Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. Is uh anyone on the commission that would like to declare a conflict of interest? Seeing none, I'll move on to citizens communication. While the series planning commission welcomes and encourages participation in the planning commission meetings, adopted rules allow no more than 5 minutes for expression of non-aggenda items. Matters under the jurisdiction of the planning commission and not on the posted agenda may be addressed by the general public. However, California law prohibits the planning commission from taking action on any matter which is not on the postage agenda unless it is determined to be an emergency by the planning commission. Citizens are entitled to address the planning commission on any agenda item subject to the five-minute provision. Is there anyone tonight that would like to speak on any matter not on the posted agenda? Anybody on Zoom?

I see no hands raised at this time. Okay, we'll go ahead and close citizens communication. Moving on to consent calendar. Uh, all matters listed on the consent calendar are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by one motion. If discussion is required, that particular item will be removed from the consent calendar and considered separately. Does anybody uh want to pull an item uh from the consent calendar? Anybody from the public? Anybody on Zoom? There are no hands raised at this time. Okay, Mr. Gary, item two, is that a presentation later? Does that get approved right now or?

No, item two is just a consent. There was just the um we had to adjust the balance on it. So, that was the change for it. Okay. And then later on, we'll go into the downtown board, which is a separate item. Okay. Perfect. With that, I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve items one and two on the consent calendar. Motion to approve. Got a first and a second. Can we get a roll call? Certainly. Um, chairperson Condit I. Commissioner Jamu. Hi. Commissioner Gil. I. And Commissioner Johnson. Hi. Motion carries 4 Z with one absent. All right. We'll go ahead and move to public hearings. Uh, item three. Turn it over to staff.

Thank you, chair. We're just going to get the slideshow on screen. Chair Leah Simplac is planning consultant for the city of Sirius. Tonight we are discussing a site plan approval for warehouse 1819 as well as a tenative parcel map for the project site. Next slide. Before you um is the project site plan. So this is site plan approval and a tenative parcel map to subdivide a 57.34 acre parcel into five parcels. It's hard to see the fifth one. It's on the bottom of your screen. It is the basin for the two warehouse buildings. That will be up to 249,200 square ft singlestory warehouse buildings. They're spec at this time. And the other two parcels are just sub uh empty at this time. The city has no project on file. And so we're just looking at the construction of the two buildings and then the subdivision, the overall subdivision of the larger parcel. Next slide. Just for some clarity, um the tenative map was added to the staff report. That was uh the amendment. So I just wanted to note the parcel sizes on the site plan are shown in net net acreage and then the tenative map does have them in gross acreage, which doesn't matter much. It's just to show that the front parcels are 12.53 acres and um I mean the two project parcels are 12.53 gross and 12.41 gross. And the front two parcels are um the first is 15.2 2 acres and the second is 14.53. So there is a slight discrepancy. One shows net, one shows growth. Either way, the tenative map does show the gross acreage and the subdivision of all the parcels. Next slide. This is the existing project site. You'll see that it is vacant with um one home on it. The home has a renter. There is no farming activities

on site. Um it's just mowed and um any kind of growth is kept down to ensure fire safety. Next slide. This is a current uh general plan land use designation of business professional. Next slide. And then this is the project zoning. So just a quick reminder, you have your general plan designation, then your underlining zoning designation. In this case, it's PC68 for the entire Westlanding area. You'll see the project site in the lower corner has the same designation as the entire Westlanding area. Next slide. Uh this is actually the land use plan of the Westlanding specific plan. So it's kind of a third layer to land use planning here. You'll notice that this also has a BP land use designation. And just to discuss street A does run show being run through in the master plan right now, but in a prior approval. Um the city engineer did approve the removal of street A. So it kind of look looks off like the red square doesn't properly kind of correspond, but just picture that site without street A and that is that larger 57 acre corner parcel. Next slide. elevations. You've actually seen some of the proposed elevations around town. This is an existing warehouse and it is what our proposed project is going to look like in the flesh, which is rare where you don't get to see projects um on paper in real life. So, this is nice. We have a real life example of potential elevations of the future warehouse. Next slide. to remind you quickly that the proposed project is exempt from an environmental review process as it is consistent with the le West Landing specific plan environmental impact report which was approved um in 2012. It was started in 2008 which is why it has that state clearing house number of 2008 in the beginning but pursuant to SQA section 15162 um when there are no changes in the area no changes to proposed projects that were already contemplated in the original EI you do not have to do additional SQL work. So that makes it easy for the uh commission to next slide. Find that the

