City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, thank you folks for showing up to the City Council meeting here. We're going to call the meeting to order at 6 p.m. Please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. All right, thank you. Do a quick roll call. I see all council members are present. Any report out on closed session? Alex, no report out on closed session? Okay. Conflict of interest declarations. Do we have any?

Yes, Mayor. I have a conflict of interest for item G1. I am a resident of Zone 2. Okay.

Mayor, I have the same conflict with Zone 2. Okay.

And I also have a conflict of interest for Zone 3 when it gets to that item. Anything else? None. None. All right. Thank you.

All right. Agenda review. Changes or deletions? A couple changes, Mayor. Item B3, Citizens Recognition for the Food Pantry. They couldn't make it, so we'd like to postpone that one until it's a good time for them to... That's B3? B3, Citizens Recognition for the Food Pantry. So we'll coordinate with them and make sure we get a good date for them.

Okay.

Also, H2, which is the senior planner item, I'm asking to postpone that to a date certain, or actually not a date certain, to a future agenda item. We need to do a little bit more work on that, the salary on that one.

All righty.

And I have a couple to add. I would like to... For item G2, this is for the considered adoption of the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Storage Contingency Plan. I would propose that we do receive the presentation tonight. I'm asking that we can hold off from adoption until the following meeting, just due to public notice. I think there's been a shortage of time that the public had to digest it.

That is exactly what we were going to do after talking to a public works director here, and that's exactly what we're going to do. So thank you.

Okay, excellent. And the other one I have is item H4. I would like to postpone that item until after we receive our three water presentations.

Any questions from the bias on that?

No questions. I don't support that.

Nope.

Okay, great. Thank you.

No, we're going to go ahead, and that one is going to stay on the thing with consensus of the council. All right, anything else? Okay. Page 4.

Brian, I think there might be a clarification. Can you clarify for the record what we're doing with H4?

I would like to postpone that item until we receive our three water presentations. That was Sonoma Water, IRPA, and IWPC.

Correct. I understood the request, but I don't think it received consensus.

No, it did not. So would that be to the other option? I would like to postpone that to another meeting and not have that be tonight. I don't think sufficient time was given.

No, that's a normal council meeting item.

Yeah, we have a normal council meeting agenda item. Do we have consensus on that? There's no reason for it.

Everyone's prepared. And I'll speak to that when the item comes to council.

Okay, thank you. All right, let's move into item B, Recognition Student Liaison Program Completion. Recipients of Valeria and Giano and- Pardon me.

Just want to interrupt, Mayor. Point of order. We did not give the audience a chance to ask if they had any changes or deletions. Okay.

Yeah, I'd like to bring it to the public. Sorry for that. Changes or deletions?

That's not part of our protocol. The council sets the agenda. The mayor can readjust items. The mayor can entertain requests. This is not an action item for members of the public. It's been called out before. Can we make that request during public comment on the item for it to be continued to later meeting when that item is up?

Can I request also to have that item moved up? This would be the H4 item. To have that moved up to after consent calendar. This would be prior to public hearings.

Do we want to move that up? I don't. There's no reason for it.

What would be the justification for moving that? There's people, a lot of members here that are members of the public that would like to speak to that item.

They can come in and speak when it comes up on that discussion item and under new business under age I think the issue with that again.

There's been That was added very last minute to the agenda. I think there's been a history of bias from our city attorney and regarding potter valley project decisions that goes back to how this came about from the beginning was that there was a lot of confusion from not reporting out in closed session sort of falsely well i might suggest that the council decide whether they want to move it or not and then have this discussion when the

the item comes up so if the council wants to show thumbs up or down whether they want to move so i was giving the reason why we wanted to have it moved okay do we have consensus to move this item on the council here i see a no i see a no i see a no created two okay all right now we will be one B1. Yes, I'm getting back to B1. Recognition student liaison program completion recipients. Again, Valeria Angiano. Sorry if I got that name wrong. And Brisa Cardenas, Cloverdale High School. We have two certificates for you. Please come down.

Before we bring them up to that microphone, they're used to sitting up here. Just for the public to be aware what the city council student liaison position does, it's in an effort to increase youth participation in local government. The Joint City Cloverdale Unified School District Subcommittee developed a student city council liaison position to gain student participation at monthly city council meetings. and serve as a youth voice for the community. The student city council liaison is an annual position for a one school year term. Duties include acting as a liaison between the city council and the high school, the elementary school in the middle for a one year school term. Assistance special projects as needed serve as a role model for younger youth and provide periodic updates to the school student council on current projects and activities. And before council takes it away, I just wanted to provide some feedback to the two of you. You did an excellent job this year. I know I worked with you from the beginning, kind of set the ground rules of what this program is, and you hit the ground running. And I'm really proud of both of you. I hope you both apply to do it next year. For anybody who's used to this program, typically at the end of their term, they get a very giant check for a scholarship. However, you only get that your senior year. Both of these students are juniors this year, so they have another opportunity to apply, potentially another season, and a potentially larger check. But you will both get that larger check next year regardless if you apply again or not. And then I know that at one point you will be getting a check tonight, and I'll leave that to Councilmember Marquez to discuss at that point. But I just wanted to give members of the public a little background of what this program is and let you both know you did a really good job.

And this is a check received from the Cloverdale Kiwanis Club. This was Nikki Lane presenting, which is a total of $500, so $250 each. Thank you.

Hold on. Yeah, you're not done yet. All right, let's go ahead and bring it up to council for any comments, please.

student liaison Valeria Cardenas and Brisa Cardenas and Valeria Anguiano thank you very much you've done great service this year always showing up on time and very very impactful and complete reports from from the student liaisons thank you very much

It's been enjoyable watching both of you grow your public speaking skills. And I want to thank you so much for your time that you spent on the dais.

Thank you for representing Cloverdale High School. You guys did a great job. And we hope to see you next year for sure. And like I say, where do you see yourself in five years?

You two are amazing. I've been doing this for the council for about six years, also had them on school boards. I've even had family members that I won't mention their names that were our student liaisons at different points, and you two knocked it out of the park. You're the best we've had. You were very thorough, very articulate, and we can't thank you enough. So as juniors, amazing. Looking forward to next year seeing your applications come in.

Yeah, congratulations. Well-earned 250, you got there also. And I think they've said it all, but you guys did just an outstanding job. It was a pleasure to see your reports come in, very well-written, very laid out perfectly, easy to follow, and you guys delivered them flawlessly. So thank you very much. And like we've all said up here, I sure hope to see you next year. Thank you, guys. Very appreciated. Do you guys want to say anything?

I WANTED TO JUST HAVING GONE THROUGH THE COLLEGE ADMISSIONS WITH MY OWN DAUGHTER RECENTLY, I KNOW HOW TOUGH IT IS AND THINGS LIKE THIS REALLY WILL HELP YOU STICK OUT AND IF YOU WANT A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION FROM MIKE OR I, LET US KNOW.

I just want to say thank you to everyone. You guys were all very welcoming. I'm very thankful for that. And I learned a lot and I definitely will be applying for next year. Hopefully I get it. But yes, this was definitely a very good opportunity for me and I learned a lot and I enjoyed it a lot. So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for this experience, and the welcoming was super nice. Thank you, and hope to be here again next year. Thank you.

Awesome. All right, we do have two certificates for you guys, so let's get a picture with you. You know how that goes. Thank you. All right. All right. Let's move into item B2, proclamation for Pride Month and the recipients of Cloverdale Pride Committee.

Thank you, Mayor. A proclamation of the City Council of the City of Cloverdale recognizing June 2026 as LGBTQIA plus Pride Month in Cloverdale. Whereas Pride Month is observed each June to recognize the history, contributions, and ongoing pursuit of equality, dignity, and inclusion for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and other LGBTQIA plus individuals. And whereas Pride Month commemorates the history of the LGBTQIA plus civil rights movement, and recognizes the efforts of individuals and organizations who have worked to advance equality, acceptance and human rights. And whereas the city of Cloverdale recognizes that diversity strengthens communities and that all residents deserve to be treated with dignity, respect and equal opportunity, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. And whereas LGBTQIA plus residents, families, business owners, employees, students, volunteers, and community leaders contribute to the cultural, civic, social, and economic vitality of the Cloverdale community, And whereas the City of Cloverdale values fostering a welcoming community where residents of all backgrounds can live, work, participate, and thrive, and recognizes Pride Month through community observances and celebrations, including the city's pride flag raising ceremony, and whereas recognizing Pride Month provides an opportunity to celebrate the diversity of Cloverdale community and reaffirm the city's commitment to inclusion, understanding, mutual respect, dignity, and equal opportunity for all residents, consistent with the city's mission, vision, and values. And now therefore be it proclaimed that the city council of the city of Cloverdale hereby recognizes June, 2026 as LGBTQIA plus pride month in Cloverdale and encourages all residents to celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and treat one another with dignity and respect. Dated June 10th, 2026. So ordered. Brian Wheeler, Mayor.

Comment.

All right, Eric Tureri, I'm the chair of the Cloverdale Pride Committee. This is our second annual Pride weekend that we've organized. I want to thank Council Member Lasky for reading that, all of the members of the City Council for supporting the recognition of Pride Month and the raising of the flag. It means a lot for people in in the broader LGBTQIA plus community to have that recognition at a municipal level. It says a lot to see the pride flag flying above City Hall, regardless of which pole it's on. It's awesome to see it up there. So thank you very much. I've got a few flyers that anyone in the audience that would like to see for what we have scheduled. I don't need to go through all of it, but if you go to CloverdalePride.com, you'll find all of the events for June 28th I'm sorry, June 18th to 21st. And I just want to thank you again for the recognition and for doing this.

Perfect. Thank you. I'd like to bring it up to the dais and have comments from the council.

Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to thank you, Mr. Eric Turrey, for your organization and the Pride Committee's organization. You know, this was an effort with businesses, local organizations, to put the Pride event together starting last year, and that's not an easy thing, and I really thank you for putting all that together.

I think it's really important to recognize diversity and I think it's wonderful that each year Pride Month grows in Cloverdale and we have more activities and more people participating.

I would just like to, Eric, thanks for showing up tonight. All these words are just words on a proclamation, but unless you live them, experience them and know them, you have no idea what the internal intent is. So with that, I'd like to say Jared, my son, I love you and I support you.

Cloverdale has always been based around community. It's always been a small town, always had a very diverse community here, and we've always been supportive of everyone. Watching it change over the last few decades has been amazing. Thank you for including us in the celebrations that you guys hold. And I was going to actually say something about the words on the paper because it's the second to last paragraph where it talks about mutual respect. and dignity and those are big words in this community because it wasn't always that way and have one of my friends that uh helps me a lot that lives in our community that is part of the lgbtq population here he actually said to me one time he goes i've been married three times yes but it's been the same person they've been legal and illegal and legal and illegal and so to know that We in Cloverdale support them and will always support them and include them in everything. And to know that they are equal as anyone else now makes me feel good for my friends that love each other. So thank you guys.

I think everybody's taken the comments here. Eric, thank you for showing up, and thank you to all the members of the LGBTQIA plus community. Cloverdale has, we kind of, I don't want to say ramped it up, but actually got a flag raising last year, and I was pretty proud to come down there. and talk to a lot of the folks. And I was sorry I missed this one this year. I was sorry I was on vacation, but I was checking in to make sure. Also, one of the things I want to see, I know we redid our commemorative flags, and we decided to put it up at the library, and I noticed today it was not flying, so we'll be checking on that. And those are just little items that can be taken care of to show you guys the respect. Thank you for being part of our community, and thanks for doing what you do. Appreciate it.

So everyone who's a member of the committee, please come on up.

Be part of this photo.

All right.

And we have, let's see, B3 is being moved, correct? That's to a future. Kevin is out. Okay. Thank you. Do we have any public comments for the last, for our last item? The proclamation for Pride Month from anyone?

Nope.

What was that?

I'll get that. Thank you very much for the proclamation. I wanted to make a short statement today regardless, and I think this is a fitting time to do it. My name is Dan Rickert. I have been a resident of Cloverdale since 2021. My current role or job is I'm the executive director of the Cloverdale Arts Alliance, but I'm not speaking today in that capacity. I'm speaking as a citizen of Cloverdale. First off, I've had the pleasure of working with a lot of you up here on the stage, and I want to thank each and every one of you for your dedication to our community and to our city, and thank you for all that you do. I want to acknowledge a lot of the folks that just came up, members of our community, and the nonprofit community. I think the average Cloverdalian doesn't know how much Nonprofits do for our city. There's a number of them and a number of leaders here here behind me and with their the donors and the volunteers they do a lot provide a lot of services for our city that That the city doesn't have the resources whether it's staffing or funding to do and so I want to acknowledge them And the reason why I'm speaking now is Councilmember Lasky, you know, the values that he was talking about was just about what I wanted to talk about today. And that's civility and respect in our community. So, you know, we're coming on the 250th birthday of our nation. You know, we're a melting pot. All men are created equal, a land of innovation and opportunity. And that comes from different ideas. And You know, that's something that drives our nation forward and drives our community forward. You know, there's a lot of issues in front of us. There's people here that want to talk about certain ones of those. And there's going to be differences of opinion. And I think it's important, not just for the council, but for our whole community to really understand. and give respect to each other. There are people up on the stage, there are people behind me that have been accused of all sorts of things, crimes, corruption, secret meetings, all sorts of things. Because somebody thinks they think differently than them. And that's not how we approach these things. Just because somebody is for something that you're not, or you have a difference of opinion, the default should not be accusing them of bad character. Everyone up here, the people in our community, they're giving their time. And trying to do their best, you know, I know you council members, you know, you have families you have businesses You have things outside of this room. I believe you get about $900 a month And you put in a lot of time and you take a lot of crap for that $900 or whatever it is and I know none of you are throwing your lives away or scheming or committing crimes and in that role but um you know the temperature has been escalating both especially online social media sometimes in this room i just want to remind all of us you know that we're in this together we're all good people trying to do our best we're going to have differences of opinions But that doesn't mean we need to malign each other. So I just wanted to state that. And if somebody is on the other side of something that you are, your default shouldn't be to say, well, they must be doing something wrong. Listen, if people in the audience, people in our community don't like what these five individuals are doing, Run for city council. Support somebody that aligns with your values. And I just felt a need with all of the hostility that we've seen here in our community to say that. And it very much aligns with inclusion that comes with pride, love that's on my shirt, and the values that the city council just celebrated. So thank you very much.

Okay, any other public comments on that item? Okay, I'm seeing none. We don't have the student liaison. Now let's move into regular public comment item D1, verbal comments. Any person wishing to speak on an item not listed on the agenda may do so at this time. Pursuant to the Brown Act, the City Council is not allowed to consider issues or take action on any item not listed on the agenda. Three minutes is allotted to each speaker.

I'm Eric Tureri. I have a question before I begin. I apologize. I didn't have time to review the agenda. Is the issue of districts on the agenda this evening? It is. Then I will defer my comment till later.

Good evening, Daniel Frankston. I had originally come here to discuss item G2. I'm one of those residents that was unable to access the agenda report, and more importantly, I was unable to access the master plan that was attached to the agenda report. The purpose of my coming here is to request that that be put over. But based on what I heard earlier, my understanding, we'll get a presentation today. We'll have a discussion, but we'll have an opportunity either at the next council meeting to do that. And I want to thank everyone for doing that. And with that in mind, that leaves me two and a half minutes to say a couple of things. First, I want to really thank what Dan said with regards to... the speech that he made. I really think it's important that we all work together. I think we all have a desire to make Cloverdale a better place. And even though we might not see the same path forward for solutions, it's important that we listen to each other and respect our differences, because together we're going to make Cloverdale better. I also want to thank Dan for an outstanding Friday Night Live calendar this year and the hard work that he puts in at that. And lastly, I just want to say I attended the open space dedication on Saturday. It was great. But more importantly, I went back there on Sunday and walked around, and it was just awesome, and I really appreciate it. I think things like that really make Cloverdale stick out, and I really think that that will help draw people into the town. So I want to thank the Vice Mayor and Council Member Morgenstern. I know they had particular – I know you all had – efforts in there, but you particularly had especially large efforts in that, and I wanted to thank you both for doing that, and thank the Council for moving forward and getting us 200 plus acres of open space that'll be there today, tomorrow, and forever. Thank you.

Any other public comment?

Hi, I'm Rob Kozlowski of Cloverdale. And Brian, Todd, I just saw you the other day. So first of all, I'd like to thank the city's administrative subcommittee team for addressing many issues surrounding both the water rate study and the two-year budget cycle review yesterday. We discussed issues such as drought surcharge refund for the dry years of 2021 and 2022 when water bills were amped up by state intervention. We also talked about the promotion of outdoor water usage and the necessity of lower budget reserve levels tied to specific departments, such as the water department, even as the city's bank account is flush with millions of dollars. One item deserving of comment, which is why it came up, is the reporting in our local feel-good newspaper. A number of errors were reported in a Cloverdale Connect column dated June 2026. And I just wanted to recount those. First, they argued that or stated that Cloverdale water rates are low. No water rates in Cloverdale are not low. Five years ago they were reasonable, but after five years and a cumulative double-digit rate increase of 76%, Cloverdale water rates are among the highest in the county, including higher than a number of towns in Mendocino County, as outlined in the recent Hildebrand Consulting Study. The paper stated that there would be a 7% increase over the next five years. And no, that statement is incorrect. Water rates would rise by 49% over the next rate increase period of years through 2034. The increase would be on top of the 76% rate increase recently experienced by Cloverdale Water customers over the past five years. And as one member of the public stated, affordability must be included in the discussion of water rates. The paper stated that deficits are anticipated, and looking at the data, there would be no future deficits in the water departments, especially if the current policy of 25% reserves are rescinded in favour of 10% reserves, as is common practice for awarding contracts such as the repaving of First Street. For bond ratings, 25% reserves for the general fund are appropriate, but not for individual departments like the water department. The paper stated that water bill increases would amount to the following. $4 more for a current $75 water bill. Not true. They would go up to $112 at the end of this latest rate increase. They stated that for a $188 water bill, it would only go up by $13. That's also not true. That $188 water bill that you may be paying now as a larger family becomes $280, unless the planned water rates in line with Proposition 218 are lowered or at least stick to the inflation levels. I've asked Cloverdale Connect to update their information, and I trust that the city representatives will support fact-based data on water and wastewater building and dealing with the media. Thank you very much.

Public comment, any other public comment? Jennifer?

Oh, and somebody get her microphone.

Excuse me. Let's get Jennifer. We need to get Jennifer a microphone and let her go. She was next in line. She's gone?

