils have been kicking this can down the road about sufficient space for staff, and is it anticipated that this will allay that concern that it will provide sufficient space for the reasonable future?

I think absolutely, yeah.

Are there restrooms included?

There would be a restroom. And a small kitchenette.

And what we lost with the previous recent remodeling at City Hall was that small meeting room which used to be upstairs and now is the administrative director is in that room. And that small meeting room was lost. Is there a possibility of having a modest sized meeting room somewhere in City Hall or in the modular to accommodate small meetings besides your regular offices?

Yeah, I think that could absolutely be accommodated within probably that the space that planning and building is in now, because I think only two people would come down from finance. So then, you know, there's two private offices in there, and then plenty of that open space. So that could some somewhere in that space could be utilized for meeting space.

Great. Thanks. Those are my questions. Other questions? Yes, Councilman Eisenberg.

Yes, I'm before proving it actually like to see what it looks like I'm concerned about the aesthetics, it's going to be essentially part of our city Hall and it should. As much as I love parks and recreation and the modular there and the utility of it one is sitting and look in the local parking lot and the other would be in a prominent space next to city Hall and I would hope that it could be something that fits in better with that environment.

So it would be kind of a standard modular a lot like the one at Parks and Rec. You know what we could do is we could potentially match the paint of City Hall. Unfortunately when you get into these kind of custom much better looking aesthetic modulars the price just goes much much higher than what's included in the staff report.

Maybe some flowers on the wall absolutely outside walls, yes.

Yeah, I think we could definitely do a nice job with some you know potted flowers or and also like I said the paint when we did that the modular down there we were able to pick the different the paint colors and the finishes. So I think we could certainly do that here in the city Hall as well.

Thank you.

And what is the lifespan on one of these modules?

Gosh, you know, when we purchased the one for Parks and Rec, I think they said it was about a 20 to 30 year lifespan for the new one.

And just for clarification, when you guys initially presented this to us, we were presented with four options. One was to remodel the old modular that was at Public Works. One was one option was to put a modular in the back of current city hall. One was to put a modular here. outside of the community center and the other option was to build office space within the fairgrounds at the Tubbs building with this which is an unused space.

It was actually so there was like a swap option and it would it would convert the Butler building to the council chambers and then also a community center space and this building would be converted and renovated to be office space.

But Rachel was there not ever a conversation of that extra like conference room area at the Tubbs building being converted into the office space?

Yes sorry I think we did talk about that and I think the challenge with that was it was you know the amount of staff that we we would be moving in there from planning and building it was kind of it was it was not sufficient.

Okay.

With also the new fairground staff that we've added. Okay.

we'll open up the public comment in just a moment but any um clarifying clarifying questions council member lopez or tega yes um i had just one question for uh for the staff how they feeling about moving into uh you know that type of space do they gonna be comfortable or they're gonna be you know

so far all of the staff that i've talked to and director desmond can chime in as well they've been pretty positive about it um a lot of the planning building staff came down and looked at the rec modular and and kind of evaluated it for look and feel and everybody had positive comments about it okay okay thank you all right anything else uh council member

Okay, we'll get director Desmond's input there. And Councilman Cooper?

No, I think we made a decision already to take this step and I think it'd be good to finalize it.

Okay, we got to get public comment then we'll proceed there. Director Desmond, do you want to comment on Councilmember Lopez Ortega's question?

Good evening, yes. And Planning and Building would be happy to be in this space. And I think it gives us the option as DCM, Steph mentioned, to have some flexibility on how we use City Hall overall. And I think it's the best solution in that I will be with my department would be in one location. Right now we're kind of spread throughout City Hall. And we also don't have meeting space. So I think this frees up some space for all departments to use one of the offices that we'll be vacating as a larger meeting space for the public and council members and so forth. So we're happy with this approach. Great. Thank you.

That's open for public comment. Are there speaker cards first of all.

No speaker.

OK. And is there anyone online. No. OK. And anybody in the the room here. Yes. Miss Yant.

You're going to put this right behind City Hall.

That's the plan. That's the discussion.

OK. Is it going to. Will the old jail.

Well let's see you make your comments please and then then we will try to address them.

Well will it impact removing the old jail from 1915 there.

OK that's a concern. OK. Are there concerns.

No I just want to say that originally that building was built in about 1902 as a fire department. So fire department moved into bigger space the. electric train depot, which is where the fire department currently is, and it was interesting to see it change over because then it became changed city hall and police department, and now it's all city hall. It's interesting to see the changes, but I just hate to see the jail leave. I don't know what you're using it for, but it's fun.

Okay, all right, thank you. Is there any other public comment? Let's close public comment, and I think that's a really good question. What's the thought about that?

The jail would be preserved. It would remain in the location where it's at.

OK, great. Is there any anticipated use of that?

So right now, we use it for storage. I think it would continue as that use. There's files and such in there, and a lot of black widows.

Great. I also heard it was haunted.

Let's close public comment as the public comment is closed bring it back to us council members. Council members comments vice mayor do you like to offer a comment here.

Sure I'm happy to weigh in initially. What I recall is the initial presentation to us was. the Tubbs building being an opportunity for office space, which would bring together our building department, which ultimately, if we were ever to consider building a city hall down on the fairground since we now own it, sorry, in comparative to upgrading what was the portable at Public Works, I have a really hard time just putting a Band-Aid on an issue and spending money right now, today, for what will have to be solved 30 years down the road, which is what we're dealing with with the water issues. So I mean, ultimately, since we aren't really using that space, I respect what the staff is. They were doing all of the infrastructure for all of the i.t at tubs and that was also one of our options and that was also the more affordable option um so for me i don't really support just buying a trailer park to throw in the back of city hall okay other council members

I'm supportive of this. I guess I'll weigh in here. I'm supportive of this. And you asked about, if the council approved it, you asked about where the money would come from. And I would support using the money in the administrative fund, first of all, and then whatever additional funding is needed to come from that CIRA grant funding.