proposed project is consistent with the Westlanding specific plan environmental impact report and make the determination that there are no additional environmental review needed and adopt a resolution approving a tenative map and site plan approval for warehouse 18 and 19 located at 3807 Crows Landing Road. Um the applicant is here and is available to give a presentation prior to opening the public hearing and I'm also available for questions. Thank you. Should we turn it over to the applicant first? Okay, we'll go ahead and do that.

Thank you, chairman, members of the commission. My name is Dave Romano. It's a great pleasure to be here uh this evening on behalf of G3. Um I want to uh first let you know that Doug Smith and Steve Lei from G3 are here with me. If we have questions as you get through the process, we'll do our best to answer those for you. I also want to thank staff for their hard work in getting us to this point. Um I had the good fortune of working on the West Landing Pacific plan from 2007 to 2011 ultimately resulting in its annexation to the city of uh series. And when we worked on that project, we were actually working not only on getting undeveloped land into the city, but we brought the old Proctor and Gamble site, which is G3's uh major corporate uh location into the city of Series. We brought the county center three into the s into the city. We brought the jail into the city. Um and we were proud to be able to do that. We were also looking forward to the opportunity to develop this area. And one of the things that we figured out really quickly when we were preparing that specific plan is that service was a major transportation corridor for the city as is Crows Landing. So when we looked at that, service gives us an opportunity to get access to Highway 99. as you go to the east. Crows Landing can get you to 99 going north and it can get you to I5 going to the south. So, it was an ideal location for business park. So, we specifically zoned this corner and this side of the property business park so that we could uh have these kind of uses. And so, we really thought uh thought ahead. It was 2011. It took a little bit of time, but G3 has been very successful. They've been very successful in the city of Series. They have over 500 employees at their existing campus and they really want to continue to grow that success. I know they've looked at a number of properties in the area uh and they were really excited when this piece of property became available because it's so close to their existing operations. It's of a substantial size that allows them to construct what they need to construct and so they were able

to acquire and close on this piece of property. So with that said, um they're a known commodity. What they build and construct uh is known. If you have questions specifically about it, uh we'll do our best to answer those, but we agree with all the conditions of approval in the staff report. We agree with staff's recommendation and we would ask for your approval this evening. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Any uh questions for the applicant from the commission at least at this time?

All right, we'll go ahead and open it up to the public. Would anybody like to uh speak on this item? All right. Anybody on Zoom? I see no hands raised at this time. And then I know we got an email. Is that going to be read into the record or

Yep. Can we ask it if we can make the sound? Would he like to speak on public comment about this item? Yeah. Yes, that is the time that we're at. So, we're going to go ahead and open the public hearing back up. No. Well, this is the only time. Okay. Okay. But this is the only time for members hear about this item to discuss it. Um so once it's closed, it cannot be opened again. So one last time anybody Okay, sir.

Good evening. My name is Charles Evans. I'm the owner of Evans Home in Modesto. Um I submitted a document. Um I'm kind of concerned with it moving forward prior to me giving be given enough of time to do an appraisal. So, I had requested that it be tabled to give us a little bit more time. We only had less than five days to respond. All right. Thank you, sir. Anybody else for public comment? Did we receive any emails this morning? An um not not this morning, but we did receive one on Friday

from Mr. Eric. I'm sorry I didn't see it. Well, I'm happy to read it, too. If you want like you can come up to the podium and and read it if Okay.

I also have a gentleman on Zoom that's waiting to speak perhaps after this woman. Okay. Tom, Tom, did you want to say something? Oh, I was just uh seeing if we could get that video feed changed for the to face the public. Okay. Should we wait on that? Oh, there you go. Thank you. All right. It is on it. All right. Go ahead, ma'am.