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, council members, and staff. My name is Jennifer Sullivan and I'm a resident of Cloverdale. I'd like to focus on one section of the Masonite property tonight. It sits next to the Russian River, is approximately one mile long and 20 feet high. Esmeralda's own FAQ cites approximately 1.3 million cubic yards of wood waste and soil in the reusable fill area proposed for a future public park. At even a conservative estimate of 1,000 pounds per cubic yard, that is roughly 1 billion pounds of material, or about 650,000 tons. That is not a landscaping issue. That is not a pile of dirt someone can casually move around and turn into a park. If that material had to be excavated and hauled away, even assuming 20 tons per truckload, you're talking about more than 30,000 truckloads. At 20 truckloads per day, seven days a week, removal would take roughly 1,625 days. Almost five years of daily traffic, assuming no delays. All of those truckloads would require extensive logistical management, including regulatory oversight for safety, environmental controls, and proper disposal. And that is only if the material is moved. If it stays in place, the questions do not disappear. If it were to be removed, a rough estimate of the water needed for dust control could range from 18 million to 65 million gallons, approximately 50 to 250 per acre feet. Cloverdale is not limited to doing nothing or accepting Esmeralda as proposed. The former industrial site could host a clean employment district focused on sustainable materials, climate resilient construction and local jobs. This could mean a campus for businesses aligned with the site's industrial history and Cloverdale's future, such as reclaimed wood, fire resilient materials, modular components for carbon materials. Such a vision would create local jobs for a range of careers and diversity in the economy beyond tourism and housing growth. But that vision starts with telling the truth about the industrial history of that site, understanding the complexity of the fractured bedrock beneath, recognizing that the persistence of pentachlorophenol contamination, which can last for centuries, and realizing that the former Masonite property is simply not safe for residential development. Thank you.

Okay, do we have any other public comment?

Green. Good evening. John Lambert, Cloverdale. Tonight, I would also like to share some numbers with you. She wrote about it, a return to send a address unknown. I'm not going to do those numbers. 16 is the number of pieces of chicken in a KFC bucket of bird. Sadly, there is no KFC in Cloverdale anymore. 42, and this is from the Cloverdale Chamber of Commerce, is the number of vacant businesses and empty lots dotting the city. All of them are places of opportunity. One of those, ironically, flies a No Esmeralda banner in the window. 42 is also the age of Elvis Presley when he passed away. 16. That's the number of Yes Esmeralda signs that have been vandalized or removed by those that are opposed to this project. Zero is the number of signs that have been removed or tampered with by those who support Yes Esmeralda. Yes, Esmeralda supporters are focused on positive change for the community, while some of those who are opposed seek to divide us. Zero is also the number of dollars I have received in support of this project from anybody. A question mark is the number of people who are engaged in intimidation, vitriol, and abhorrent personal attacks against people who are involved in trying to bring something of intrinsic value, not just to Cloverdale, but to the county, the state, and the world. One. It's not just a number. One, W-O-N, is what Cloverdale will have achieved when this project is approved. 8.39. That's the time karaoke starts tonight and every Wednesday night at Railroad Station with KJ Full Send. Come on down and sing some Elvis songs. Maybe I'll get some hairspray. To close, yes, Cloverdale. Yes, Esmeralda. Please check out the Hello Esmeralda Facebook group page and esmeralda.org for up-to-date information and some fun. Maybe we'll have a clam bake. Happy 250th to the United States of America. The chickens are free. They make great dog toys. Thank you very much. Elvis is leaving the building.

Do what? All right, folks. Is there any more? Okay. See more.

My name is Paul Peary. I'm a citizen of Cloverdale on the other side of the river. And for six months now, I've been coming to these city council meetings and also Esmeralda's timeshare sales and information events. And I can't get enough time to get my concerns and questions that I have as a local affected citizen to be of Cloverdale. The three-minute stop clock pasted in full screen right above us is really frustrating to any presenter. I mean, it'd be nice if you could just put it down in the corner and not blast us out. So I got a new tap for tonight. We're going to play a word game called Less Talk. I'm going to say some words and sentences and let you all fill in the lines to save time. Industrial Cleanup Superfund site. Outdated 2009 EIR. Devin Zugle was 12 years old when she must have first read it. EIR CEQA Addendum, Environmental Errors and Emissions. Endangered Species Act, COHO. No Russian River water temperature flow analysis from increased well pumping. No toxin tests from the southern riverine border below the Esmeralda property. Let's play some D word games. Drought. D.O. Depleted water oxygen. D for dust, dust control, five to 10 years of construction, there's your million gallons of water. Atmospheric river, El Nino, site storm water control, new purple pipe, gray water concept, above unknown toxic geology. Site oversaturation storm event. 28 site imploded contamination testing wells imploded, gone off the site. Site toxic leaching. Dead river, sick people. Let's put Cloverdale on the map for the right reasons. Maybe more talk. thoughtful action. Esmerelda needs a new ERI to develop. Any more of that land, period.

Hi, my name is Sally Pringle, and I'm a Cloverdale resident. I would just like to add about the Ismerelda project that definitely need a new EIR. Also wanted to bring up the Endangered Species Act for the foothill yellow-footed frog. And last city council meeting, there was talk of transparency. and transparency during real estate deals. So who's the realtor involved with Esmeralda? Don't go any farther until you disclose that. Thank you.

Good evening. I'm Lance Villa. I own the property south of Esmeralda to the west side. And I'd like to bring up some concerns that I have with what has been said here before. The dust coming up. I have small children. I'm concerned about that. I'm concerned about my pets. I'm also concerned about my well, which is south of the property. And when that all gets dug up, what's going to happen to my water? Right now, it's fine. We haven't tested, but who knows what's to come. I also want to say I'm not anti-growth whatsoever, but I am anti-unmitigated, destructive growth that does more for the developers and the dealmakers than for the community who are already here. Thank you for your time.

Do we have more public comment? Okay, I'm seeing none. We will move on to D2. We have written comments that did come in. They are on cloverdale.net agenda center, and they are on there and part of the public record. They're there for your viewing when you get on their presentations. We have none. Consent calendar. Do we have a motion for the consent calendar?

Do you want to? Anybody on the dais want to pull any items? Vice Mayor, we did get a request from a member of the public to pull both items. Mr. Koslowski, if you wanted to speak to that or not.

Thanks, Mike.

First of all, I think... Hey, Rob, real quick, could you explain why did you want to pull F1 and then we can do a vote on that and we'll just move through it like that?

Yeah, I was just going to tell you really short. I want to say, first of all, kudos must be given to the city's water enterprise team for responding to and quickly fixing the broken water main near Industrial Drive. Second, I'd like to understand if the city's going forward policy for its water and wastewater budgets, as we discussed yesterday, will be shifting from reactive emergency repairs to proactive planned replacements of the aging water and sewer lines around town. If so, please publish the schedule of water and wastewater projects planned for the next two-year budget cycle. And I hope that was taken in earnest yesterday and will be done. In this way, competitive and cost-effective bids can be selected for fixing the city's infrastructure instead of reacting to problems that require very expensive emergency repairs. Emergency-spurring fixes of failing infrastructure should be rare, not the normal business practice of the city. Furthermore, proactive planning of water main and sewer line replacements would mitigate the need for maintaining large budget reserves to accommodate emergencies. No longer should the water enterprise team act like firefighters waiting for an emergency to occur in order to act. The added benefit for residents is that such good public policy of proactive work will stop the forcing of higher water bills and double-digit rate increases. So again, I implore you to please publish that project schedule and draw down the millions of dollars collected from the ever-increasing water bills during the past five years. Thank you, and that was my comment on F1.

Okay, thank you.

Want me to stay for F2? Yes. So related to F2, again, I praise Ms.

Yes. We have to discuss this one, open it up to public, and then vote on it and move into F2. We'll need you probably to send them out to stay close. Thank you.

Okay, do we have any comments from the guys on this one?

None?

None?

One thing that I will comment about, thank you for being in the meeting and participating so much yesterday, that went really well, and I think that we had a good effort on all of us to make sure we were on the same page. One of the things I will say, and I said it yesterday, is it's illegal for us to take too much money, and We have a reserve that we need to set, and these numbers are set so that we can someday be proactive. It might not even happen in our generation because it has been kicked down the road for 60 plus years in Cloverdale. And so for us to start catching up on these projects like we are now and trying to do more, I think we're all in agreeance that we want it to happen, and we're going to work very hard to do so, except it doesn't happen overnight. The list of projects, the capital improvement projects, the things we're doing, they will always be published. They'll always be made public. You can always reach out to Kevin or to Derek if you have any questions like you always do, and we appreciate that.

Yep.

Do we have any public comment? Seeing none.

I'll make a motion for F1.

Okay. Do I have a second?

Second.

All right, if we can read it by title, since it is pulled off the consent, it has to be.

Give me one second here. Thank you.

Yep, I need somebody to read that.

I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution entitled the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cloverdale Approving a Budget Amendment for Emergency Water Main Repairs at Cloverdale Boulevard and Industrial Drive.

Now do I have a second? Second.

Okay, take it to vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Motion passes 5-0.

All righty. Now, Mr. Kozlowski, item F2.

So, F2 is considered a resolution awarding the Cloverdale First Street Gap Closure Project to Precision Excavating and Grading, incorporated in the amount of $184,222, and authorized in the City Manager to execute the contract with Precision Excavating and Grading.

Okay, so on item F2 again, I think praise must be offered for the city's public works department for securing competitive bids for the first street gap closure projects. And that's one of the things I've pushed for is doing competitive bids, not directed projects. I was also pleased to see that the city is implementing 10% contingencies in its spending approval process. as opposed to 65% contingencies for previously proposed water projects that fortunately I guess from that point of view weren't done but unfortunately are putting us behind the eight ball today. As all residents with water meter recall, both the past rate increases and documented contingencies for water projects were excessive and those were beat back with the protest over through Proposition 218 five years ago. Second, I actually applaud the Road Works team for using federal community development block funds for the First Street sidewalk project and not using up local DD sales tax for much-needed road paving projects. The added benefit for residents is that lower project contingencies and lower financial reserves allow projects such as the First Street sidewalk and road paving paving projects to proceed expeditionally. And it was very heartening to see and drive on First Street between Main Street and Cloverdale Boulevard. That was paved, I believe, last week it was finished. And I would say keep up the good progress and keep putting our local DD tax dollars to work. Again, let's make Cloverdale both attractive and functional. Thank you for listening to me.

I would like to make a motion, but just want to bring up there might be a conflict of interest on this item for a council member. I just want to give them the opportunity to recuse.

Okay.

If he wants, I will respond to that. This is a competitive bid process. With that, they took the lowest bid as a city. It's a CDBG grant. Precision Excavation, the person that won this bid, gave me money towards my supervisor campaign. They gave me more than $500. However, the state does not mandate that I have to recuse myself because of the competitive bid process and the city taking the lowest bid. So thank you for trying to point that out. Thanks for the transparency.

I'd like to make a motion to have a comment first, don't forget.

Let's do, let's run this to the, do we have any comment from the public on this item? Okay, I'm seeing none. Do I have a motion to read by title only?

Move for a resolution to adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Cloverdale awarding construction contract to precision excavating and grading for the first street sidewalk gap closure project and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement and related contract documents. Do I have a second? Second.

All right.

Mike, take it to vote. Thank you, Mayor. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Motion passes 5-0. Perfect.

All right, let's move into item G, public hearings. G1 would be Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District public hearing approval for the annual engineers report and resolutions authorizing assessments for fiscal year 26-27. This is where we do have two conflicts of interest, one starting out with... Oh, I'm sorry. Oh.

How's it going?

I didn't see your presentation on there. Hold on. Just let me make sure we're following our agenda here. OK, go ahead.

My name is Jenny Melman. I'm an engineer with DCCM who prepared the engineer's report. Brief presentation. The City of Cloverdale's Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District funds the costs of maintenance and landscaping and lighting improvements that are in the right of way but were constructed for the special benefit of particular developments. And there are seven zones in this assessment district. Each zone is operated independently in terms of expenditures and assessments and a map of each zone and description of the maintenance areas are included in the engineer's report. Every year, the city has to undertake certain proceedings in order to levy assessments in the upcoming fiscal year. These proceedings are consistent with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and by Proposition 218. And they take three council meetings. On January 28th this year, the council initiated the proceedings by appointing DCCM as engineer of work to prepare the annual engineer's report. On April 8th, the council adopted resolutions of intent to levy and collect assessments and set the date for the public hearing tonight. um... tonight after brief review of proposed changes to the landscaping lighting assessment district we're going to have a public hearing and then the council may adopt resolutions authorizing the levying of assessments so uh... There's a summary above which states the proposed changes this year to the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District. There's been no changes since the April report that was preliminarily approved. Would you like me to summarize this again? Sure, go ahead. Cool. So looking at the table above you, this is the proposed assessments for LADD. The first two columns show the proposed budget and the change from the previous year. So overall, the assessment district's budget is going to be reduced 6% from last year. We have reductions in the budget in zones one, two, three, and increases in zones four, five, six, and seven. In terms of assessments, we show last year's assessments and upcoming proposed assessments and the change from the proposed upcoming year from last year. So we have reductions in proposed assessments for zones one, three, four, five, and six, and increases to assessments in zones two and seven. The sources of budget revenue are primarily from proposed assessment revenue. We also use proposed reserves that are from previous years, unspent monies. And we have, in Zone 2, a general fund contribution, and that pays for public benefits of parks. So the last three columns are showing our reserves for each zone and they're all at 25%, which is the goal of lab this year. So that concludes my summary proposed changes and happy to answer any questions.

Cool. Any questions? Any comments for questions from the public on this item? Seeing none, yup. All right, let's move into zone two. And we have a couple of recusals here of Council Member Marquez and Vice Mayor. Does somebody wanna read the resolution? By title only. Council Member Lasky, Council Member Morgenstern.

if you want, right here. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution entitled a resolution of the city council of the city of Cloverdale approving the annual engineer's report, confirming the assessment diagram and the annual assessment amounts and authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2026, 2027 for the Cloverdale landscaping and lighting assessment district for zone two.

Do I have a second?

I want to second that motion.

Okay.

Mike?

All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Motion passes. Noting that Council Member Marquez and Vice Mayor Lanz abstain.

All right, with all council back, let the record reflect. The mayor has stepped off the dais for zone three's resolution due to the fact that he lives in zone three. Do you have any comments from the dais? Seeing none, do we have any comments from the public? Seeing none, do we have anyone that would like to make a motion?

Vice Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution entitled resolution of the City Council of the City of Cloverdale, approving the annual engineer's report, confirming the assessment diagram and the annual assessment amounts and authorizing the levy and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2026, 2027 for the Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District for zone three.

I would like to second that motion.

Thank you. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes 4-0 with one recusal of Mayor Wheeler. Mayor Wheeler, if you could come back.

All right, we have another resolution here for zones one, four through, zone one and four through seven resolution. Do I have a motion for that? Do we have any public comment on this item? Seeing none.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion resolution titled Resolution of the City of Council of the City of Cloverdale approving the Annual Engineer's Report confirming the assessment diagram and the annual assessment amounts and authorizing levying and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2026-27 for the Cloverdale Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District for Zone 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Do I have a second?

I'd like to make a second for that motion.

All right. Mike? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Motion passes 5-0. Perfect. That is it. All righty.

Thank you. And item G2. Public Works Director Derek Montagna.

I like the new podium heights. Bonnie Robinson is going to provide a presentation for us today on the update for the urban water management plan. I just have a couple of quick talking points that I'd like to go over before she does her presentation, kind of clarifying what the plan is. It's been five years since we've seen one of these plans in front of us, so it's good to freshen up on what it is and what it's used for. So council's going to receive a presentation. We are in the public commenting period right now and the public hearing period. And then from what I can hear from the council, they may want to see this returned to the next meeting. So on May 26th, I notified the council that June 10th meeting, we'd be seeing this urban water management plan. Hey, Derek, could you speak up a little? Sorry. That's full volume. That's what I got. The urban water management plan was available on May 22nd, 2026 through the City of Cloverdale's website. It was noticed in the Press Democrat on May 20th, May 27th, and June 3rd of 2026. We're in the public hearing portion of that plan. I just wanted to make a brief explanation of what the urban water management plan is, and just as important, what it is not. The state mandates the urban water management plan include a water shortage contingency plan and water, the urban water management plan includes water shortage contingency plan and the water shortage contingency plan be embedded in the urban water management plan. The urban water management plan is a planning document that the urban water suppliers are required to prepare every five years under California law. Because Cloverdale serves more than 3,000 water connections, the city is legally required by the state to prepare this plan at our cost, make it available for the public review, hold public hearing and submit the final adopted plan to the state. The urban water management plan is best understood as a state required plan and response document. it identifies how the city would evaluate water demands, recognize potential shortage conditions, communicate with the public, and implement conservation or demand restrictions measured during droughts, curtailments, infrastructure disruptions, or other water supply emergencies. In that sense, the plan functions less as a physical water study and more like an emergency action framework that the city is legally required to have in place. The urban water management plan does not govern, control, or determine the physical availability of water in the city's water basin. It does not create water, operate the watershed, control hydrological conditions, nor does it calculate the actual amount of groundwater or surface water physically present at any given time. or establish the basin's safe yield. It is not a groundwater basin study, a water rights determination, or a project specific water availability study. Rather, it uses planning assumptions and emergency scenarios to identify when the city would need to employ water saving measures set forth in the water shortage contingency plan. I'll get there. Also, it does not approve, develop, allocate water to a specific project or replace any project level and analysis that may be required under state law. Instead, it is a broad citywide planning and compliance document that uses available information to evaluate water supply reliability and identify how the city responds under different water supply conditions. It is also important to understand how the water shortage number in the plans are developed. Those numbers are not a declaration that the city currently has a physical water shortage, and they are not a measure of how much water is physically available in the basin. They are planning scenarios created in response to emergency conditions, regulatory curtailments, and multi-year drought assumptions. The plan uses per capita water use, which means gallons per person per day, as one way to estimate and compare water demands. In other words, the plan looks at projected population and assumes water use per person. then compares that demand against potential limits that could apply during drought or emergency conditions. That is how the plan estimates shortage percentage under dry year, multi-dry year and drought risk scenarios. water shortage caused by a curtailment order during a declared declared drought does not necessarily mean that the physical water doesn't exist it means that under the emergency regulation on regulatory conditions the city must limit use to the amount allowed and employ the water saving measures identified in this plan The major part of this effort is the water shortage contingency plan. This plan is essentially the city's response framework for drought, curtailments, infrastructure failures, or other water system emergencies. It identifies shortage levels, response actions, communication procedures, enforcement tools, and the steps the city would take if available supply does not meet demand. In practical terms, this is a plan we are legally required to have in place before an emergency occurs. It ensures that the public has had opportunity to review and comment on the city's approach. Tonight's action is to receive public comment on the urban water management plan and the water shortage contingency plan. I do recommend that the city council receive the presentation, receive public comment, and then give direction for further items or bring it to another council.

Future meeting.

Future meeting, sorry. So that's my little preamble. I just... Sometimes the nomenclature of the study gets confused with an actual water availability study. With that, I'll turn it over. Is Bonnie on?

I am on.

Okay. Take it away.

Perfect. Let me share my screen and the presentation. Right. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Members. As Derek said, tonight we're presenting on the City's Urban Water Management Plan and Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Derek covered a lot of this in his preamble, so I will move through this a little more quickly, but as he stated, the Urban Water Management Plan is a long-range planning document looking to out the year 2050, evaluating availability and reliability of water supplies to meet both current and projected water demands through 2050. It also provides that water supply emergency response plan through the water shortage contingency plan, which is included as required as part of the urban water management plan. This also serves as a foundational document for water supply assessments that may be required for other proposed development projects. that are required under state law. And this would be a building block for those to then evaluate beyond. And under state law, the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan is due to the California Department of Water Resources by July 1st, 2026. Some of the background on the regulatory requirements, the Urban Water Management Planning Act was first enacted in 1983 and is included in the California Water Code. It applies to urban water suppliers that serve more than 3,000 customers or 3,000 acre feet per year of supply. The Cloverdale meets that threshold. In 2025, it served approximately 3,330 connections and delivered 337 million gallons of water or about 1,000 acre feet of water to city customers. Therefore, the city has to prepare an urban water management plan and is required to update that every five years, including that associated water shortage contingency plan. Maintaining compliance and an up-to-date urban water management plan is also a requirement for the city to remain eligible for and receive state grants and loans. The 2025 urban water management plan includes several key components as required and outlined in the water code. It includes a lay description in the executive summary, a description of the city's service area, historical and projected water use characterization, documentation of water supply availability and reliability, a drought risk assessment covering the next five years, the water shortage contingency plan, and a discussion of the demand management measures that the city has in place. These components work together to document the entirety of the city's water system as it looks towards the projected demands, available supplies, and how the city would respond under water shortage conditions. The city's current water service area is contiguous with the current city limits shown in the black dashed line on the map here. The city provides water service to a wide variety of service connections, residential, commercial, institutional, landscape, and fire. And as shown on the map in the yellowish color here, the city is planned to serve water within its approved urban growth boundary in the future. The city's water supply source is local groundwater under the direct influence of the Russian River, which means the city's using wells that are influenced by the Russian River and that water is then treated before it is delivered to the city's customers. The city does not currently purchase or import water from any other water supplier. This slide shows the city's historical and projected water demands. For the purposes of this document, the urban water management plan assumes build out of the city's general plan through 2050. The demand projections are based on that future growth from the adopted general plan. The city's actual 2025 water use shown in that last green column there was about 337 million gallons. And planning projections show that that may increase to 535 million gallons over the next 25 years. These projections are intentionally conservative because they reflect normal year unconstrained water use. What that means is they do not assume any drought conditions or shortage restrictions conservation measures are in place. This is important to note because the city has been on stage one water conservation of its water shortage contingency plan since 2023. and other stages or restrictions since 2021 when the drought began in those years. Therefore actual demands, including currently for 2025 are considered constrained and may be lower than what normal year planning projections would be shown. So the purpose of using those conservative projections is to support long-term planning and avoid understating the city's future water needs. provide more detailed context on how we're considering reliability for the city's future water supplies. Under normal years, the plan evaluates unconstrained demands as mentioned, and that ranges between approximately 125 and 138 gallons per person per day. This generally decreases over time as future growth because new development is anticipated to be more water efficient because of newer construction. As Derek mentioned, it's important to note that for the considerations of this plan, the city's water supply restrictions are based on state regulatory actions that have been observed during past droughts. This is not representative of reduction of actual available groundwater or the city's well pumping capacity. So for single dry years, we have assumed the same level of curtailment that was observed in 2022 and imposed by the state water board which was the lowest water supply restriction that the city had observed to date. For our purposes moving forward, that would be a restriction of down to 91 gallons per person per day. This would be up to a 34% water shortage, which would then, which we'll talk a little more about than what that means. But I also want to note that those, the reason we're saying up to is because that's based on that conservative demand projection. If demands are lower, then that percentage is lower because there's farther, you're already closer to that 91 gallons per person per day. Under multiple dry years, we've assumed the same conditions under the 2014 to 2016 drought, expanded for a five-year period, repeating 2016 conditions at the end. And that restriction ends up being between 105 and 109 gallons per person per day, equivalent to about a 13 to 24% water shortage. As Derek mentioned, these shortages do not mean that the city is out of water, but these would act as triggers for the city to take appropriate action, implement its water shortage contingency plan to reduce demand, which the city has done successfully during these droughts and these conditions in the past. Also, as mentioned, because these are based on population and the state when it has imposed curtailment orders was based on population, The extent to which the city grows would not impact the percentage shortage that would be anticipated. Continuing on with the water supply reliability, the requirement under the water code is that we're looking at projected supply and demands for normal, single dry, and five consecutive dry years. For normal years, the city's water supply is expected to meet the projected water demands through 2050. with no problems. And as was mentioned, the city would expect to be able to address any potential shortages or restrictions in single dry or multiple dry years through its water shortage contingency plan. The water code also requires a specific drought risk assessment exercise for 2026 to 2030, assuming a five consecutive dry year drought starts this year. Running through that exercise, we would see a potential 4% to 31% water shortage that the city once again would address through demand measures in its water shortage contingency plan. However, this is a required planning exercise. The city has recently assessed its water supply for the upcoming year, which I'll talk about later, and is not expecting any shortages for the upcoming year. The urban water management plan also identifies several ways that the city can continue to improve its water supply resilience. These include options that the city can implement if needed in the future. These include things like improving well production efficiency and continued management of water loss to make the best use of available water supplies. The city also is exploring water supply resiliency improvements to better prepare for dry years or other regulatory constraints. And then in emergency scenarios is when the water shortage contingency plan comes into play. For the water shortage contingency plan, as was stated, this is the city's plan to prepare for and respond to water supply emergencies, whether that be a planned drought or an unplanned infrastructure break that limits the city's ability to serve water. This is included as an appendix to the urban water management plan because state regulations require it as part of this overall plan. And we include it there as well so that it may be updated independently from the urban water management plan if needed in the future. The plan uses the state standard water shortage levels, which are the same shortage levels that the city used in its last water shortage contingency plan. That starts with stage one, which is up to 10% of a potential shortage condition, all the way up to stage six, which is more than 50% shortage. The city conducts an annual water supply and demand assessment as required by state regulations. They do this each year ahead of the upcoming fiscal year to evaluate whether there might be a potential drought. The city has recently completed this exercise for the upcoming fiscal year, starting in July. and is not anticipating any actions will need to be implemented. For the urban water management public process, we have followed or the city has followed the public process as required under the water code. Notice was provided to Sonoma County Water Agency, the county and their stakeholders in February, notify them that the city was preparing a plan. And then as Derek mentioned on May 18th, the draft urban water management plan was posted for public review and notices have since been posted in the newspaper and online. We're at the June 10th council meeting this evening, which I understand we are switching and we're receiving comment this evening, but potentially considering other actions moving forward. And once this does get completed in the future and adopted, we are required to submit it to the Department of Water Resources and then within 30 days of adoption, submit it as well to the county, the California State Library, and make sure the final is available for public review. With that, our original, these were done earlier, and I understand there have been some changes today, but I think the initial requested action is to receive public comment, but I will turn it back over to Derek for what the process is from here. I would say we will do our best, but it depends on the extent of the public comment and what level of revisions or items are requested to be changed.

Folks would need to come back to the council for our direction. So really that leaves us about a week, it looks like, from the next council meeting to July 1st when we need to adopt it. Um, so I guess we'll just do our best with that. Is there, is it, uh, what happens if, is there a late penalty? If, if any time passes beyond the first, there is not an immediate late penalty.

Um, the only, the main restriction is just that if it's not adopted by that time, there may be a period of time where the city's ineligible for search and state funding, um, items, but if that's adopted relatively soon afterwards, then that would trigger you back being eligible again. So.

Okay.

Well, thank you. We'll do our best.

Yeah.

Good evening, Bonnie. Thank you for your presentation. Derek, same. A couple of quick questions. When you do our urban water management plan, do you take into consideration the incorporated urban water management plan that was just completed by the county?

So the Sonoma County Water Agency has recently completed its urban water management plan. However, because Sonoma Water is not the city's wholesaler and doesn't provide the city's water, there's not really an overlap in those numbers and how they would impact each other. However, the city did provide notice to Sonoma Water and the county and make sure they're aware of our documentation.

communicated with them along the way so they have the city's documentation and plans as well okay and the reason i ask that is because the changes that might be happening in our river and are currently happening with water variances into the upper russian river will affect our flows and how much water we have access to because if they're measuring flow variance and that's how we dictate our contingencies and our curtailments We could be in big trouble to the point that the county in the Upper Russian River, even though they are gloating that they have a good urban water management plan, that's from Hillsburg South. In the Upper Russian River, they are saying that we are going to have to reimagine our use of water. Which tells me that the wells in the unincorporated area are probably going to start going dry on a yearly basis if they aren't already. Especially as the flow variances out of Lake Mendocino change from was at 150,000 acre feet and now we're down to 39 and they want to drop that to 30. So we'll be at 20% of our water in the Russian River that was diverted in the past. So it makes me very nervous that we are saying we have plenty of water through the UWMP here. However, our neighbors that are one property away have a chance of going dry. But with that said, I understand how it works for the incorporated areas, and I appreciate that. With a higher population, does that create higher water availability for our city?

With the higher population, we have assumed because of where the city's wells are and the constraints and the assumed water rights, that the city will be able to pump under normal conditions to whatever level they need to, to meet those future demands. There's been no indication of restrictions there. However, under that water shortage contingency, because that would be per person, if there are more people, that total for the entire city would be higher under a drought condition, you know, if there's 10,000 people compared to there being 9,000 people.

Perfect. I just wanted to make sure that was clear to the public that they know that we can take more water with higher population, but it truly affects our unincorporated areas. Thank you.

Bonnie, great presentation. I have no questions for you. The Vice Mayor took my last one there. So anyway, thank you for the presentation. And so now I'm going to open it up to public comment. Do we have any public comment on this item? Can somebody please get? Let's let Jennifer go Sally. She's she's first we just need to get her a microphone.

Thank you. I don't understand the mentality of, let's add population, we'll get more water, because it's just basically more people sharing a shortage, a water shortage. I came across a scoping document from the State of California Water Boards, and it's about the dam coming down. And in it, it says, this was from, I guess it collected comments from september november of 2025 but it said the city of cloverdale stated all the direct and indirect adverse impacts to the city water supply so you're basically you're arguing for like an eir but it says that the proposal project will result in lower russian river flows especially during drought years and that it's basically going to have a huge impact on cloverdale so what i have a hard time reconciling is so if you knew this in like november How does the WSA for Esmeralda get approved? And then how do we look at like this right now? I think it was like 119 million gallons per year. So from like 2025. to 2030, the increase is 119 million gallons per year, it was the increase in demand. I mean, where is that water coming from? It seems so certain when you read this plan, like, oh, yeah, it's just going to be there. Because like paper rights are not actual is not water supply doesn't mean that's going to be there. And I'm curious about in your contingency plan, you used 2022 for the single dry year, but then you use 2014 for the consecutive. And when I was looking at the numbers, I was like, why are the percentages decreasing? Because it would seem that, like, as longer that the drought goes on, that the shortage percent would get higher, but... when I had some help doing the math, those numbers, so had you used 2022 for the consecutive dry years, those numbers would have been higher. So it's like by using 2014, you softened the results or the way that it looks. And I'm not saying you, just I'm saying like that's the impression is like it softens the numbers. So it doesn't look so extreme. And I'm just curious like what... Why do you guys decide to do that? And then if you could answer like the other questions too, that'd be great.

So for the first, for the 2022 versus the 2014 to 16. One second, just as a point of, sorry to interrupt you.

I just want to know, do we want to go through public comment period? Oh yeah, do we want to respond this evening or not? With each person that engages the council?

I would say let's go. I like the way we're doing it right now. Let's continue. Bonnie, if you could, and pick off each question as it comes through.

Okay. Just Jennifer, are you done? Because we can only give three minutes.

Yeah, yeah, sorry.

Okay. Okay, Bonnie, thank you. Sorry for the interruption. No, thank you for confirming the process.

Bonnie, if you don't mind, can you stop presenting so that we can see you? Oh, yes. Thank you. Okay.

So on the 2022 to, you know, the single dry year versus the multiple dry year, that's because we're looking at, you know, when the city had the worst instance of the 2022 curtailment, that was not part of the city's most severe multiple year period. The city hasn't been under, you know, official dry year conditions yet. for an extended five-year period. And so we're basing that on what's been historically observed by the city. Obviously there could be an instance where a single dry year falls within those different periods, but the response would still end up being the same in implementation of the plan, but it's based on what's been historically observed by the city. As for the Potter Valley project impacts to the Russian River and the city's water supply. A lot of that is still not finalized of what those impacts will be. That's the same as what has been in Sonoma County's or the Sonoma County Water Agency's urban water management plan. And so the intent would be that we are kind of proceeding as is until there is a clear direction of what that impact would be rather than us trying to predict at this point how severe that may be because There's a lot of still unknowns or just difference of opinions on how extreme any of those impacts may be. But the urban water management plan can be amended at any time. So should that become finalized and more information is known about what those impacts will be, any of the agencies that are impacted by that can amend their urban water management plan outside of the five-year cycle. So it doesn't need to wait until that next five-year cycle. Those were the two.

I asked just about increasing population. Oh, the increasing population.

Like 119 million gallons of water.

Yeah.

I feel like all indications are there's going to be a shortage. Even the state of California said that by 2040, they're estimating about 20% less water statewide.

Jennifer, sorry to cut you off. We can't have a back and forth during a public hearing. So you provide your comments. We'll respond. Providing comments, response. Providing comments, response.

On the additional population, that's because the city's existing Russian River water supply provides that water. Part of this plan is not to do a detailed evaluation, as Derek stated at the beginning, of water availability and what exactly the total volume of groundwater and impacts of the Russian River may be. So we're basing it off of existing documentation that is available, and that may be things that are studied as part of other processes.

Any other public comment? Sally?

Yeah, I would like to bring up 2014 during the drought. I was highly involved with the Cloverdale Oasis Community Garden located at 131 South Cloverdale Boulevard, or is that 205? There's two addresses. I'm not sure what's going on there, but... We were literally like, because there's a grandfather well on that property, I saw what goes on during a water shortage. And having our resiliency during that time is important. Nobody else in the community was allowed to water their landscape. We were the only people growing food in Cloverdale. the community garden that's why it is such an issue with what went on with no transparency and these deals and the bait-and-switch that happened with that property with the plaza and everything when you had the farm and AG people out there that was our resiliency that you guys beefed and it's not okay. I'm not okay with what happened with the community garden. I'm still not okay and I have hope that something is going to happen and switch that back over because that garden and that property should stay as it is. forever it's a historical landmark and that is the resiliency of Cloverdale and our community and the prices of lettuce are going up so high it's a slap in the face to everybody to think that we have to survive feeding at picks or some other market when we can't grow our own food and keep our resiliency and eat a salad okay when we want to eat salad and vegetables and fruit. There's fruit trees over there that are mature that I have never tasted the fruit of. I donated all those fruit trees. I planted those trees. There's citrus trees. There's plum trees. There's nectarines. There's multiple peach trees. There's persimmons. There is food to feed our community on that property that is our resiliency. The people in this community can survive off of that property alone. When all the farmers have no water and everything's shut down, we were the only ones able to grow food on that land. That's why I stand up for what... There and what should always be there and should never be taken away. That's in zone one It has the highest amount of water all that well needs to be done is drilled deeper And that was a bait-and-switch that happened with people who discriminated against me all of them Any other public comment

So I want to also share the concern with the loss of the dam. I'm generally opposed to removing any water storage in our state. In fact, I believe we should be building more water storage. But I think an important point was raised here that people need to understand that while the Russian River water source is likely going to decrease as the study shows over time, and the contingency plans. There are other water sources that still provide sufficient water for some of the projections that have been made. At least that's my understanding of the documents that have been put forward. So it's not just that the loss, yes, the loss of the Potter Valley project, the loss of that water, it's going to impact in ways that we cannot fully understand yet. And it is still being figured out how that ends up happening. Cloverdale, years before any of the current council members are sitting on this council, had an opportunity to come forward and get more involved in it, and prior leadership in this town decided not to. And so unfortunately, we lost an ability to control what happened there. Many of those decisions have been made. What we have to do now is plan for them in a reasonable, responsible way, and to develop alternative water sources, maybe some catchment. maybe tying in. I know that there have been some opportunities to tie in and get water from Lake Sonoma. Maybe as long as we don't allow the you know, out of compliance with adopting this plan and lose access to funding on July 1st, maybe there are some grants from the state that can be brought in that could fund some of these alternative water sources. I'd like for us to start thinking about how we develop these other water sources and plan for long-term resiliency with our water supply. But what's being talked about here today is the management of of it, not where the water's coming from. And I think that it would be irresponsible for the city council to allow the city to be out of compliance with state law and put any future funding at risk starting on July 1.

Evening, Dana Starr. I almost have to rewrite all my questions because I misunderstood in reading the 200-page document what this was about. So now I get that it is management rather than actual action plans, per se, with what is happening in real time. In real time, we have Potter Valley Project decommissioning. That is a given. We might not know the exact day, but we know it's relatively soon. And I'm pretty confident less than five years. So we are definitely going to have something coming up. And my concern is... what is happening who is looking into what it is we're doing or can what it is we can do who it is we're working with and not only the city but our neighbors outside of city limits up and down the river. It's all one river. Right now, the water table in the river, I say water table, the water flow is dropping. The temperatures are staying warm in that river. They're not cooling down because there are no releases happening from the dam. So already, the water is decreasing in the river and what is feeding the groundwater underneath that we draw from. And that's just real-time information without the math, because I don't have the capacity to do that. I just know by going down to the river regularly right now. So the whole thing about Table 6-9 in the report for the management plan is all about reasonably available volume. And I'm saying the knowing of Potter Valley plan decommissioning states that there is a known decrease happening. And this was not even used in the discussion for the five-year plan. Then we get to the shortage contingency. And there's a statement in there, I think it happened at least three or four times, that says, you know, there is discussion about alternative methods to back up our water availability, our water resource. and that is coming up in future city council meetings as of the date of this writing well we are now at least six weeks beyond that and we know that it came to city council last month and it was voted down to take any action going forward at this time on what we could do for possible options and i would like to see that incorporated into the report for transparency reasons. Because the current council has decided not to look into any of those at this time. Thank you.