You um Michelle Vargas, um concerns for the development of existing farmland. Uh is obviously increased traffic, especially trucks. Would the develop will the development affect our property value and who wants to live next to that? Will the new zoning affect or increase rates and insurance? Also of question and deep concern, what is the plan for the future for the areas from Ustick Road to Crows Landing and the areas from service to Whitmore. Note the warehouse development neighbors to our family's property 512 West Road uh nearly 20 acres of almond orchard. We've been there forever. Um, as as in writing, we request the city of a series council to inform the proposed warehouse owners. We're we're in back of the development. Our uh orchard backs onto um the warehouse uh proposed warehouse. Um, as in writing, we request the city series council to inform the proposed warehouse owners and occupants to expect typical farming practice that incurs dust and the use of chemicals, fertilizer, including harvesting again dust and and noise and the like in their backyard. We are aware of the following dumping incident violation uh from from this uh company that was uh Merrced and Outwater River. Those are just

concerns that there's not going to be any dumping or um things drained out in the property. Um I also requested that my father, Edwin Joseph Vargas, be able to raise his concerns verbally at the meeting. Um I'm not sure uh if he can be the last one if he wants to speak after the other speakers. Unfortunately, this is the only time for public. Yes. Yes. Um after if the person um anyone else needs to speak. Yes. Those are our concerns. Thank you. Thank you so much. Anybody else uh for public comment?

I do have if the applicant can just follow up on some of the concerns raised. um the dumping on site uh and are you aware of the farming activity in the area? How how are how are you guys going to address that?

Absolutely. We're aware of those farming activities. This has actually been in the city of Sir for 14 years, but it's going to be adjacent to farming on the north and on the west and and that's common. Actually, a warehouse is a much better use to be adjacent to farming and dust and those type of uses than would be an apartment complex or residential. Um, I if I know where the Vargas property is, I think it's in the city. If it's on the west side of Crows Landing, it's probably zoned ultimately for some kind of residential uses. And when you review that, there will be kind of some buffering. But if it farms for 20 years, it farms uh for 20 years. I'm unaware of any dumping in incident related to this property. Okay. All right. Anybody else for public comment?

Yes. I have a gentleman named Mike on Zoom. I'm going to mute him. Okay.

Mike, please your mic and you may speak.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Mike Mendoza with the electrical union representing several dozen series families working in our trade right alongside the plumbers, sprinkler fitters, sheet metal, and iron workers. After a difficult few years, this project represents a vital opportunity for our local workers to support their families, pay their mortgages and bills, and strengthen the community. The staff report highlights city policies that justify approval, noting the significant jobs and economic benefits it will bring. With tens of millions of dollars in construction wages expected, it only makes sense that the local workers who will reinvest these earnings in series are employed on the project. We will also be engaging with G3 to ensure the community benefits from local workforce opportunities and we'll update the commission and city council on those discussions. I thank you all for for your time.

Thank you, sir.

Last call for public comment. German. Uh my big concern is uh service road is just a two-lane load most of the way just in and out and that has to be brought to your attention because with the with the high school down and faith home and and uh service is quite congested during the times that the school was being held And that should be done before that project is ever uh completed or ever started.

Thanks sir. Mr. Beltran, can you speak on some of those um items when it comes to future development of service you cruise Landing uh some of those?

Thank you, Commissioner. Uh so those those roads as development does happen uh will eventually be expanded into a four-lane road just like um services really in front of the uh in front of Central Valley High School. Um it will also you know once the overpass comes in the interchange it'll all all be expanded to at least four lanes. So it it is in the process. We don't have any capital improvement project at this time scheduled. Uh for instance, in front of the wastewater treatment plant. Um but as uh a couple other developments come in, um we do have an annexation in process uh as those developments start to develop, you will start to see the widening of service road. So that that is that is what the plan is at this point in time. Uh and as soon as we do have something in the works for service road widening uh in areas where the city will need to do it, for instance, in front of the wastewater treatment plant, uh we'll allocate funding uh to that project.

Thanks, sir. Um I had another question for the applicant uh as it relates to the uh business right next to this uh property. Have you communicated with those folks when it comes to their concerns? No. Um, chairman, I know there have been a number of conversations at the end of last week and and communication up to today and I think that there will continue to be that dialogue through construction of the process. So, they're neighbors. They know each other. They know who each other are. Either of them can reach out and continue to communicate. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Anybody else for public comment? Mr. Warren, commissioners, John Warren, city of Series staff and looking at the condition of Crows Landing Road and Service Road today. Um going ahead into the future, um this project is going to bring a large number of vehicles, large vehicles. I mean, it's the trucking industry and those things weigh 80,000 pounds. They're going to just chew up that road even more than it is now today. Uh at night time, you can't see the white lines painted on the road from Service Road north on Crows Landing. Now, I know that's not something that these people are may be concerned with, but I think that they should be going forward in the future. Service Road all the way out to Highway 99. Um, I'll be dead before uh that happens. And uh Dave is kind of chuckling over there with that project for the service road interchange pushed out to 2035 or somewhere beyond. Um it's it's a it's an impact. It's a direct route. These people are correct and crows landing on out to I5. But these are narrow farming community roads that they're going to be bringing big trucks onto. And of course the employees, these warehouse employees are going to have a place to park there. There's a article or a comment about the parking, the number of parking spaces for these buildings, and it's going to bring a large amount of traffic and that should be a concern to the developer as well to the to the uh uh commission. I know the project fits very well and I think it's going to be good for the community, but

these are concerns. traffic and the condition of those roadways now and they're not going to get any better sooner. Thank you. Mr. Beltran, upkeep of Crows Landing Road, does that fall under the city of Series or is that partnered with the county?

Uh, so it does fall under the city of Series. Um, and just uh for the knowledge of everybody, we are actually taking a general services agreement uh to the city council. Uh we're hoping on the September 22nd meeting uh to have all of Crow's Landing from service to Whitmore uh completely restriped. Um this is actually a in addition uh you know we we are currently in design on Crows Landing for a full road rehabilitation. Uh so uh Crows Landing that will probably go to construction in the uh probably the first half uh of next year. Um but those those are in in the works. Um we have heard the community loud and clear that Crows Landing is difficult to see the striping on. Um and so we are even though it is an interim measure before we go to full rehabilitation uh we are um going to restripe that road uh before we get into the foggy and winter season uh here in in the city. So we are actively working on it. Um and we're going to be investing probably about I'd say about six to seven million dollars in the rear road rehabilitation of Crows Landing Road. So, thank you. All right. Any other public comment? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public comment, bring it back to the commission for further discussion and questions. So, commission, go ahead, vice chair. So, I had a question. Uh, is B Street going to be a public street or is it going to be uh owned by the is it private?

Public street. It will be public. Plan for the Westlanding specific plan are public streets. Okay. And then does the um the neighboring property is there an access route to B Street or is not one proposed currently to connect it? They will have a new driveway off of B Street. Do you mean the property to the north? Yes. Assuming they are amenable the plans, the plan the objective would be to give them a new driveway off of B Street. Okay. Commissioner Johnson,

how far off in this distance would the widening of service road be? Uh so right now um service road uh where for instance in front of the wastewater treatment plant does not currently is not currently part of our capital improvement program. Our capital improvement program generally goes out five years. Um that's not to say that it can't become a part of the capital improvement program. Um, as far as in front of say, uh, the Copper Trails annexation, which is, uh, to the east of Central Valley High School, um, when that area starts to develop, then they will be required to widen Service Road there. Uh there will be some widening of service road as you come off of the overpass uh to when when the overpass does get installed, which you know at at best is 2032. You're probably looking a little later than that. Um and then as as you go to the west um as those developments happen development in west landing uh service road will get widened with those developments also. So it's it's a combination of how quickly developers come in and develop uh and and widen service road that because it borders their properties. Um, and it also comes down to essentially funding, both local and state funding for roadways and how quickly the city can get to widening service road.