Yeah, if she could.

Yeah.

Hi, Mary Ann Brigham, Cloverdale. Quick question, something I didn't even think I was going to comment on this, but is there a current reading or readout of how much mercury or gold is in Sulphur Creek lately? I know it was done years ago, and I know it had high volumes of mercury. We have water rights to Big Sulphur Creek also. So just curious, has anybody checked that lately, within the last year or two? Kevin?

No. Not in at least five years, I'd say, Marianne. We talked about it during the drought.

So nobody's testing that at all as an alternative supply?

Not that we have at this point. And there was some reasons behind it. I'd have to look into them again as to why. But it was something about cost effectiveness and being able to actually put in wells and things in that area.

I was thinking more of catchment. Maybe a small dam. There's much that could be done. And when we're looking at, when I talked to everybody about putting a pipe from Lake Sonoma all those years ago, it was $5 million. I'm sure by now it's a billion at least. So that's out. But Sulphur Creek is not that far from our treatment plant. Maybe we could do an overhead. Or we could do it on the side of the bridge and just pipe it in. But if it's good water, why aren't we using it? We have the rights. It's ingrained. It's 1884, I think. Just a thought. And I really would like to agree with her in that I think it's really important that we start thinking about alternatives because it looks like we're going to get screwed.

Yeah, I wasn't planning to talk on this topic since I hadn't seen the document, but the discussions triggered something. I'm not sure if Bonnie's looking into this, but at a Colorado infrastructure subcommittee meeting about a year and a half ago on sustainability and whatnot, I asked a number of questions, and I was bounced between the city and the county. I never got a response from James Gore, never got a response from Sonoma Water. And so I sort of wanted to raise this again, and maybe Bonnie, you can be an advocate going forward. We obviously agree that we need more water storage. We need that for resiliency and mitigating future droughts. Although I will note that I believe over the past five years, we've exceeded our rainfall totals by a significant amount. And if you think about it, we didn't take advantage of that. And, Bonnie, from that point of view, what about water injection schemes to replenish our groundwater, especially when we've got lots of rainfall? What about the city of Cloverdale maybe getting funding from the county to add additional swales along roadways to slow down and reduce runoff to the Russian River, obviously going south from the city here? And that would also be a form of flood mitigation for the people downstream and, again, support that overall groundwater replenishment plan. I also asked Supervisor Gore and Sonoma Water about a bigger vision product about water desalination plants off Sonoma Coast for future water supplies. And even though you probably couldn't pipe it here, just like we probably can't afford to do it from Lake Sonoma, if there's an emergency, we could truck some of that water. And I was thinking about, I believe San Diego's got a massive desalination plant that delivers water to 10% of their population. no reason why we couldn't take advantage of something like that, because we're about one-third the population of San Diego, so we could do a desalination plant similarly, but maybe a little bit scaled back. So I asked, what are we doing on that? And it was crickets from both the county. I was referred. back to the city then back to the county and Sonoma water water is not responding so I haven't done anything on it for about a year and a half and I would encourage you to look at these kinds of alternatives like former council member Brigham brought up as well thank you have a great evening

My name is Dale Winterford. I am a resident of Cloverdale. And the one thing I came here to talk about is I had one question, and that when I read the report, and I've listened to everybody tonight, we always come back to that we only have one source of water and one plant. And we have no other plans. We talk about ideas, but I've never heard a backup plan to the one source of water that we have, which is the Russian River and Lake Penicino. So my question is, do we actually have a long-term viable backup plan, you know, like other than the Russian River and its tributaries? That's my question. Thank you.

Can I respond to that? Just want to mention to everyone here that Sonoma Water is, this is their water supply roadmap that they did release towards the end of last year. And a couple of the other alternatives, there is a water supply agreement that a study would need to be done that will come to the council in the future that is for potential storage in Lake Mendocino. Also, they do have, which is currently being studied, is Lake Sonoma Water, FIRO secondary outlet. So a secondary outlet at Lake Sonoma would possibly, it's being proposed to come down to Asti. That would be from the lowest part of the lake. This would be an advantage to all the users in the whole watershed because it's really allowing for to maximize storage by creating a second outlet when Lake Sonoma only has a single outlet. You know that when they're releasing water, sometimes you'll see that area flood. So this will give an option that with the forecast-informed reservoir operation, FIRO, that they can forecast the weather. And when they see that a weather event is coming, instead of just automatically releasing water, they'll have... More facts so they can release it at the right time. And that FIRO has been implemented in Lake Mendocino, where they're able to store 10% more water, usable storage, using the FIRO technology. So that is on the roadmap. They have it listed here for 2045. So that is something that wouldn't just be for us north of the Healdsburg tributary, but... for the whole watershed because it does actually maximize the storage in Lake Sonoma, and that would be a much cleaner source of water. There's things that I think we can talk about later tonight in our other Potter Valley project item that will lead to that, but just wanted to share that with everybody. I'll read that. Thank you.

Do we have any other public questions?

Do we have any other public comment? Okay, I'm seeing none. Are we done? Anything from the dais up here? There.

Yeah, I'm just coming up to receive direction. Okay.

We're going to move this one. We've gone through the public comment process that's required and we're gonna move this to the next,

Mayor, can we just have a motion to move it, continue the item to June 24th?

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to table this and move it to June 24th for adoption.

Second. And just to clarify, to continue it. Sorry.

Continue after this. Second that.

Did you get your first and second? I did, thank you. And just for clarification, to the consent calendar? Yes.

No. I think it's to the regular calendar. Okay, to new business.

Nice try.

Yeah, it'll be a new business item.

Okay.

You got to try.

Council?

All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay. Motion to continue the item to a date certain of June 24, 2026, passes 5-0.

Pardon me here for a second. There we go. I lost my place on the... All right, where are we at here? H1. All right, we're going to move into item H. We're going to go to H1, consider the adoption of City of Cloverdale biannual budget for fiscal years 26-27 and 27-28.

Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. Oh, gosh, that's hot.

We're going to...

Thank you.

If you can turn down the audio a little bit while I pull up this presentation.

Sorry folks, we're waiting for our presentation to come up.

I'll just go ahead and start while you're doing that. I'm just going to, the agenda tonight is going to, we're going to walk through what's changed since we had our budget workshop on May 5th. We're going to go through what is included in the budget, what is not included in the budget, why adoption matters, and then the recommendation of staff. Two more.

Okay.

Next slide, next slide. Okay, so since the budget workshop, oh my goodness.

He's gonna bring that.

since the budget workshop staff has been continually looking at the projections where the revenues are based on where we thought they were going to be at our may 5th meeting so in looking at our revenue projections our general fund revenue for 2526 is coming in at 193 000 more than what we had projected at that time. And our gas tax for 25-26, we received updated projections, and that is increasing by $15,500. We did make some updates to the expenses at the workshop. They're broken out in the agenda report. But we had 138,425 that we added to the 26-27 budget and 27-28 we added 233. Going off of memory, those were a police officer, some police software and some other things. I can't remember everything, but it is broken out in the agenda report. Peregrine and flock, yes. Thank you. The gas tax, we also got updated numbers for 26-27 that we would see an increase of almost $40,000. We carried that number over to 27-28, assuming that it would be the same since we don't know what those updated projections are. The water, we did remove three months of user charges At the time that I initially did the budget, I was thinking that we were going to have the rates as of July 1st. So I had 12 months worth of user charges in there at the higher rate that we discussed in the water rate and the wastewater rate study. Since now we're moving it back to September before we start any user charges, I did decrease the revenue and both water and wastewater. Wastewater should be a negative. We removed a side-by-side from the water at the meeting and then there was a $105,000 Cash deficit in the water impact fund based on some of the budgeting that was done and We saw that at the May 5th meeting and if I was You know it was brought to the attention at that time that we would be removing that that went back into the water department And that slide like So what's included in the budget for donations and contributions and I have a list here. The chamber is at the top with $133,933 for both 26 and 27, or 27, 28. The homelessness services, we have $5,000 budgeted for that, but that is paid out of low to moderate income housing fund. It doesn't come out of the general fund. The YMCA pool program and then the permit associated with that is about $20,000. The Sonoma County free fare program is $20,500. The sculpture trail or the autocast is $2,000. The citrus fair, if we should need a shelter branch, we have $5,000 budgeted for that. The Senior Center has requested 15,000, or no, I'm sorry. They've requested more, and we'll talk about that later. But we have a budget of 15,000. That carried over from last year. And then the History Center has a budget of $5,000. That also carried over from last year. And Friday Night Live are the Cloverdale Arts Alliance. We had a budget this year of 25,000, and we carried that over. Next slide, Mike. The other donations or contributions that have been requested but are not in the budget is the Performing Arts Center is requesting $25,000. We're currently in the middle of negotiations with the Performing Arts Center to rent the building, so that's One of the reasons that this would be on top of that, the Citrus Fair has requested $25,550,000. The History Center has requested an additional $10,000. So they're asking for a total of $15,000. The Senior Center is requesting an additional $25,000, a total of $40,000. And then the Food Pantry recently sent an email requesting $10,000, and I assumed that that was for both years. Those are not in the budget. However, I know we talked a lot about this at the budget meeting, and there was a request for tax returns, and I do have those now for everyone except for the food pantry. But I just received those, and I'm going to recommend that we adopt the budget without these, have them come back if they want the additional money with their tax returns, and make a presentation to the council saying what benefit there would be. That's my recommendation for tonight. Next slide, Mike. Other considerations to include, that the budget does not include, the budget that you have in your packet does not include a $90,000 consultant for the West Hills annexation. It was approved during the budget workshop, but I missed putting that in. And also the barriers for the street events at the meeting... We knew that we wanted to add it if it could be paid with impact fees. We've determined that it can be paid with impact fees. And so that will also be added. There will be no general fund impact. Not included in the budget, but discussed at the workshop, was a Clark Park restroom. And I don't know what that amount is. That would be coming back for a budget amendment when we have a better idea. An administrative assistant, we talked about having one full-time or two part-time or maybe even more part-times. That is not in this budget. An adjustment to any council member wages or benefits is not in this budget. And the budget also does not include any additional contributions requested by employees, any cost of living arrangement, any wage adjustment, any other employee compensation increases. It does include the increase in health benefits, which we know are going up. So we did include that, but no compensation or additional. any other additional employees other than the police officer are included. The city is currently budgeted to have, it says 25.5. It's actually going to be 24.4 when we add that $90,000 into it. Generally, every $100,000 in expense reduces the general fund balance by 1%. It's just a general number just to keep in the back of your mind. We'd like to have a budget of reserve of 25%. I wouldn't feel comfortable going much less than that. But again, that's your decision. The budget must be adopted before June 30th. Without an adopted budget, the city would not have formal spending authority for the new fiscal year beginning July 1st. Next slide, Mike. So why the budget adoption is critical. If we don't adopt the budget, then we have no spending authority beginning July 1st. That means we can't do any more contracts. We can't do any public works projects. Employees might have to be delayed. Grant funding and compliance risks will increase if we don't have a budget and all you know The obvious that it just reduces the public confidence in fiscal transparency And the next slide Mike So staff recommendation tonight is that staff adopt the budget with those two ads that I talked about that should have been included, but were not. And if there's anything else that we want to add, then we would bring those back at a later time for a budget amendment. Next slide, Mike. And as I mentioned, by adding those costs, we will have a 24.9% revenue and restricted balance, sorry, and unrestricted balance, which is really close to the 25 and where I'm comfortable. And that's the end of my presentation. If there's any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

Thank you, Susie. I just appreciate this whole process. You've been very helpful and very clear at helping us understand all this. For the subject of other donations and contributions, and we have just the donations and contributions, my concern is... that, you know, I don't want to see any group be overlooked. And I don't want to see us kind of nitpick at a ceiling about cutting funding from any of these groups. I love all the groups that are here tonight, and I'm glad that there's some outreach that's been done. And everyone in the community really knows that this is an option for them. I think one of... My suggestions would be, and I did give this to Kevin earlier, was if we can identify some areas in our full budget that we can maybe choose from to say maybe we can reduce some things here, reduce some things there, and maybe find that extra funding to really make sure that the You know, nobody's getting cut short in that the distribution of these funds is equitable. So, you know, my concern is last year the food pantry did come ask for a donation and they were denied funding at a time that they really, really needed it. And that, I just don't want to see that happen. So I think If we separate what was listed as donations contributions from the other donation contributions, I would just kind of like to see that all in one thing, and maybe we can decide that together. And if there could be some stacked recommendations to where we can identify some other areas that maybe we can identify some extra funding, then that would eliminate cutting anybody short or

you know pulling from a bucket to fill another so that that's my thought on that one i throw that to the council and you know everyone thank you everyone for coming out here to represent your groups tonight appreciate you hanging out for a long meeting yeah i think that's a great idea i think um once we have our final june numbers which we probably won't have final due numbers till closer to august because some of our um revenues come in later but are for this fiscal year We will know then if if they're coming in even higher like I increased it by 200,000 but based on what I know, but if something comes in even higher than what we anticipated then we can maybe say You know that those are the funds that we could use as long as we keep this 25% unreserved balance

And just to clarify, my concern is that the new requests and the requests that were in the former budget, that we include all those in kind of one group.

Okay. I'm not sure I completely understood that. I'm sorry. You want me to add those into the budget now?

Well, you know, I'm throwing this at the council, throwing this at the community, because we have donations, contributions in the fiscal year 2026-27, 2027-28 budget. Those were a carryover from the previous budget. And so I think now that we're creating a new budget, I would like us to actually create a new budget. And so what that means is, you know, re-looking at... what this is, and I think we have to kind of be present in this time right now and take in consideration that a lot of groups, there was an outreach done, and so now we have groups, you know, a number of groups that are asking for contributions where they never received them before, so I think that needs to be taken in consideration, and I would hate to separate them to create an other section. I would just like everyone to be in one pot, and start over with that section.

I agree with that regarding the nonprofits. I think we should, you know, kind of divide up how much money we have for nonprofits between them so it's kind of equitable and not overlook things like the food bank and, you know, just make sure that we're spreading the money around evenly. But my other thought, too, is when licensed flight readers were first presented to us by the police chief, Amos Ferguson, he said they would just be for stolen vehicles. But since then, things have sort of changed. It's, you know, for catching criminals and different things. And so, you know, I voted against that then because I think there's, you know, license plate readers have positives to them, like they help catch criminals. But then there's also unauthorized data sharing with federal agencies. And that could, you know, even though, say, our police force doesn't want to share with us data. It might not be up to our police force. And I want to just make sure that anyone living in our community is safe and that they're not going to end up in a detention center. There's also been police misconduct, not with our officers, but in other agencies. where they've been stalking like their ex-wives and ex-girlfriends. Also, the flock license plate reader system is very easy to hack into, which is kind of scary. Sometimes they actually get the person wrong. You know, they take innocent people and link them to crimes when they're actually innocent. The ACLU continues to lead campaigns and lawsuits challenging warrantless license plate reader use, which has prompted dozens of municipalities across the country to terminate their contracts with the company. So my thing is, you know, I never voted for the license plate readers in the beginning, but we do have some. But I really don't think, and nobody has to agree with me. I just have to put this out there. I really think it's a waste of money to spend more money on license plate readers. We already have a lot. There's ones on 101 that don't belong to us. And they're pretty much everywhere. So adding, you know, they're costly. You have to pay like a yearly like cell phone bill on them. So adding more cameras and adding more money into that to me is something I'm not interested in.

So if I can... We don't share data with the feds at all, period. It's just state agencies, municipalities in the state of California. And I don't know, that's a misnomer out there that we do share. We can't share. The servers are the same servers that the military uses. They have not been hacked. They've never been hacked. They're very secure. The data is ours. It's not anyone else's. And the license plate readers, they take a picture of a license plate.

That's it. Chief, can you talk about how many crimes you've solved in Cloverdale over the last, I think it's four years or five years that we've had them? Can you talk about even recent?

Yeah, so I can't give you, I don't have the numbers with me, but we've solved, we had the bank robbery at Chase Bank. We tracked the suspect through Cloverdale into the Chase Bank and out of Cloverdale. And he was caught in another state. And then they had called us and said, Hey, we think this guy was one of your suspects, and so we went back and looked at his license plate. Yes, he did come through the city of Cloverdale, and we got some other information for his cell phone data, further collaborated at him being in the Chase Bank. There's been a whole host of stolen license plates, stolen vehicles. Um, people running from us, um, uh, I don't know if you listened to the scanners, but, uh, center was at the real crime, uh, data center. And you can hear them, you know, talk and talking on the radio when they're looking at suspects that they did just committed a robbery. They're saying, oh, they're done. They just turned on this street. They just checked in on this street. And then officer goes out and contacts them. Uh, It's a great tool for us. There are many checks and balances for us We have to do training on it every year with the the employees It's audited every month what the officers are looking at they have to go in if they if they use the system they have to Make sure that they it's a cave. There's a case number there's a they're looking at it for purposes of the police department and their investigations and So, you know, it's just a great tool for us, and I understand your position. You know, it's just one of those things. It's like, you know, we wish we didn't have to have firearms, but we do. It's a tool for us to do our job.

Well, about the sharing, because I know we share with Healdsburg. We share with Santa Rosa. So, I mean, I just think it's so easy, like if... for ICE to get a hold of our information, even though we don't necessarily want to share with them.

No, it's not easy. They have to get authorization to do that. They're not allowed to do that. We're not allowed to share with them. And we have to physically authorize them to come into our system and share with them.

How many flock cameras do we already have, though? Because we're adding more to it. And it's like, when's adding to the flock cameras going to stop? Because it is expensive.

Yeah, so we're adding cameras because of the extension of Cloverdale with the Dry Creek area because we don't have that area covered down there. So we're moving the camera around and we're adding two. We want to cover the burglary out at the commercial area. We want to add that area as well so that we can get people going in and out of there.

How many do we have so far that we're paying for before adding?

Seven, I think it is. I think it's seven.

And how much is that a year just for those seven?

I think it's like $17,000, something like that.

$17,000.

And is that... Don't quote me.

Is that just for the use of, you know, like...

It's a subscription, yeah.

Okay, but that's not for the cameras themselves, even, which they're expensive.