So on service road from Rose Landing Road to Mitchell, it is some ways off because that will be accessed a lot. Uh, I I agree that it's it's definitely a ways off. There's I I would not put a timeline to when I could see four lanes at this point in time. Thank you. Any other questions? So, um, question for staff. Uh, a couple of these issues or concerns that have been raised up, do we already feel like that they've been addressed or will be addressed in the current site plans submitted.

Um, I I would say go on a ride with me for a minute. First, I want to talk about some of them. So, have they been addressed in the staff report? No. But I think we can delve a little bit deeper here. So, the first concern was property value. The day that this specific plan was adopted and approved by council, property values went up. Um, the pro prop the 900 acre 960 acres are now all in the city limits. You're inherently your value goes up because you're in the city limits. The second a project goes in, the value of those properties go up because it's inevitable. If you build it, they will come. This somebody has to be the first project out out there, there will be some growing pains, but once you have development, it spurs more development. as um G3 comes in, the city's willing to make some improvements to Crows Landing, which has been hard to um for the city to do, but we're able to do it. And then as G3 now connects their plan, they're building some infrastructure that's needed to then spur development further past uh B Street. So, as development comes, properties only get more valuable because people see that the heavy lifting has been done. So, that was the first concern. Yes, property value will go up because the heavy lifting is being done by the first person to come in. Uh 960 acres is going to take a really long time to develop. This plan was approved in 2012. So if you had a baby, you almost have a teenager, right? 13 years later, you do have a teenager. Um so it takes time for these plans to come to fruition and not every property owner gets on board at the same time. So you may have some pinch points with these trucks as they are traveling on service, but eventually service will be wider. They'll take the path of least resistance, which is probably going to crows landing to Whitmore. There is a path um and other things will follow that make development easier. Um as far as loss of a land, the environmental impact report that was approved um found that you can't mitigate the loss of a land. So they um found the impact to be significant, unavoidable, but the city council passed a statement of overriding considerations. So that means you can't

consider this impact anymore. 13 years ago it was reviewed, discussed, and the council found that they're willing to accept that impact. But as um Dave noted, um the city does honor right to farm. So any impact from the farming is not going to be an issue for G3. They have the right to farm. Um it's actually easier to explain that to people who may have louder uses and you you're a residential neighbor. So those two uses actually go well together. Um, as far as insurance goes, I'm sorry, we don't really weigh the cost of insurance. I don't have an answer to that. And I believe, uh, I guess to address the union, that's between G3 and, um, the union, the city does not have a right to force a project to contract with the unions. I'm sure that G3 is familiar with them and will do some of that work on their own, but that is not an issue we can condition or force. So, I think those were all the large issues. If you have other questions that I didn't I I guess there was some discussion about the future for the home the property from USA um Crows Landing I encourage everybody to look on the city's website the Westlanding specific plan is posted. That is the plan for that area. Um it's again 960 acres that have been planned since 2012. Um specific land uses have been identified. If anybody's interested in what can I do with my land, that plan spells it out. And this project is basically developing for the parameters that were set 13 years ago. It's just taken some time to come to fruition.

And then I want to just confirm currently there is no B Street right there. Right. So the property to the north of Feral just utilizes Crows Landing. Correct. Yes. But they will be if parcels one and two develop in the front they have to put in B Street. That's your question. So the future development will be required to install B Street. Okay. I guess my my biggest concern is how B Street and just overall this whole process will affect the funeral home business. They seem not to be notified properly that did not have enough ample time to kind of respond to this. I'm I'm glad they're here. Um but how will that um specifically B Street impact them and will they be involved in the process?

B Street isn't going to impact them. We don't need any right ofway. So, the installation of B Street will be taken care of with the project. The applicant or the funeral home did come in to see the city several weeks prior to even receiving the notice. The 10-day notice is the legal requirement. The state has changed the rule for when resonings and general plan amendments are involved, but that is not the case here.

10 days is the legal time required to provide mailed notice, and we also posted in the paper. But, you know, in full transparency, the funeral home came into the city several weeks before the hearing notice even went out. So, to say they didn't have ample notice is not appropriate in this instance. But, um, there's still time to and also I guess B the B Street hasn't been a secret for the funeral owner. The the project has been annexed into the city under the Westlanding specific plan since 2012. Mhm.