We buy the cameras, so the cameras are ours, and then we have a subscription with the flock. I'm sorry? Yeah, there are about 3,000 for a camera. It's about 3,000 plus the subscription for the year, which is included.

So if we add more, how many more cameras do you want to add?

Three.

Three? So that's three times 3,000, plus then we have to pay the fee to use them yearly.

It's about 1,000 a year for each camera.

Times, what would it be for the cameras?

I'm sorry?

What would it be for the cameras without the, okay, it's about, would you say per year, 1,000?

I don't have the number. I'm sorry, I wasn't aware. I'm guessing it's about 17,000, I think, a year. I don't have it right in front of me, sorry.

Chief, real quick on that too, and correct me if I'm wrong here, but when we were talking about the peregrine also? Yes. Does the flock and the peregrine talk together, combine? They do. They do? Yeah. What's the benefit of that?

Yeah, so the officer goes to a house, just kind of give you an example. I'll start with tearing peregrine as a system that ties all of our systems together together. Our RIM system, which is our local management system, we contact you. We write a report. It goes in RIMS to make it simple. We also do, we run checks on people. If you have warrants, your driver license, we run checks on people you have a driver license. Registration, that type of thing. So if we get a call at like a DV suspect beats up the other half of, I won't say male, female, but beats up the other half and takes off, we know, you know, we go to this house, we can run a check on the subject and say he drives a blue Mitsubishi with license plate number XXX. And he takes off. So the officers now know, using Peregrine, that And it's simultaneous. He left the house, and he hit one of our flock cameras. In what direction he's going, and so we can alert the other officers. If he's going towards Healdsburg or to Ukiah, we can alert them. And then... Ultimately, hopefully you catch them, but it's just a speedy process utilizing Peregrine. Peregrine also tells us if we went to this specific house, there's guns in the house, the officer's been threatened. If we've arrested the individual, it'll come with a picture of the subject. It ties all the information together, along with Santa Rosa's information, Healdsburg's information. And then we can see what cases, if we're looking at a property crime, and there's some specific information on a tool or a... electronic item with the serial number, and Santa Rosa gets that piece of item, books it into their evidence, we wouldn't know about it. So that would alert us, hey, they have your evidence over there. This is where they stop with that property. It's simultaneous, so...

I wanted to add one more comment. I think everybody in this room needs to research flock cameras for themselves. There's a lot of research you can do online. And both systems that you're talking about are both heavily invested by Peter Thiel. And we can vote every day by where we spend our money. I don't like giving any money to this person. I don't think he's a good person. I don't think he's good for America. He's moved to Argentina. And the fact that we're taking our taxpayer money and just handing it over to this person, I don't think that's a good thing for Cloverdale.

Okay. I'm sorry, I don't know anything about Peter Thiel. I'm just trying to solve crimes.

But I think that's one thing people need to research, who he is, what he stands for, and where we're putting our money. Because, like I said, we get a chance to vote every day by where we spend our money.

I'm in the business of solving crimes and providing service to the community. If you want to allow me to do that, that's great. If not, that's your choice.

No questions on flock cameras. Back to the budget, Susie.

Thank you. Okay.

So Susie, you said you... you missed the West Hills and the barriers for streets events. You want to include that in the budget, right? Yes. And we want to be at 25%, but adding that will bring it down to 24.9%. Yeah. As close as 25 as possible. And then, like you said, every $100,000 in expenditures brings down our financial strength by 1%. Generally. So... with the additional contribution requests, that would take us down to 23.9% if those were all approved. However, like you said, we're dealing with taxpayer funds. And as we keep dipping into the reserves, the strength of our city goes down. And with that being said, are those, organizations willing to come forward and possibly in the following year for a budget amendment present their case to council and we could move forward with a vote on that.

I believe they are, yes. I haven't spoken to each of them, but I have spoken to a few of them, such as Behr, Senior Center, I know that those two are willing to come forward, History Center,

And then the Clark Park restroom, do you have any funding, Kevin?

We were planning on doing that in the second year of this upcoming two-year budget, and we were planning to use park impact fees for that, and I think there's enough balance in that account to cover that.

So once again, Susie, thanks for the presentation, and I would agree to include the two that you missed because you're human, but anything else that would... take our percentages down, I'm against without backup. Thank you.

Thank you.

Susie, thank you for the presentation. This is the third time, basically, and I'm thankful for all that you're doing and your adjustments that have gone on. To this point, I think there's too many unknowns with the cost of our insurance. With that going up, A lot of unfunded mandates due to HR1 and the battle between California and the federal government. And then our employee negotiations. Right now, I think you showed us at about a $240,000 deficit where we sit approximate. To me, that's a zero because there's a lot of projects that don't get completed by the end of the year. And so if you said about $250,000 to $300,000 in the deficit spending, that puts you at about a zero usually at the end of the year if everything is done, not done, like as we would expect. The 25%, to me, is a minimum on your reserve. It's not even a safe number to me. I think we should be in the 35% range because we've seen it before where you don't get your money. And when we were at the school district, you want to be able to fund yourself and make sure that you're safe in your city when the government's not providing you the money that they're supposed to. And that's where you get in trouble. So 25% reserve is not enough to do that, in my opinion. I think that we should be looking at 50% for six months. However, you know, the 35% is safe because you don't want to overload the taxpayers and not give them something back. The barriers on your other considerations, I don't know enough, and I don't know if they're going to cover all the areas that'd be necessary because I would hate to cover, oh, the Boulevard, but then we don't get First Street and Main Street, Second Street and the parking lots and things along those lines. So I would like to put that on as an additional item in the future at this point. the annexation consultant is a big deal I know it's only it's $90,000 in here but by the time we're done it's going to save us money because of the property taxes of your open space districts bringing those into our city limits will keep us from having to pay those property taxes to the county in the state so that's a smart investment so I want that one back in as far as the other asks, I agree that they should be presenting later to us and come forward because there's a lot of questions that I have on all of those, considering different things that have happened in the past and ways that we've tried to work with them and fund them. I would love to have the conversations and presentations with them.

Does it make a difference if the barriers are covered by impact fees to you or not?

No, because with our budget being really, really tight, we might need those impact fees for something else. So no, unfortunately, and you know, I'm very, very pro law enforcement, but that one, I really want to see that personally somewhere else at this point or in a future item. I want to make sure I got everything that I wanted to say here. last one that i want to comment on is our council wages i looked at what everyone in the county is getting and i think that we are over compensated in cloverdale i know that we put in a lot of hours however if you look at average wages for places around us it's around 300 a month and i think that's where we should be i think that when we maxed ourselves out at 950 a month it's nice to have but it's not necessary And I voted against it then, and I think that we should remove it now.

I'd like to make a comment to that. We already voted four to one that we would go up to what, $950. And the reason we did that was so if a single mother wants to be on the city council, she could afford to, because she could afford to get a babysitter, Or if somebody was a student and they had three jobs and then they wanted to be on the city council, they could maybe have two jobs and then be on the city council. I don't think anyone sitting up here is on the city council to make a paycheck. But people need to get... When I was running for city council, I didn't even know we were going to get paid, period. So the thing is, I think being compensated for our time is important. And I think by having it at the limit at $950, the single mother or the student could be on the city council. And I think diversity is important and that it should be, anyone should be able to be sitting up here and not just somebody who's married and has two incomes and a nice house. So that's my thoughts on that.

Well, unfortunately, I don't disagree with all the comments that you made, but I still don't think that we should be maxing out payments for us, just like I don't agree with your flocks, but I'm not going to disagree. This is our chance to talk about the budget, and then we get to vote on it together. So we can agree to disagree on that one.

You had a couple of years where you could have taken your pay that you're getting on the city council and donated it to the city, but you didn't bother to do that. So I think if you're really concerned, you would have donated your paycheck by now.

I'll just be honest, I donate more than $1,000 a month to this city, easily. I've never taken a single thing for a single travel reimbursement to this point when one trip has been thousands of dollars. I work very hard for the city out of my pocket. I don't do it for the paycheck. So I really feel that was disrespectful.

You can afford to do that though. I would like to see maybe a young person up here, like a student or a single mother. Instead, we have like four married men with dual incomes at all our homeowners. So it would be nice to have a variety of people up here.

Well, and I don't think on that. I've got a comment on that. We look at bigger cities like this. If you look at the compensations, it's done through all the different cities around here. Petaluma right now and all the stuff that they're dealing with, the mayor gets $10 a meeting and the council members get $5 a meeting, and they do have single people on there.

Sebastopol just went up to $9.50 a month. Hillsburg gets $9.50 a month. Petaluma has a different... kind of city council going. I forget what it's called. Alex, you might know. But it's not the same as our city council. Yeah, that's what I meant to say.

Petaluma's a charter city, maybe what you're referring to. I would say, you know, this is not part of the budget. That would have to be a separate ordinance. So if that's something the council wants to consider, you know, that would have to be direction for a future agenda item to bring that back. It's not something that can be accomplished through the budget tonight.

Okay, Susie, my concern here is obviously what happens if we don't adopt this budget by July 1st? We can be equitable, we can be everything, but it hamstrings Cloverdale if we don't pass this budget so we can continue on with all the projects that we have promised everybody. There is a lot of things in there I see. When we were at the budget workshop, that was a public meeting. People were invited to that. We had a few people show up, but it was mentioned there that we would get our budget adopted in the time frame we need to so we can move Cloverdale forward. And then the second year people could come in, which is referring to what people have said, please come with your tax returns and come with a reason you need the money. The feel that I'm getting right now, and people may disagree with me, is hey, we've had some outreach go on since our budget meeting, and next thing I know we're getting emails left and right, like hands are out and we're just going to fill it with money and life's good. And I don't agree with that at all. I said, just justify why this, sorry, this microphone's not working. I need people to justify why they need this money. And it's all of our money here. And we're trying to run Cloverdale. We're trying to keep Cloverdale going and all of the nice stuff it has, whether it be the CPAC, whether it be Citrus Fair, whether it be the food pantry. Yes, we can do it, absolutely. But we need people to come forward and justify it. They're justifying spending our money here. You know what I mean? All of us sitting in this room right now. So I can't just hand money out freely when I have a reserve I need to maintain for, I mean, there's a million different things here. So please, let's look at this budget. We can disagree, like Dan said up here, probably the best statement of the night. We can agree to disagree, but there is city business that needs to be taken care of. You know what I mean? And that makes priority over being Mr. Nice Guy. So let's work on that.

I'd like to add a comment just regarding that, and this might be a question back to Mayor Wheeler. I think people should present their case when they're asking for contributions. My issue is that the city, it's our job as council members, it's our city staff's role to know what's going on in the community. And at the budget meeting, I was shocked to hear that so many groups were not included they were not contacted uh... they didn't even know that this was an option and so that that's my issue is that we have to start over with the donations and contributions to our community and we should Put everyone and let everyone make their case, but let's not have an other group. Let's not other the groups that were not reached out to and treat them differently. If you want to scrutinize any of the contributions that were given out, then let's start with all of them. And let's start from the beginning. And let's take this back to the pre-existing ones, to the future asks, and just include them all in one bucket. If we got to keep the ceiling the same, then everyone's got to make a case equally. We can't treat people. unfairly who there wasn't the outreach done and maybe these were just favorites and and when I see I think it's our job as council members to reach out to the community and know what the needs are and I've seen a lot of groups that have been struggling over the last couple years who were not getting any funding and that's the problem that I have that I think we should just look at this start over not just fly through the status quo and overlook every other group and tell them to come back and make some other pitch. You know, I think we need to treat everyone fairly. Let's start from zero, allow everyone to come forward, make their case, and we dole out the funds. I think that's the fair thing to do. It's in alliance with our adopted governance manual, and that's the way I think we should proceed.

I do think that would be the fair way to go. And if we don't, you know, like the mayor's saying, you know, we don't have a ton of money, then we could cap the amount of money that we do have, but we could make sure that it's shared equally or shared to, you know, to the most in need or something rather than just do what we did last year.

Okay. I just want to make sure I'm understanding correctly. You're saying take the other group and add them into the budget. Or are you saying remove everyone from the budget and have everyone come back for a budget?

Thank you for asking for clarity. I appreciate it, Susie. So what I'm looking at is we're creating a budget. We're here to discuss the budget. We have listed donations, contributions that was the former budget. And then we have other donations and contributions, which are some new asks. I don't want to separate those two groups. I just want to put them all in one group, start over, scrap the old budget, and let's see where everyone's at and what we can do. And if there's an issue where a group is really looking at that's going to be a downside for them, then I would ask staff to propose a few items that we can look at so we can choose from those, maybe where to make the cuts so we're not cutting some of our local groups. You know, there's a new reality that there's been some outreach done that we have all these folks who are here today are representing all these groups that never were contacted before. And I have a problem with that. I just want to make sure that we're clear, though.

We don't do outreach to anyone. If they send a letter requesting, then that's how it gets in there. We don't just...

I did outreach as a council member. I think that's our role as representatives of the city is that we know what goes on within our city. So not holding it on our financial director, you're handling finance, but certainly I think it's the role of council members. I think it's the role of a city manager to be aware of what the needs are in the community. And when I hear that people have not even been contacted, I have a problem with that. And so to other these groups, is not okay. And sorry if I'm a little passionate about it, but I think we should just look at the reality And if it's $100,000, if we could look at places where we can maybe make those cuts and present those as options, I think that would be easier to choose from rather than kind of taking away funding that some of our local groups need. And so this is something that is new. I don't know if it's ever happened in the history of Cloverdale budget, but it's happening now. And I think we should address it and respond to the reality of that.

Okay. Comment on that also, Susie, sorry. I'm looking at the list here included in the 26, 27, 20, 28. I've got homelessness services. Yes, that's something Council Member Morgenstern came up that is funded right there. So we have emergency fund that's taking care of our community. One of the ones, and I'm going to bring it up to the public, I'd like the public's comment on what the Chamber of Commerce does for the city of Cloverdale. And what the Chamber of Commerce does is it does everything from it coordinates the car show. It's economic development for City of Cloverdale and them driving this. They absolutely need to be here for everybody. If you took away what the Chamber of Commerce does and you decided to put that on the city, it triples the price right there. We're getting a lot of bang for our buck, and that gives everybody something to do, whether it means helping coordinate with Friday Night Live, with Dan doing the car show, doing the 4th of July. These are all huge things that make Cloverdale Cloverdale. So I'm not willing to put everything in a bucket and start over. We've got some pretty deep-rooted... Funding that goes on here. It's not a favorites thing. It's what's best for Cloverdale. What do the people of Cloverdale enjoy? What do they like coming down and seeing why do they live in Cloverdale to see all of these items and see all the things? That are that are done and it's not just the chamber. It's the we've got the we've got the History Center and Yes, they're going to come up and they're going to bring us their case for funding. Okay, great, because people do go down there. It's the senior center. Operational budgets go up. What the senior center does for Cloverdale. I mean, these are all items that have been thought through. We're not just shooting from the hip and saying, hey, here's our favorites. We're going to do this. I get it. What I'm saying is... Yes, there is other people that need to be included. Outreach was done. But please bring us your case. It may not be funded this year, but can we come in and when you guys do it, can we make budget amends and do it in the following year? That's what was agreed on down there at the budget workshop. Once again, the budget workshop was a public meeting. There was people there. It was posted at least a month in advance. So next time we have a budget workshop, I don't know how to reach out to the community anymore, but we have. and show up to our budget workshop, the more the merrier. And we would love to make this as equitable as we can, but city operations and what city enjoys doing and what city likes seeing is priority.

Thank you. And I want to add a comment that the budget workshop was not recorded. It was not broadcast. There was, I think, two members from the public. You know, even today having a meeting in the evening, we have a room full of people. So I think people couldn't even go back to watch the recording. It was held during the middle of the day. It was a workshop. It wasn't an approval. So nothing was approved. Nothing has been approved. We can make this up as we go along to how the community would like to see it. So, you know, we do have a lot of folks here that I'm sure are waiting to make a comment. I think it would be good to hear from the public regarding this. And my suggestion is not to take from anyone. It's to find some, you know, dealing with this matter at hand, we can find some spaces in our budget where maybe we want to pull from. And those might be a way that we're not going to nitpick about things, but we can make sure that everyone's taken care of. I think that's a positive solution. I asked for some recommendations about a week or two ago. So maybe I'll ask our city manager again. Did you find anything?

You're looking for ways that we can cut budgets and cut the budget in other places to fund this? Yes. Okay, if that's the direction of the council, I will do that.

you know, it's, it's nothing that is going to say like that's in stone, but I think that would be a better way to make this happen.

I mean, like some of the, you know, we do have impact fees and, you know, maybe there is a possibility there and maybe we can, we can look, I just, if that's the direction of the council.

And I just want to add on to what you said, city manager, some of these funding requests, like for what I understand from the citrus fair is for their emergency resilience that they have there as emergency resilience hub. So there might be, When we look at these and we examine them, there might be a way that some funds might not need to come out of the general fund, and there might be some other solutions to make all this happen. And I think if we look at this carefully, that we can really make this happen for everybody and not have to say we're going to pull from this group or we're going to pull from that group. I don't want to do that. But I just saw that there was a lot of need in the community that just wasn't being addressed. And I want to find a way... to make that happen. And I think othering them and having them come back and say next year is not okay. We did that with the food pantry a year and a half ago. Our community found a way to make it happen without city funding. We can find a way. We can do it.

Any other comments up here?

I'd like to make a comment. I totally support our police chief, but I do want to say that I think we could save some money on the barriers, or at least for now.

All right, I'm going to go ahead and open it up to public comment on this item.

Eric Tureri. So I want to speak to a few things here. One, firstly, process. You guys had an open public process where people could show up, they could speak at the budget meeting, they could give you all of the feedback they wanted to. And everyone in this town that gets involved and does things, They know how to ask. They know how to come forward, okay? What Council Member Marquez is suggesting now is sort of like you've had this open process. Everyone participated that knew about it. Yeah, maybe someone didn't know about it. But how about the person? This is like the person that sits at home, didn't know there was an election, and then they want to go vote the next day. Well, I'm sorry. The polling place is closed. Okay? There is a open process that's publicly available to participate in. That is the chief thing here. And a lot of what is being discussed here, right, is the other thing I want to make a distinction on, there are, like, the Arts Alliance and the Chamber of Commerce provide a service to this town that if the city was doing it would cost probably between $400,000 and $600,000 a year in terms of paying prevailing wage, insurance, staff, benefits, and then all of the other thing, hiring volunteers, et cetera, to run the events that these organizations run. The small amount that these organizations are asking for is a fraction of the cost. I don't make a dime off of any of this stuff. I donate my time to both the Arts Alliance and the Chamber of Commerce. I'm not on the board anymore because I was personally attacked and told that this budget item wouldn't pass if I remained on the board of the Chamber of Commerce. So I resigned from the Chamber of Commerce board. But I'm still a volunteer. I'm still a business member in this community. And I'm still working on behalf to make sure that the work that that organization does goes forward. And what the mayor said is absolutely right. This city could not afford to put on the events that this community benefits from that the chamber puts on. The car show, the wine walk, that brings businesses into this town. It generates tax revenue. The city's getting more back bang for their buck from those two organizations alone. They are not a charitable organization. They are using those funds to put on an event that benefits our economic development, our economic growth. It brings visitors into this town. It makes Cloverdale a place that we all want to live. I would love to see us be able to fund more organizations. But there has to be a separation, at least a distinction, between an organization that is providing an actual direct service and those that are asking for support to fulfill a mission, and an important mission. I'll grant you that. And I'm about out of time, but I want to close by saying that this town would be a completely different place without the Arts Alliance and the Chamber of Commerce providing the events that it provides. Fourth of July.