So, the layout of the streets are in that plan. B Street hasn't changed. I did talk about a change to street A, but street A is not street B. Street B has been where street B is going to be since 2012. So, it shouldn't be a surprise per se that a street is going to be there. And again, the project does not need any land to construct the street from the funeral home. So, other than having a new driveway, which is only beneficial to them, there's really no impact from this project to the funeral home in any way.

Yeah. Okay. That was my specific question. And I think we have we have a different opinion on what ample time is. 10day notice in my opinion is not enough time but if that's the minimum requirement that we have to do so be it. Um but I am glad that they have been involved in this process. So, um any other further discussion?

I'll go ahead and look for a motion to approve. So, taking a look at it um with it already currently being zoned for and everything. I motion to approve um the proposal consistent with the west lending specific plan and adopt the resolution approving tentative parcel map and site plan for review. A second we get a roll call and certainly commissioner Jamu I person. Commissioner Gil I and Commissioner Johnson no

motion passes 31 with one absent. All right, we'll go ahead and move on to new business. Turn it over to uh Julian. So, good evening. At this time, we will adjourn the planning commission and go to the series downtown revitalization area board. Uh the series downtown revitalization area was created under the provision of the parking and business improvement area in 1979 by the ordinance number 88708 and adopted by the series city council on September 26, 1988. The series downtown revitalization board was established by the city. Uh the series planning commission was formally appointed by the council as a designated advisory body to serve as a series downtown revitalization area also known as the sebra and advise the city council regarding economic and revitalization issues of the downtown area. Currently, we are asking to generate a levy um for approximately 48 businesses located in series downtown revitalization area which will be funded to maintain downtown and for potential future beautifification for things that are not covered by capital improvement such as um outside seating, lighting, cameras, music um renovation efforts along with other general projects and improvements that contribute ute to the revitalization of downtown series. The annual report in front of you u for 2025 to 2026 is attached to the report for you to review and includes a map of the seed wrap boundaries, legal description and the calculation of the potential levy for

businesses. The levy was established back in 1989 and has not increase since then. And so we are asking that the levy continue to be the same as the fiscal year 23- 24 which is outlined in attachment C. Last year the city council did not approve the assessment levy and so therefore that um the assessments that were in our budget um were deenishing quickly. Um and so we are hoping that the planning commission will approve the annual action plan which is to continue with a levy assessment and to build that fund for future um beautifification for downtown. We also have a contract with Grover Landscaping that does the maintenance and beautifification right now um for the downtown and that is coming out of that fund right now. um should we not approve um to send this to city council for a levy, then what will happen is then whatever is left in that budget um will be replenished and then it will come out of the general fund eventually. Um, so we're just asking um for the count for the commission um to approve the um the annual report um for the downtown revitalization um along with the potential to um ask for a levy assessment from the council.

Thank you sir. Any questions from the commission to confirm with the general levy increasing um the projected increase in balance is 34K on page four. So I do apologize there was a correction. Yes, the 34,000 is what we currently have in our balance right now.

Um there was an error um in that balance. So right now we have 34,456. With the proposed budget, we're looking at collecting at least almost close to $10,000 from the levies. Um, we had found out prior to last year that there were several businesses that were not notified that they had to have a levy. Um, so we have switched to a new third party. Um, and we've notified some of those businesses. So when they do come in, I believe we have 48 businesses downtown um, that we would be collecting. And majority of those, there's 80% of them that do pay into the assessment. I think we have like one or three um that just don't pay, but we don't have any collection for them. So, we just do on good faith and hopefully we can get them to once we do the capital improvements on uh third and fifth street um that they will start paying into this.

Are they collected as part of the business permit or are they collected separately? This is a separate assessment. Yes. Julian, can you kind of talk about why the council did not approve this last year? Because I I remember voting on this last year and I think some of the concerns were businesses have not seen this money when it comes to the upgrades. Was that the um thoughts of the council or what went behind their decision?

So, one of it was was we had a few businesses, yes, that said that they didn't get the improvements that were created for Third Street and Fourth Street. Those were capital improvements that were done. They did notify that was one of the concerns. So, engineering has put that on one of their calendars to do those improvements on Fifth Street. And I believe, if I'm not mistaken, Michael, that they're they're working on those designs um for the Fifth Street, Third, and Fifth Street improvements, which would be the gutter, sidewalk, everything. Um and so so we're so that's what what it was is that the portion of the fifth street um they felt that the improvements didn't get to them. Um this is um a funding source for the downtown bid that's been established for a long period of time. Um there is businesses that pay into it. Um it is for things that aren't covered by the capital improvement. Um, so we've had at meetings and they'd like to see like cameras that are for safety downtown, music, like music boxes. So that's something that this funding can do it, but we need to get a cushion in there and the cushion has been replenishing um because there's a lot of there's businesses that we didn't have a lot of businesses downtown. So when there's an empty business or empty building, there's no levy on those. And so now that we are seeing we have a potentially I think there's four new businesses coming in to downtown plus those businesses that have not been notified of the assessment. So we're looking to replenish that fund back down. Um and so that's we're just asking for this to go back to the council again to see if we can get that levy assessment.

Mr. Bill, can you talk about some of those projects and and I'm assuming those projects are attached to this and some but but for the council to approve it, they want these projects to be in motion. Correct. Correct. Can you just talk about some of those?

Sure. Uh so one thing that I do want to make clear is the money that is actually collected from this levy will not be used in capital improvement projects. So that is that is a separate fund for downtown for whatever maintenance or cameras or whatever that the the downtown businesses I guess deem it be used for. Uh the downtown rehabilitation project actually takes into account Third Street, Fifth Street, uh North and Lawrence. Um so for instance, you see the uh what is it? Fifth Street has is like half concrete. It's concrete down the center of it and then it's asphalt on the sides. All of that's going to be taken out. Um, all new sidewalks where applicable. I mean, we're not going to replace good sidewalks, but I would say for the most part, most all sidewalks in downtown are not in compliance. So, we will be replacing most all of them. We'll be replacing driveways. We'll be doing additional parking. Um, so everything that on those on those roadways will actually be done. There's uh water lines that need to be installed. they'll we'll we'll put the appropriate water lines in. Uh so it is uh we're we're thinking this is going to be about a $6 million project hoping to go to construction probably in the latter half of next year.

Thank you very much. And and I might add it will it will essentially mimic the look of Fourth Street just because we don't want we don't want checkerboard one place, stripes another place. We want to make sure that downtown looks consistent for everybody. That's measurel. That's uh the funding source with that or is it

uh it will be measure L. Uh there will also we're the engineering department is going to be applying for grants here. They're due in on September 22nd. Uh so there could be some uh state block grant funding that we will be using uh downtown. Also, I think the other big thing that will go away is going to be the uh roundabout uh that is at Lawrence Fifth. Um it's not designed correctly. Uh so, most likely that'll just go back to a four-way stop. It'll be nice people in downtown. We'll try and keep everybody slow uh to to the best that we can as we as we move through the project.

Thank you. Julian, can you talk I know you mentioned it, but um the contract service u expenditure $24,000. Um so the expenditures of this is 25,000 $24,000 for contract service and we bring in $10,000 a year. So, right now we have uh we did an RF u request for uh RFP for landscaping and we had one company Grover.

Um their contract is 21,841 per year. Um, and so there I believe the contract ends next year at which time then we will do another request for funding for services hoping to get um a local somebody local. The thing is when it comes to contracts with the city um these companies have to be able to maintain um the pesticides um they need to provide insurance certificates. There's a whole lot of things that make it really difficult for small um landscaping individuals that would probably be a lot cheaper. Um if Grover does not take the contract, then it falls back on the city. Um and then the city would have to maintain um the downtown.

When did we start contracting the service for downtown? It's been um before my time. I don't know the exact date, but it's been a while. So, we've always contracted um I believe we um for some time. For some time, yes, I know for the last three years. Yes. Is it something that the city can do? I know you're not probably the right person. I cannot I cannot say yay or nay on that. Okay.