Daniel Frankston, Cloverdale. It's really sad to see all of these wonderful organizations basically pitted against each other. I think the chamber does wonderful things. I think the food pantry does wonderful things. I looked at the list, and to be honest with you, I can't see anything in there that isn't an admirable and worthy cause to be supported here. As far as making contributions, we all make contributions in our different ways. Yes, the Chamber does wonderful work at helping bringing people into town, and the Arts Alliance also does wonderful Friday Night Live, but CPAC is another organization that puts on theater here and provides and enriches the community with opportunities that would otherwise not be here. The arts are something that are desperately underfunded in this country, and they need to be supported. I'm not here to advocate on behalf of CPAC or on behalf of any other. I just hate to see this process the way it is, one pitted against the other. And I want to chime in and also agree with Council Member Marquez about this previously funded versus now funding process. I certainly understand what Eric said with regards to, hey, if you want money, you got to come to the table and ask for it. I agree with that. And yes, it's great if you have council members out there telling people, hey, come on in. But the bottom line is that there are needy organizations. And when they come and they look for support, they ought to all be treated equally. What I hear today is that the new asks are being requested to come in and justify their payment. And I 100% agree with that. But I also think that the people who have previously received funding should also be held to that same standard. The bottom line is I know Neenan does great work for the Chamber and I fully support it, but just like I want to see the paperwork and the books for CPAC, so too the Chamber and all the other organizations who are requesting funds. They should all be held to the same standard. I was one of the three people, citizens, that attended the budget workshop. And one of the things that really struck me wrong was the way the contributions and donations were set up, where you had one page, as we had here today, that listed all of the people who had previously received and what they were asking for for this year. But then way down later on in the discussion came a list of people who are new asks. And it's difficult for me because I don't see any... distinction between CPAC and between the Citrus Fair and between somebody who might have received funding previously. And I think that all need to be treated equal. And I would encourage you to look at all of it together. And I know it's difficult. You're stuck in a situation where there isn't enough money to go around to pay for the services that we need, let alone these additional things. But I think it's really important that we look at things really hard and try and find a way CPAC gets money from the city for the services that they provide to the city, they need some additional funding as well. And I'd urge you to look at everyone and treat them equally with regards to contributions and donations. Thank you.

Good evening. Gene Lau from Clover Hill Food Pantry. And I want to thank the council for taking the time to address this issue. I was a school administrator for 20 years, and working with budgets is not fun, but that's what you get paid to make decisions. I'm not here to pit one, like it was said earlier, pit one organization against the other. You have to weigh the pros and cons and make your decision. Clover Food Pan, just like anybody else, costs are going up, rent's going up, insurance is going up. Costs us, our costs are about $2,000 a month. Insurance, rentals, rental fee, food, okay. What positive effects does the food pantry have on community? Okay, I don't know if we've really thought about that. alleviating hunger and food insecurity by providing free food to those in need. That's one. Two, empowering individuals and families. It was mentioned tonight by a gentleman here about the cost of water going up. Families have to make a decision, okay? Where are they going to get the money to pay for housing, their water? If they can get food without paying for it, then that obviously gives them some extra funding for housing costs. Food pantries promote health and well-being. They partner with local farmers, grocery stores, organizations to provide fresh produce and other grains and other healthy options. Food pantries are also strengthening community ties. They foster a spirit of mutual support with one another. The shared experience of giving and receiving helps strengthen the community overall. Community involvement. Food pantries Can you read my writing? Food pantries have received the requires of support of all volunteers, donors, and local businesses. And we have a lot of volunteers that work for the food pantry. Nobody gets paid. The food pantry reduces waste, reduces food waste with grocery stores, restaurants, farmers, to rescue food that would otherwise go to waste. And last but not least, food pantries provide safety net during a crisis such as natural disasters, pandemics, or economics downturns. So, again, you received a email from us back middle May, May 14th, And we're just asking for a little bit. Throw us some change here and there. Help us out a little bit. We would really appreciate it. Thank you for listening.

Hi. For those of you I haven't met, I am Lenore Messler. I'm the board president of the Cloverdale Performing Arts Center, also known as CPAC, this theater we are in this evening. And I'm here to speak on behalf of our request of a $25,000 contribution in support of our ongoing programs and operations. In many small towns, people often have to travel elsewhere to enjoy live theater, entertainment, and cultural events. But here in Cloverdale, we are fortunate to have a vibrant performing arts center right in the heart of our city. It was built through the vision, hard work, and support of Cloverdale residents who believed that the arts could enrich our town. Each year, CPAC presents a diverse calendar of programming in theater, music, comedy, dance, and community events, offering a platform for local artists to share original works and bringing visitors from throughout Sonoma County, from Mendocino up to Ukiah, and even as far as San Francisco. We aim to ensure that the arts are accessible and reflective of the many voices that make up Cloverdale. On that note of inclusivity, I want to thank you, Council, for your proclamation on behalf of Pride Month. CPAC is a proud contributor and part of the Cloverdale Pride Weekend Committee, and we have for many years provided Pride Month events and, most importantly, have strived to create a safe and welcoming space for everybody in Cloverdale, and it means a lot to have our city officials recognize Pride Month. and show that same commitment to our community. We are proud of the artistic excellence that has dawned this small town stage and that it's garnered recognition in our area. Last year, CPAC's production of 1984 was spotlighted when Christopher Johnston received a Norbay Theater Award for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama, winning over theaters throughout Sonoma and Napa counties and shining a light on the talent we have here right in Cloverdale. But the impact of CPAC extends beyond the performances on this stage. We work with the high school to provide internship opportunities for students in technical theater and production. And our summer youth camp allows young people to discover the joy of live theater. One Cloverdale parent told us, the summer youth camp was such a gift for my kids. Not only did they gain confidence on stage, but they also found a supportive community where their creativity could shine. As a parent, it was incredible to see them come home each day inspired, excited, and proud of what they were learning. CPAC is a place where people come together to learn, to create, to celebrate, and to connect. Being a performer or audience member at CPAC is to feel all the love and support this community has to offer, and it's personally one of the things that made me fall in love with this theater and this town. Your support could help make all of this possible and strengthen the future of our nonprofit, helping us to continue serving residents while contributing to the cultural and economic vitality of our town. On behalf of our board, volunteers, artists, and many community members who love this theater, I respectfully ask for your support of this $25,000 request. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Dana Star I'm not one of the organizations for donations but what I will do is comment on something I have stated previously which is I would have been at the budget workshop except for that I had three appointments that day, two of which were scheduled six and more than a month in advance, and I couldn't reschedule. So my last request, which I'm repeating, is that you all find a way to make sure it's recorded so that I don't have to go into my second part of... why I'm up here right now, which is to ask a specific question about the budget itself. So I know Susie has done a lot of work and I don't even know what all of that is because I don't have that information from the meeting. but I do know that at the administrative meeting yesterday it was brought up that in projection of some of the future numbers going forward about income on the water and wastewater calculations that 75 units of service were not included in the in the formula and so I'm wondering Did that get included in the next two years budgets also that we have 75 units coming online? Because that could be some more revenue than to help cover all these asks. If that wasn't included. Anybody know?

So the are you done with your time? Sorry, we don't we're not doing a back and forth. So I'm just curious.

okay so that is not in this budget the reduced rates the reduced rates will obviously reduce the revenue as well because it's what we're we're gonna try to keep the the revenue the same, but it will reduce the rate because there's more people paying, right? What was the other half of your question? I'm sorry. Was it in there? Oh, and also that won't help with this because this is general fund money and that has to be specifically spent on water and wastewater. We can't use those funds for general fund purposes.

So there's a lot that I don't know about this, but I'm trying to learn. I have some accounting background from owning a restaurant. So what I've been doing to try to understand the approval process for Esmeralda is look at other approvals and how they've gone through. And one thing I've noticed about, like, The fees and how this ties into the budget is, so I discovered something called AB1600. And my understanding of that is that it's meant to protect the developer, and it's meant to protect the city. And I would love to see something that really breaks down how that is calculated. Because instinctually, when I'm looking at things, and maybe it's just kind of a natural suspicion, but it just seems like Cloverdale is leaving so much money on the table. potentially by also the Nexus schedule or something like that is basically from 2011. And even if like you're adjusting it for CPI, I feel like just saying that is there's something wrong with that because people's water rates are charged. The city's kept up with people's water rates, but to be charging a developer rate that's based in 2011, yeah, it just, it doesn't make any sense. But like, so I looked up like Healdsburg just to kind of see What's going on? And I mean, their breakdown is amazing. If you haven't seen, have you seen it? And it says like where the money is actually going to like, this is one sentence from it. And it's funny, like each time I start talking, like I go blind. It's like, I can't read. So it says fee revenues will be used for the fair share of of the city's acquisition and construction costs of the existing water system. And this was another thing I discovered. Ukiah, for example, anybody who is outside any development that's outside of their current water system, the developer has to pay 100% of that connection fee. So the city has not relied on that. It would be nice to see those numbers broken down more clearly. And then one last thing. I was curious, because do you guys remember the $137,000 that was approved? I think it was a budget amendment for Esmeralda to front them. I was like, why are you fronting them this money? Because they have a deposit reimbursement account. Does anyone know if that's been paid back and if that's at zero?

I don't have the number off the top of my head what Esmeralda's deposit is on hand right now, but I do know that they're making payments and paying it. So I don't know. The other, oh, the AB 1600, we do have one. It's not as pretty as Healdsburg's, but I have seen Healdsburg's, and we are going to move towards that deposit in December when we have to do it again. But our AB 1600 is on our website. It's not as pretty as Healdsburg, but it will be.

Well, and Susie, is it at 2011 numbers as stated, or have we raised it since 2011?

It has been raised, and I think it's by CPI.

We raise it by CPI every year. CPI.

That could be an issue. It's like, you know, housing prices don't just go up by CPI, so they think there's other factors that we can look at to update those numbers and bring some money back to the city.

Yeah, we just need to do a new nexus rate study.

I'm Sally Pringle again. The food pantry has inspired me and that was through the community garden. growing food for myself, just for myself, and then giving everything else to the food pantry through the community garden. Everybody there had donated everything extra to the food pantry. um i did notice in that budget that they were only allotted 10 000 and there were other 25 000 people maybe that should be adjusted um but i like what i agree with what marquis was saying about um allowing other people to um have enjoy the bounty and um I graduated from the top acupuncture college in the nation. I'm a certified Tui Na practitioner, which I don't know if any of you people know what that is. It's the first documented medicine in history before acupuncture, before they used needles, before there was any other medicine. People healed others with their hands using acupressure, and the food pantry is... a part of the healing arts, just like I am a part of the healing arts. I am an artist, just like these people that perform and the people that play music and the people that do the art across the street. I'm an artist, OK? I'm a professional artist, a practitioner of the healing arts. And I'm professional. That's why alcohol does not mix with my profession. I was taught in the top acupuncture college in the nation that massage therapy, you don't massage people, you don't treat people when they've been drinking, okay? And you don't treat them if you've been drinking. And I have been in other businesses before my latest location when WineWalk interfered with the business. I emailed everybody and nobody got back to me nobody got back to me they're taking the first saturday of every month for all those months the first saturday is when people have to pay rent that was always my busiest time of the month and it died my first saturday is dead Okay, because of Wine Walk. And I don't have a problem with Wine Walk and what they're doing at all, but it affects other people's businesses. And another spot that I was in, they line up outside of the bathroom in two different spots, drunk. making so much noise that my clients have to listen to that. And they track in all of this dirt and spill their stuff. And there's no sales going on at Alchemy Collective. They were cleaning bathrooms. And there were people outside of my massage room door when I was trying to give treatments. making a menace of themselves. And same thing happened at the courtyard. And when I was at Bella Moda Salon, it was dead over there when Wine Walk first started, right at the onset of everybody getting their SBA loans and getting back to work after being shut down from COVID. And I had just moved to this town back from 2013, 2014, when I was part of that garden. So, like... It is affecting people, and I'm a person, and my business matters, and healing arts matters. Keeping people healthy matters. Eating good food matters. Having diapers at the food pantry, it's gone. They're not giving diapers out to people anymore as of last Monday.

So the kids would be shitting all over the place.

Marianne Brigham, Cloverdale. First of all, before I make my main comment, I have to say that, Mayor Wheeler, I know that people tell you what they want, but it's our job as council to give what people need. And right now, things are really hard. I live over in Tarman Track. Come on over, take a look. It's rough over there. So I think people need clothing, but the thrift store is doing fine. We don't want any money from the city. In fact, we're going to start giving money away soon. But we still have electrical. But the food pantry always is going to need money. The senior center that takes care of... I mean, I helped a lady drive over there today because she was offering... They've got a person that comes in and takes... I don't know what you call them, bunions or something off feet. And she can't get to the doctor, so she uses them. I mean, focus first on people that need things more than we do. You know, we're all kind of a special case here. But all of those guys are poor, and it's going to get worse. You all know it's going to get worse. And I think money for playful things, that's great when your budget's good and strong. But right now, I think it's more important that we feed people, clothe people, and give them some hope, like at the senior center. The other stuff is just play. And sorry, but that's the way I feel. Now on to the main reason. And this is to the city attorney. I have a question about... the Levine Act. And, Todd, I waited the whole meeting to see if you were going to bring up your conflict. And you did not. So I'm pulling the Levine Act. Please speak to that.

That is campaign conservation.

Are you referring to the Chamber of Commerce?

Before we continue, is that the continuation of your time? I want to make sure everybody gets their three minutes.

Could you pause for time on this one? If you'd like to. I just want to make sure everybody gets their... Are you talking about the contribution from Nina Hanchett from the Chamber of Commerce? Is that the one you're referring to?

That's one, and then plus you've got other ones that were also... Could you name another one?

Because that's the only one that I know of that I had to rectify. Steve Kawa. Okay, so what does that have to do with anything?

You gave money to the chamber. You know, you're going to vote on that right now.

Absolutely, and he doesn't financially benefit from it. However, Nina Hanchett does because she is an employee. Yes, she does. So I gave back the amount to put it below the $500 minimum. She has a refund check. The attorney and I have been dealing with it, and it was done through FPPC to make sure that I could vote on everything here in town.

And when was that done?

Do you want to check?

And when was that finalized?

The date of the check is...

Just a bad look. Within the last few weeks. Really bad look, Todd. Well, let me ask. I'm sorry, but you know what? It's not a bad look because who do you think is going to contribute to my campaign? I've been in this town for 50 freaking years. Who do you think is going to donate to me? The people that love me. And unfortunately, Nina likes me. So she donated a little bit of money to my campaign, and I had to give some of it back and tell her, I'm sorry, I can't take your money because I want to make sure that we're supporting the Chamber of Commerce, who she works for. So that's it. I did it per law and per FPPC, and the attorney has the paperwork.

The date of the check is May 26, 2026. And according to the Viennese Act, it provides that if an officer receives a contribution that would otherwise require disqualification under the section and returns the contribution within 30 days from the time the officer makes any decision or knows or should have known about the contribution and the proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use, whichever...

I thought it was 18 months.

Whichever comes last, I'm reading from the section. Okay. Straight from government code 84308D1. The officer shall be permitted to participate in the proceeding.

Okay. So you feel comfortable with that? You are our city attorney.

Yes. The law, I don't make the law. The law says you have 30 days to return the contribution from the time of the decision or when you knew about the contribution, whichever comes last. So I can't speak to when.

So it has been 30 days.

I can't speak to when the vice mayor received the contribution. When this was brought up for decision and discussion was at the May 5th meeting. Workshop was when it was discussed. So if you consider that to be the decision, 30 days after that would have been June 4th. And so based on the only information I have is the date of the check. It was dated May 26th. That's within that 30-day time period.

Okay. Okay.

Hello, I'm Sean Mayfield. I live here in Cloverdale. I just had one little point of contention about the flock cameras that were brought up earlier. My ears perked up when the gentleman earlier mentioned that they've never been hacked. which is likely true, or I assume is true. I think he's probably referring to their cloud storage. But I think what Marjorie might have been referring to is the way these systems kind of work is Flock will actually, like, provide the software rails for these cameras that they provide and the independent locales get their own instance of like you know web portal admin portal things like that and What tends to happen or what can happen with these systems is, for example, what's been reported on is misconfigurations and things in those localities actually will broadcast those cameras live publicly to anyone on the internet. So there's instances where people can, you know, you can pull up on your phone, watch those cameras, and actually walk to where those cameras are and see yourself. So the security posture of those systems really is reliant on, you know, the local implementation of those, and that's not something that Flock can really guarantee to their credit they did fix those I think there was something like 60 instances at one point of these cameras just like broadcasting and admin portals with like default credentials and things that are no credentials at all you could just go in and look at you know stored videos and things like that but they relied on reporting of those flaws to address them. But, you know, to the credit they did, but there is some, you know, level of security concern there. And I'm speaking as a developer, someone who builds systems and engineers, things like that. So anyway, just wanted to.

right do we have any more public comment okay i'm seeing none let's move in uh to let's uh bring it back to the dice i want to hear some more comments here um i just want to clarify as far as um

you know, any of the direction that we're giving tonight. There was a lot of items we had mentioned throughout the council, and I'm just wondering, you know, do we have to come to any consensus on those before they come back at the next budget? And perhaps this would be at our next meeting this month.

So the council can adopt the budget tonight. It's agendized that way. The council can also give direction to continue it? and can make directions to have changes be made in the meantime or not. That's entirely up to the council and the budget needs to be adopted at our next meeting later than that in order to be able to spend the money. on July 1st, but it's up to the will of the council.

Thank you. Yeah, I don't have the desire to approve the budget tonight. I think, you know, coming back to, you know, the community donations, I really don't want to see Any of the groups have to pick at each other for any of the funding. I want to find a solution that we can work on things. I'll give an example. I met with Teddy Spain a couple weeks ago and also met with Karen Pooley, the CEO of the Citrus Fair. Teddy's the president of the chamber board. And, you know, we just kind of discuss ways that, like, you know, maybe eliminating some overlap on the 4th of July event. And these are kind of things that can save some community funding. And I think, you know, if we can work together in a smart manner, we have a community leadership group, you know, that would be perfect to sort of work out some of these things. We all love these groups. I love all these groups. So I think, you know, looking at solutions with... you know, what the Grange did with the thrift store. It's like things can happen when we put our minds together. And so I don't want to just see, like, let's just, because this was the way it was always done, let's just move it forward. I think we have to look at... what we have, let's put everyone into one bunch and see if we can find some alternate funding, see if any of those charges can be, um, you know, or any of the ask can, the money can be found in, uh, possibly, you know, like, like again with the citrus fair and, uh, some of the needs I believe were for, um, you know, they're keeping their resiliency hub and keeping the lights on folks and safety, you know, could that be found in another source? And, um, Some of those things, if maybe a group put $15,000 into their reserve fund, maybe they can come forward and say that they need $15,000 or less. Those kind of things, I think we can hopefully, as a community, work some of these things out. Our groups can talk, and with the time we have, come up with a way, and maybe, again, bringing this back was identifying some other sources, if that's maybe flock cameras, and that might be one idea. We cut the flock cameras. I don't think that'll pass, but some idea. And then we can find a way just to make sure that everything works. And so that's, as far as this budget goes, I just don't want to put any group in another category.

Can I respond to that?

Absolutely.

So typically, if you're going to ask me to bring back a budget, you're going to give me direction on what I'm bringing back for you to see. But if you're asking me to go find something that...

I'm not asking you, Susie. I'll be direct as far as, you know, some of this was a community call out to everyone that's here tonight, as well as my fellow council members, city manager. If I'm going to provide direction to you, Susie, and this would be with the approval of the rest of the council, I would just like to put the donations and contribution requests all in one group. And everyone would present individually, and we just start this whole thing over.

So just take out the line items but keep the dollar amount?

No, what I would say is I don't want to just take the status quo and bring what was done in the past. I don't want to make our future budget. I would like to see the groups that have the new donations with the previous donations, all those requests just in one bucket.

But when I bring back the budget, how do you want to see that?

Donations and contributions would all just be one group.

One number.

Yeah. And so if, you know, I don't want to reduce any of the asks, but, you know, it's like if, you know, if a group is asking for an additional amount, like the senior center and the history center, we just include those. But, you know, the other donations and the previous ones just include all those in one proposed budget.

So just add all of the requests into the budget?

Just one pot, yeah.

So then we would just be reducing our reserve limit to 23.9?

If we didn't find other ways to fund it. So I think what I would say is like we... I want to hash this out, and I want to figure out what the needs are, and it makes it tough.

Unfortunately, we only have until Tuesday to hash it out, right? Because then I have to have something to Mike to bring back to the next council. Okay. So we're kind of... We're kind of running into a wall of time before we can't adopt it.

Then, I don't know, is the other option to pull the whole thing and pass it and have every group come back and ask for a budget amendment? I think if that's the most equitable idea and solution that we can come up with to get the budget passed, then I would do that. I would pass it with none of the requests and have everybody come back and make their case.

Can I go through these things and just see if there's across the board support for these? So taking all the donations and putting them into the budget, is there support for that? Just a thumbs up maybe.

I think we should try to figure out how much money we have for donations and then divide that.

Well, we have the amount that we have. That's how much we have.

Yeah, so I mean, like right now, I don't think, you know, maybe later we could pull from other resources, but right now we should see what our limit is for donations so that we're not just coming up with some big mushroom. Mike, can you pull up my agenda report?

230 000 ish um you know because the one thing we don't want to do is create a slush fund right and not identify where the money's going so that's that's what makes it harder if that was a solution that would be great if we if we just put 230 000 and don't identify any group if that is the most equal thing to do um

And then have each person come back and take their piece of that.

Yeah, and then everything is a budget amendment.

Okay, do I have support for that? Yes, for me. Okay, so I'm seeing three nos and two yeses. Okay, so what about leaving the donations the way they are and having people come back and request the additional or the new... The new, do I have support for that?

I think that would be, if I could comment on it, I think that's what was happening before. And what happened was we had an instance, and this is what happened. It's part of Cloverdale's history. The food pantry came and asked for a donation of around $10,000. I don't remember that. This was public comment. little over a year ago and they put together a presentation and they ended up getting the funds from from James Gore and District 4 and but Cloverdale did not respond to the needs of our community at a time of need so that's my worry is that you just you continue the status quo and And then you say, oh, come back later and we'll fix it later. It doesn't work. And that's the history. It didn't work.

So I hear you, but I have three yeses and two noes.

If they want to ride on that, then they can ride on that.

Okay. What about the flock cameras? Up or down? Up.

Yeah, they're already in there.

Yeah, but we had a request to remove them from the budget.

If you guys can turn your mics on when you can't hear you on the system. Thank you.

So there was a request from Council Member Morgenstern to remove the additional flock cameras, I believe, correct? Correct. I don't wanna miss out. Okay, but they were already approved. They're already in there. In the budget, already budgeted, so.

So leave them or take them out? Leave, leave, leave, take them out.

I'm abstaining.

Okay, so I have three and two again. How about the barriers, the motor vehicle barriers for Friday Night Live.

I say we wait on those because that would be a way to save money. I think they're a good idea, but not now.

And I think one of the suggestions is that some of these solutions that you're presenting can be the solution to fund the donations.

Those are impact fees, so it won't work for that, but...

I would thumbs down the barrier.

You would say yes or no? No. Okay, so I have three no's. Council wages.

Are we still on the barriers? Did you get a count? She got a count.

Oh, I got three no's. Okay. I got three no's, so I stopped. Sorry. And I just want to add, that doesn't mean we don't love our police chief.

And if I could add a comment about the council wages, I refrained earlier from that. I've been back and forth on this one. I brought it up to council like a year and a half ago. It was silence. And when I think about it, and I think hearing Marjorie's case for it, I do think that it's valid to keep the compensation at 950 when we've had not many people run for city council if there was like maybe nine or ten people running each election cycle then I could say great you know like we're we're fine to cut the it's it's not going to reduce the amount of people running but when we're getting such few people running and I think I would like to see some diversity on the council as well I think that becomes the issue for me and so you know we all have the choice to take our 950 and spend it in the community right go right back in the community but I think I don't want to eliminate somebody you know I think you know whether you're retired or you know I think if if if you have a a job you know I I have the kind of job that I have a little flexibility so The amount of time that somebody who has their own business, who might have some flexibility, that extra money might mean the difference of them spending more hours on council matters. And so I think that money will come back to the city. I certainly think as council members, we can do so much work that is bringing a lot of money, especially going out to the county and fetching programs. We bring a lot more back to the community each month.

So you're for keeping...

I would be thumbs up.

Thumbs up for keeping it.

Thumbs up for keeping it. And we had asked, Todd had asked for a chart for this meeting where we could see what all the different city councils were getting. And we never did get that chart. And for him just to bring up Petaluma, that's not even the same kind of city as us, I think is not really honest.

I didn't ask for that chart. And are we allowed to actually bring this up as an item now since it's actually part of an ordinance?

So if there, the ordinance says that this is the salary. So that is what will happen unless the council adopts a new ordinance. So if there is a desire from anyone. That's not even part of this budget.

So we have to. Okay. So what are you saying?

I can't.

The status quo is that the salary remains $950,000. No actions needed for that to change because that's in the ordinance. If the council wants to change that, it would require bringing an ordinance back at a future meeting.

And would not affect this budget right now. So what I'm planning to bring back is a budget with donations the way they are. with the flock cameras and with no barrier.

And one of the questions I have, just going back to the donations, excuse me for kind of going back to a previous item, but if a group does come forward and I guess they would need to request a presentation, would that need council approval or can these groups request a presentation at the time if that's the process and the council does approve funding for them? Would that be released right away, or would that funding come in another year?

No, it would be released right away.

I could just bring back the direction at the budget workshop was to keep the donations as they are, and then the folks who want to request money, that we would bring those back. And if there's support for that, I would think that that might be a good approach, and we could... consider the further ones, and in the meantime, we can look for funding. Maybe some of those could be funded a different way, as Council Mark has said. So that was the direction from the workshop, and I don't know if there's still support for that, but... You know, that was kind of, you know, my thoughts were that, you know, the workshop was the workshop.

That was kind of a presentation. Nothing's finalized that, you know, this opportunity that we're having tonight really is an opportunity for the community to show up. There's more than three people here that were at the workshop, and it wasn't recorded, so there was no way for people to even really watch it. We had three people, so let's keep that in mind. Folks are coming out, making a good case. How do we implement it becomes really hard. That's where I'm trying to rack my brain on, like, how do we get this done? So I don't want to leave this subject without a solution for that. And so if it's... If, you know, we have, what, one, two, three... We have five additional requests. Can those be agendized? Would they all come at one time to... You know, can I put that on a future agenda tonight to have... those groups come and make the request? Would that be the process?

I think that would be the process. And then in the future, we can think about a different way to do this whole process like other cities I've heard of. I'm just trying to, you know, reiterate what the direction was at the workshop. And I believe that was what the direction was so that was discussed at length at that time too. So that could be an option.

So yeah, I would just find a solution that could be proposing a future agenda item for those five groups to come in. That's what would be needed for them to present, right? And the previous proposal of the groups that were getting the contributions previously, they don't have to present?

But they already, well, most of them.

We have to, you, I mean. So I just want to make clear to the community that.

Let's just, let's go through that list if you don't mind, Council Member. The Chamber of Commerce, they present to us multiple times and we're at the budget hearing. Homelessness services is something that we put into. YMCA is the program at the pool that we, the pool will close and not be open if we do not put in that money. Sonoma County Transit, the buses would stop or if they came you would have to pay the fares. The sculpture trail, there's $2,000. That's all that is total. Such as fair, that is an agreement that we have that we made up a few years ago after the fires. The senior center, they always come and present. They also come to the state of the city. And then Friday Night Live, they have also come to, and this is actually a new one from last year because of the fact that they were unable to be sustainable, sorry. So that's new, and they also came to us this year with that request.

I mean, you're just reading off the names. What I'm asking is, do those groups have to present their taxes, present how the money was spent? I think when we're giving groups a lot of money, and some of these groups have put a large amount of money in their reserves. They're overfunded. And so it's like, I think we need to look at that. And just passing it through, because it's the status quo, I don't think is equitable when that puts other groups at risk of not receiving the funding that they're asking for.

I don't remember if any group has ever had to present taxes until this past week when a council member requested them.

Well, you went along with that at the budget meeting. You said it was a good idea. And other cities ask for the taxes. I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying that that's the first time. And we've just been letting things slide. And I think the way we're doing it now, it's sort of a popularity contest. So I think it's important that we look at the taxes. Thank you.

I did look at the taxes that I pulled off. I didn't see that anyone, maybe there's a reserve level, but I didn't see anything that was like they had $300,000 in there.

Not $300,000, but there was a $15,000 amount that was put into reserve that clearly indicates overfunding. So those kind of things, when we're not looking at it, I would hope that wouldn't turn out into another group being denied funding. Yeah. And that's my concern. And so when we're now saying the status quo, they're fine, great, as is. And then any new group asking for funding is like, you know, put under the scrutiny. Again, I don't think that's very fair.

You know, it's like... We did ask for the taxes from everyone. Yeah. From everyone.

So we have not had a chance to look at those. That's right. And now we're passing this through. So I would suggest that maybe this comes back at the next meeting and we are able to have those documents because if those things are requested... I don't see them in our... I don't have access to them, so how can I... Are we just asking people for stuff just to delay them to say that we don't have this information and then we have to make this decision? So it's just... Okay. You know, it's like if we're going to ask for those documents, why weren't they included? And so it's like if they're not included... Because they just got them yesterday.

Yeah, so it's tough.

It's a tough situation, so now we're kind of under the gun. And... you know, if we're looking at just passing these other groups through and saying that's just fine, maybe the money, maybe there could be some reductions that could be made that could allow some room for some other groups to get funding. And I think that would be a smart, equitable way to move through this rather than just kind of blanket passing things.

And so I'll go back one more time.

We have a couple more comments, Susie, Council Member Lasky.

So we get the, yes, we had the vote on the council member compensation. So if we bring that back to agenda and we go back to the bare minimum, that would possibly save, because if you look at it now after taxes for your council member, depending on where your bracket is, you could be getting anywhere from 20 to $24,000 over that period of time. So if we acquiesce, bring another agenda item and say, okay, let's go back, and then we put our money where our mouth is, we'd have extra reserves to help our community. So in my case, as we know that medical, dental, and vision are going up, and I do not take that year after year. So that money is floating in the budget. So if council wants to reduce that and say, okay, I'll take reduced compensation without the medical, and I'm here for the community, not for the compensation, you could have that money, double that money that you're looking for. So what I would be looking for is to move forward with the budget that you have with the addendums tonight. And then in 2728 budget, organizations can come back and say, hey, all the organizations can come back and say, this is what we propose for the community. Now, I've heard everybody want, want, want. The problem is, as I've heard, yeah, everything is going up, but where are my taxpayers saying, I don't want to pay anymore? Do the fiscally responsible thing that the city should do to stay viable and make all these organizations be responsible to the taxpayer. I yield back my time.

I just want to say the three of you act like rich, privileged men up here. You don't want any diversity up here.

Hold on, hold on. Mark, you've told me yourself before. I'm talking. I'm talking. Don't interrupt. You said four married men. I don't know where you get your information, but half the stuff you say is not true. So you said four businessmen. I work for a company.

You're interrupting me. I have the floor.

W-2 employee, and I'm not married. So I just want to clear that for the record. Go ahead.

Okay, well, you live with a spouse, correct?

And what does that have to do with the Cloverdale City budget?

Well, you're the same person who told me before that you were on a basketball, a basketball coach or a football coach or... baseball in that you understood how important it was to get paid for your time. So I guess you don't need the money. Todd doesn't need the money. Brian doesn't need the money. I'm legally disabled. I'm like living on fumes. I'm on the Ag and Open Space Board. And it's been nice to have some extra money so I could buy some decent tennis shoes to go hiking in.

But you guys already have your money thing.

You've got your spouses. You've got your homes. I don't own a home. I live in subsidized housing where I can't even sleep because there's no soundproofing. But I'm glad you guys are all taking care of you.

Well, welcome to democracy. I think some of these items where we can make the reductions is kind of like, you know, we're going by one by one but not knowing what the next one is. And so it's, I think, one of those things when if we can see a list of possible reductions, then we can kind of know that maybe the third one I'll lean into. But, you know, going through them one by one, it kind of makes it hard because you can't anticipate what other things are coming. So it's hard to balance. So I think going back to my suggestion, I did propose to our city manager a week or so ago was, you know, identifying these things, and it might be through our discussion, but if we could see them as a list instead of going through them one by one, I think we would make better decisions.

Okay. I need to bring back a budget that can be adopted.

So can some of these come back at the next meeting, perhaps, as a list? And if it's attached to the agenda, people can give public comment, and then we can see them, so we see the whole pie, and it might be, maybe we're like, you know, item three, we might want to... agree with or my item two might want to disagree but going through them one by one does make it hard or even if there's now if you have a grouping if we could just announce them before we vote on them you know that grouping of the costs of the items that we're going through right now so it's like okay the donations is a hundred thousand that that has been asked or ninety ninety-five five thousand that has been asked for

That is not in the budget that we could easily add to the budget. The flock cameras were $6,000 that are in the budget.

That was $6,000. And then the compensation that fluctuates depending on

The compensation, if you reduced it by $600 a month times five, would be $36,000.

And $36,000, and so that is the minimum. It's not the previous amount, though, right? The previous amount, was that like a $450, $550?

No, I think it was, what was it? It was less than that. I believe it was...

300 and something it was it was a lot lower okay so comp if you if the maximum that can be saved there is 36 000. uh we have the flock uh the additional community contributions are 95 000. Do we have any other items now? My thought is, I did put this request in about a week and a half ago, and I don't have any items presented here except what the council came up with. So the request to ask staff to maybe identify a few things that we can cut back on. probably would make this a lot easier because, you know, what I'm trying to avoid is this nitpicking thing that's happening. And, you know, it's like when something's so valuable, you know, with, you know, the community funding, with somebody's pay, you know, these are big deals or the safety of our city. There might be some other items, if we take a look at it, that might be like, yeah, you know, we can cut that a little bit by $50,000.

There's your items that were added. At the workshop.

Okay. You know, it's a heavy thing to be thrown on me at this moment. You know, I did put the request in about a week and a half ago, and I don't have any items. You know, so that's...

These are the only... I mean, we don't budget, like, extra funds for anything. Everything is pretty much... So I don't... Especially for the general fund, it's not something that we... have extra in. So to say the only way you would be able to do it is to do something with wages. Or you're gonna have to let go an employee. That's the only way that I would know to do it, except for these things that we added.

Yeah, I guess it just comes back to the community funding, and we talked about it, we discussed it, we had a vote. You know, I think reexamining the existing funding would have been the right thing to do, but that got outvoted, so...

So I will bring back a budget or will somebody recommend the budget with the change?

Mayor, I would like to make a request to adopt a resolution entitled a resolution of the City Council of the City of Cloverdale adopting the fiscal years 26, 27, and 27, 28 biennial budget. With the one amendment.

Is that with any amendments that are considered or just as is?

I'm sorry, say that again?

You're adopting the resolution as titled. I just wanted to make sure if there's any amendments to the resolution.

I don't believe we had any amendments to it.

The $190,000 that I forgot to add.

Which one? I'm sorry.

The...

annexation annexation annexation consultant for 90 with the amendment of the annexation consultant and that's that's with the annexation consultant right yes that's included okay is there a second I second that all right there's a motion on the table to adopt as amended with to adopt the resolution by title as amended all in favor say aye aye aye all opposed say nay nay

Nay.

Motion passes three to two.

Thank you, Susie.

Yes, thank you, Susie. I appreciate your assistance with this. H2 is pulled. It's a budget.

Let's move on to item H2 has been pulled. H3, consider adoption resolution to declare intent to transition to district-based elections for city council.

Just give me a second, Alex.