Um I do know right now that they do have um problems just maintaining our parks. Um and so we they are short staff. Um, this is just something that they, you know, it's the beautifification of downtown. If we don't do the assessment, if we don't have this contract, the contract ends, then downtown, you know, is going to start looking un um, what's the word I want to say? Unkept. Thank you. So,

and again, we only bring in about $10,000 annually. That is just the the average that we kind of calculated out there. There's no one year we brought in 13,000. Another year we brought in $8,000. So it fluctuates. It's Yes, this is an average. It's not a set saying that we're going to bring$10,000. We could have bring only 6,000 in one year. We can another year could bring in 12,000.

The the years that we brought in less than 13,000 was because those businesses had left the downtown. Just remember these are only for businesses that are downtown that are operating. Um and so when we have empty business, empty buildings, empty business, there's no business. Um we do have a fluctuate of nonprofits downtown um during this bid. And so our goal is to see if they want to contribute, you know, to an assessment. They don't have to. Um but those are communications that we have, you know, on a monthly basis. Any other questions? I'm I'm having a hard time with the the contract service to be honest. I 20 $21,000. We only bring in an average of 10. We have this staff that we have staff that does this. Um, so I I'm not I can't support it. I I would make a motion to uh I I Tom would have to help me with the motion, but if they could the council could reconsider the contract service. Um I could support it. Um but as it's as it's laid out, I can't.

So the thing is we're our motion is to review the budget increase, not contract service because that's some city own thing with RF.

So So there there is no budget. The the budget increase comes from the levy from the assessments. So either they increase the levy assessment from $10 to an amount u moving forward. Um but we've always had it's never increased more than $10 a month for you know for the businesses downtown. Um they approved not to do the levy. So that's So we went from I believe um we had 41,000 um in the start of 20 July of 2025 was 41,956. Um and because they had zero levy assessments that were collected and so that kind of knocked so every so it's it's starting to to um replenish the that account. Um and so it does make it difficult because we do have that contract. Um but the goal is to reduce get that and then find somebody else to do the landscaping maintenance for downtown. Um but we're just asking for the approval to go to council to get the levy so that we can make those um contracts we get that bid. So I could support this if there's some sort of attachment of a recommendation to reconfigure this contract service because again we're spending $21,000. We're only bringing in 10 roughly. So I that's why that's why we're depleting financially with this fund, the contract service. And again, we have public works staff, whether our parks, they can't maintain them, they can do the job

downtown with all due respect. So that's where I'm having a hard time. I get the the levy uh adjustment, which I would support, and I I believe you're doing a great job communicating with downtown businesses to get buy in, and I I really respect that. But this is why our funds is depleting to this contract service. So that that's where I'm having a hard time. Tom, can you weigh in if

Yeah. So it sounds like you want to like sort of add a condition to the resolution that you have council consider reducing the contract price or something similar to that. It seems like that might be get starting to get out of the purview of of what this motion is uh attempting to do, but I I think you might be able to communicate that um within your findings and then they can uh contemplate that during their discussion should you recommend that they have that discussion. Yeah, as long as it's brought up, I Yeah, I would totally be fine with that. Yeah, I think you can add add a note in there. um with the approval the planning commission recommend or you know

right and we'll just add it within the minutes we can add it in there um by a minute order. Well, I don't think all of them read the minutes but I would like it attached to the item I guess is what I'm looking for. Right. We can do that and we'll attach it to the item and um and they and so if you'd like to make a motion to approve this with the condition that they discuss uh the contract services.

Yeah, that would be my motion to approve with the Repeat that one more time, Tom. Sorry. Uh a motion to approve the levy um but include in a discussion the contract services a review of the contract services something akin to that to approve with the expectation of a discussion regarding contract service expenditures with the recommendation of a discussion recommendation of a discussion that work Julian okay looking for a Second if there's one. Okay, got a second. Good. We need to go a roll call. Condit. Hi, Commissioner Jamu.

Hi, Commissioner Gil. Hi, Commissioner Johnson. Hi. Motion carries 40 with one absent. All right. Move to reports. Any reports from anybody? All right. Go ahead and adjourn this meeting to the next uh regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, September 1st, 2025. Thank you.