While Mike's pulling up a document, Mayor, Councilmembers, The city received a demand letter from a well-known plaintiff's attorney alleging that the city's system of at-large elections, that's where the whole city votes for the whole city council, violates the California Voting Rights Act. alleges that the city's at-large system dilutes the ability of Latinos to elect the candidates of their choice. The CVRA is the state's version of the Federal Voting Rights Act, except it's much broader, and it's much easier to show that a violation of the CVRA exists. Many cities have received this same demand. And it's not really a reflection of the council itself. You see it in councils where the whole council is a protected class. But maybe, you know, they're still a minority group within the city who's not represented. Under the law, if we refuse to voluntarily transition to district-based elections, and a district-based election is when the city would be divided into districts, either a certain number of districts, or there might be an at-large mayor or another situation, but districts. If we don't agree to do that within 45 days of the demand letter, then the plaintiff can sue. And frankly, based on how the law is written, it is very difficult to win those cases. I'm not aware of any city that has won. I'm aware of a lot of cities who've spent a lot of money trying to fight. So the city has to adopt the resolution of its intent to transition within 45 days of getting the letter. We got the letter in late April based on scheduling and when this could get to closed session. We did get an extension from the plaintiff for about a week. Under the law, once we adopt the resolution, we have 90 days to transition. And the process requires five public hearings, which was quite a lot. However, there is the opportunity for an extension. We have tried to get as long of an extension as possible. At the time of writing the report... We had not secured an extension. All that the plaintiff is willing to provide is an extra 45 days. So we've agreed to an extra 45 days. So it would be 135 days, which is not a whole lot of time for five separate public hearings. But it does provide us a little bit of flexibility. When Mike's back, I'll have him scroll down. There's an updated resolution compared to what was originally in the packet. And Susie to the rescue, but thank you, Susie. If you just scroll down to the exhibit. So there's one recital that has been added that says, pursuant to Elections Code Section 1010E3C, the claimant has agreed to extend the time for the city to complete the transition process by 45 days. There's another action item saying, that says the city manager is authorized to execute an agreement and a form approved by a city attorney with the claimant to memorialize that extension. That's the only thing it would do. It wouldn't have anything else of substance there, just to memorialize that extension. And then, can you scroll down to the exhibit? So the five public hearings, The first public hearing, part of what the delay allows us to do is to, instead of having the first public hearing at our next meeting, we would postpone that until July. And that will give staff time to put together outreach materials, put together a website, an FAQ, because obviously this is a big change, and we don't expect to... answer everything tonight, but to explain what this means to the community at the start of this process so that they can participate. And that would then be throughout the five-step process. The first two steps are to receive receive comments from the public, the next two public hearings, members of the public can submit the actual draft maps. And then council will ultimately select one. Two things. Yeah, that Yes, correct. Um, and then the council will ultimately select one, a couple of things. So there are costs associated with this. So we avoid the cost of litigation, but which would be, you know, hundreds of thousands of dollars at a minimum, but under the law, we have to pay the attorney's fees of the, uh, claimant who submitted this letter. They're capped at around $40,000, but we can expect that's what they're going to be. And we're going to have to pay for a professional demographer to help us draw these lines to make sure that they comply with all the other requirements. The professional demographer in general, so we will be getting one on board. They all have sort of internet websites or great tools that allow the public to go on and really draw their own maps and in real time sort of see, oh, I drew this one to have too much population, or this one is not, or I drew these maps and they don't comply with X, Y, and Z rule, right? The biggest district and the smallest district have to be within a certain percent, things like that. So that is something... They'll do. The other thing to add is, as the council knows, there's an election coming up in November 2026. This process would not go into effect until the 2028 election. And that is because the nomination period starts, now I forget the date, maybe July 22nd, late July, mid to late July for the nomination period. In order for the districts to be in place for that date, Sonoma County registered voters needs the maps by mid-June. So even if we had started the day we got the notice in April, wouldn't have been feasible to do all the public hearings and complete that process in order of time to do that. So part of our outreach efforts are gonna have to be communicating with the public of this is not for this coming election, it's for the following election. And so with that, I'll pause. This is, I think maybe Mike's computer is frozen. I don't know if we can go down to the exhibit just so the council can see. We will update this exhibit to, say, 135 days rather than the 90-day period. But these are the rough dates. timelines. What the resolution also authorizes is the city manager to adjust these days as necessary. We will be widely publicizing these on social media, on the website, and doing that, but we may be able to tell far in advance, hey, this is a meeting where two council members say they're going to be gone. This is You know, September 23rd, I think, I just know off the top of my head, that meeting where Cal City's conference occurs. I don't know if council members have decided yet if they're going to that. So maybe we'll have to just push things back by, you know, two weeks here or there. Lots of public communication about this. what will be occurring. And that's what the extra time provides us, you know, a blanket cushion, rather, if we need to push things back to accommodate, you know, other agendas that might need to take priority. So with that, happy to pause for any questions.

Just really want to thank the California ambulance chasing attorneys that want to screw with the small town, cost us a bunch of money, and divide us. So thank you to him. I really appreciate it. We saw it coming. We've kicked this can as long as we could. I apologize to the community for what's going to have to happen.

And what is, I think, a little frustrating is the legislature has made the bar so low that it's really impossible to fight this, but then also created the attorney's fees. Provision, in some ways, it would have made more sense if the legislature just said, you know, every city has to do this by X date. But that's not what they did. And so we're in their spot.

So is this questions or comments? You ask questions or making comments?

I think just questions now and after the public has a chance, of course, comments.

This is a stupid law. But what I'm thinking about is, I just read something yesterday, and they are going after a set amount of people. I think it's any city that's 50,000 or less is not going to have to do this. I don't know that it will fit in this time frame. But there is hope. Because there are some small cities, Ojai and a couple other ones up north, but they're only like 800 or 1,200. But they aren't doing it. They don't have to do it. And so people are actually, they may get fined, maybe. But I think that the movement to 50,000 or under will happen fairly soon, fairly quickly. So it's hard to accept spending that money. But we don't know about a for sure date. But the benchmark is 50,000 population or less. And we would fall under that. So we may not have to spend any money.

DANIEL FRANKSTON CLOVER DALE. I think you all know I'm an attorney, which you may not know is I also worked in restaurants for 35 years while practicing law on Clement Street in San Francisco. And we too had a situation where we had ambulance chasers. They came by restaurant to restaurant. It wasn't dealing with voting rights. It was dealing with ADA compliance. And people would come in, ask to use the bathroom, and then we get a lawsuit the day later. So, and the other thing you should know is the idea that Cloverdale can't decide for itself to me is really ludicrous. I'll be the first to admit, I believe in diversity and inclusion. I believe that there are many jurisdictions in which district elections are very appropriate. Cloverdale is just not one of them. I wonder, is the claimant something that can be disclosed?

Yeah, I can pull it up. I think it's in the staff report. As is the case often with these types of situations, it's a group that's representing residents. So the group's name is... I can't remember if I... Oh, that's the...

individual claim in his name. That's what I wanted to know. So I have two things that I would suggest. First of all, I don't know if you're aware, there is a legislation pending. It is California SB 686, and that would set a threshold of 50,000, and it would exempt us. And obviously it's pending and it's not moving now. As the city attorney has already indicated, this law will have no impact whatsoever until the elections in 2028. So kind of thinking out of the box, you could adopt a resolution today with an effective date 18 months down the road. If you did that, the plaintiffs would have no claim for damages because they would not be, there would not be an election in which district, there would not be a district election because we'd kick it down the canny down the road for 18 months. That gives us the opportunity to speak to Chris Rogers, to speak to Mike McGuire, to make sure this amendment gets passed, and that would solve our problem. And the other thing I'd point out is you indicated some costs that were associated with it. I got to believe that if we have district elections, there's going to be added costs to the city for those elections. Is that right? Or do you want our bill to the county get that much larger?

So let me answer all of those. The election, the county ministers its election and charges you on a per-voter basis. So depending on how it works, you could have savings in some years if you're not sending ballots to all your residents. Now, that is maybe not the case if you decide to have a directly elected mayor or you have a ballot measure on it. But there could be potential savings, although. Frankly, any savings I'm sure will be eaten by the cost of Sonoma County Register of Voters going up. It's gone up quite a lot since the last I'm aware of that proposed bill. There were similar rumblings last legislative session and nothing happened. The idea of postponement is something we have greatly considered and we got a big fat no from the plaintiff about. The potential risk is that they say you adopted a resolution you could rescind the resolution too. So I have to go to court to sue so you get a court order that you can't rescind. And now pay for all of my attorney's fees that aren't capped at the $40,000. Now, would the judge agree with that or not, that's a question. But I think that's something we considered in deciding that the risk of that was too large to risk what Could be very high attorney's fees.

But, City Attorney, if the ordinance, or if this were to take effect prior to the next city election, what damages would be sustained by the plaintiff, the claimant, if the effective date were 18 months? Because you've got to have damages to go into court. So, the...

claimant would likely say, okay, so you say you're not going to do this process until 18 months from now. My damages are that I'm unsure about that. If I have to wait until 18 months to know for sure, then that is a risk to all of these clients. things and blah, blah, blah, and then you'll be delayed and we'll get in litigation there and we won't have time. If I have to fight you 18 months from now, that litigation won't be solved before the next election. And so what I need is a firm commitment. And the only way I can get a firm commitment is by suing you and getting a court order. How strong that argument would it be? I'm not saying there aren't any weaknesses in that, but the downside risk, I think our opinion is too great to... take that risk because if we're wrong and the judge says, yes, you're right. You need the remedy of an order ordering the city to transition. I'm sure rather than $40,000, the plaintiff's going to have $200,000 of attorney's fees plus the city's own attorney's fees. So that's not to say that your point has no merit, but we just felt the risk of that given financing was too great, especially if the outcome ends up being the same in the end.

Yeah, I understand, and I appreciate it. I don't want to take too much of the council's time, but a determination of standing would be the first question that a court would address. It'd be a motion, and you're probably looking at $10,000 in fees to do that motion. And if the motion were denied, then the council could come back and amend the ordinance and have an adoptive date as of the date that that motion is denied. I seriously think the council should consider doing that. Thank you.

Since things don't move swiftly through the legislature, like since it's out there, like in the assembly or in the Senate, wherever that bill is that you were talking about, doesn't that kind of give you some standing to say, hey, can we wait until this goes on? I'm just curious.

It does not. There are, for better or for worse, thousands, thousands may be an example, but I would imagine only, you know, there are hundreds of bills every year that get introduced and don't get adopted, that die somewhere along the process. Hopefully this one is not the case, but, you know, we can't know.

So, Alex, if we go down this process... And that does go through, we can change it back later, correct?

Correct. If something got amended in the law that said only cities on there, we could always go back to the old system.

Are they good? This is just a really tough situation. You know, we've had conversations with fellow council members in other cities. They're always asking when this is going to come to Cloverdale. It's happened. I've always thought it was not in our best interest, which I don't believe it is. We don't get very many people running for council as it is. You know, you're going to have... Districts that maybe nobody's going to run. And then, you know, you're kind of... Somebody gets appointed. And the... One of the suggestions that I would give to a future council if they're watching this meeting down the road when... Well, I guess we're making the decision. Excuse me, I'm speaking to us. I like the... You know, there's the possibility of doing a hybrid election, which would be three districts and two at large. So... You know, in case you have two candidates in one district, you know, maybe no candidates in another. It kind of creates three districts rather than five. So you're going to have a greater number of people running in each district and then two at large. So I think we should really consider that as an option. Last Tuesday on election night, I did run into our assemblyman, Chris Rogers, and had a conversation with him and went over this discussion. He was on the city council in Santa Rosa when they did their districting, and he mentioned that the forum came to them, and I think they had some other city's name in place of Santa Rosa, these districts. These claims are just kind of just thrown out and it's just a really bad thing. So my hope is that between now and 2018, something can be put in place that would disqualify any city from 25,000, 50,000, you know, whatever the number is. So it's a tough one here, so.

All right, with that, they can make a motion to adopt a resolution entitled Resolution City Council of the City of Cloverdell declaring its intent to transition from an at-large election system to a district-based election system.

I second that.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay. Motion passes 5-0.

Mayor, I don't think your microphone is on.

And before we turn over the staff, in order to first have a full picture for the item, I want to make a motion to authorize the city attorney to disclose anything confidential in closed session related to the assignment.

I didn't hear that. Your mic's off.

Oh, I'm sorry.

My mic's had feedback. Sorry there, Marianne. For this item, before we turn over to the staff for discussion in order for us to have a full picture for the item, I want to make a motion to authorize the city attorney to disclose anything confidential and close session related to this item.

Second that. With clarification, is that anything regarding this, or is it regarding the two meetings and the actual item here? It's just this item, not all of our closed sessions.

Sorry, for the record, can you read that one more time so I can get it out?

Let me read it again?

Yes, please.

Okay, before we turn over to staff... In order for us to have a full picture for this item, I wanna make a motion to authorize the city attorney to disclose anything confidential and closed session related to this item.

Thank you. And what was the second?

Council Member Marquez. Yes, I would like to second that.

Thank you. We need the vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Motion passes 5-0.

Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. So I won't spend too much time on the background. As the Council is well aware, PG&E has submitted an application to FERC to surrender its license and decommission the Potter Valley project. The council first considered lists on February 26th in the closed session to discuss whether or not to initiate litigation related to lists. In closed session, the council decided not to initiate any litigation and in lieu of litigation to authorize the then mayor lands to advocate and REPRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ON THIS MATTER. OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, THE VICE MAYOR THEN MAYOR LANDS WOULD PROVIDE OCCASIONAL UPDATES ON THIS ITEM. At some of those updates, I think on three instances, he referred to working with other people that he had brought on the vice mayor to assist them and also had met with some other people. And on three of those occasions, he referred to a committee. And just want to be clear, that is not a committee to the extent the mayor gathered a group. That is not a committee that the council ever formed. so that no council-created committee was ever formed. On August 13th, the council again met in closed session and at that meeting voted to authorize the filing of a motion to intervene in the FERC proceeding that was ongoing, motion to intervene and to meet comments, and to approve the comments that would go in the letter, the filing. The filing is a few pages, but I think the general summary of the points of the letter are summarized in the agenda report. There's four of them. That PG&E is not meaningfully engaged with Cloverdale or many other interested parties. That the application does not identify all of the impacts of decommissioning and dam removal. especially impacts further downstream such as Lowe's impact in Cloverdale. The application doesn't identify appropriate or comprehensive mitigation measures for the impacts caused by the decommissioning and that finally the application doesn't fully analyze and prematurely eliminated possible alternative alternatives to decommissioning. So FERC as part of its process on May 22nd released a scoping document for its NEPA process, the National Environmental Policy Act. Don't quote me on that acronym, but it's the federal equivalent of CEQA. And the deadline to submit comments for that is, I believe, July 25th. And so there has been quite a lot of discussion of this item in the community, amongst the council at times, desiring a public process. When did we authorize something? We should discuss this out in public. And so... I did not want to submit comments, the city plans to submit comments on the scoping document without the council, you know, approving that the policy had previously authorized in the motion to intervene was still accurate. So giving the council opportunity to have that conversation. And as well, I've heard comments from the public and from council members saying, stating that you know the when was vice mayor lands authorized or or vice mayor lands um you know we didn't we we you know some people have indicated that they didn't feel they were doing a permanent authorization for vice mayor lands and so i felt it was appropriate to bring this forward to the council so the council could have an opportunity to discuss both of these matters And the council can decide, you know, it wants to keep the same policy, it wants to change the policy, it wants to have no policy. Similarly for the representative, the council can decide it wants to have the same representative, it wants to have someone else represent them, or it wants to have no representative. It's completely up to the council to decide. And that decision would be memorialized in a resolution. There's a draft based on this city's current policy and can certainly be changed if that's the direction of the council tonight. This is the first meeting. We got a scoping document released, I think, on a Thursday after the agenda had been published for the next meeting. The first meeting in July is canceled on their schedule. The second meeting in July is only the Wednesday before this, so it wouldn't allow enough time to prepare documents. And from talking with the city manager, my understanding is that the next meeting in June is quite busy, that there are nine action items that aren't on the consent calendar. And I believe that was before we continued the item tonight to continue talking about the urban water management plan. So this appeared to be the best meeting on which to bring this discussion for the council. So we're happy to answer any questions, but this is really an opportunity for the council to express its opinion and to make a decision um clear you know in the record for the public going forward on what its policy is if it wants to have one and and who its representative is if it wants to have one and but of course it's up to the council and the council could choose to say at this time we don't want to do either of that anymore so with that happy that I'll take a pause and happy to answer any questions thank you mayor just want to thank everyone for

Being here tonight, it's been a long meeting. I just want to give some clarity and speak slowly. And so I appreciate your patience. I do value honest and open dialogue and hope that we can have a productive discussion tonight. I think one of the things that we can start with is focusing on the things that we agree on and really being specific about what this is. I would say one of the questions is, this is here. The importance of having this discussion today is about coming up with a response for the comment for the scoping document. And that's due on July 25. And the scoping document was just released. I would hope that we've all examined it a little bit. It's not the decommissioning application, so it's something a little different. You know, when the decommissioning application comment period was opened up, we came up with our city, the official city comment. I think we worked that out in closed session, if that's correct. The four main points I mentioned were brought to a closed session and approved by the council. And a closed session can really happen at any time. You know, what I would say, looking back at that and our comments, that was our city comment, I think we all came to that conclusion pretty easily. We had, you know, the four council members that are on the dais right now all wrote independent comments to FERC, and I think they all aligned. pretty well. So I don't think that's really very contentious about it. What has been contentious is about the designation and how we're represented. And so I want to take that carefully. Part of it is the history and how we got here, where this was a closed session item. We can discuss that. It was February 2025. And my recollection was that this was my first council meeting. It was a closed session. And we were discussing the town hall. that we had on PVP. And that was led by a vice mayor at the time, Mayor Todd Lance. And he mentioned he was going to an event and he wanted to advocate for Cloverdale for that event. We all agreed, yeah, you know, advocate for Cloverdale at the event. Following that closed session, when we came into open session, there was no report from our city attorney. declaring what the council had decided on and I think when you have a decision like that it should be made clear at the closed session and it should be made clear to the public following the closed session. After that designation was made months later I made a request to create an ad hoc committee on water resiliency. And again, we go back to the initial decision that was made that how clear was it on you're going to advocate for Cloverdale? Does it mean that somebody is the water czar? Does it mean that they're just going to advocate on a position regarding a proposed decommissioning? It wasn't made clear. And that's the job of a city attorney to make that clear to the city following a closed session. So at this meeting, when I requested to create an ad hoc committee, it was claimed that there was already an ad hoc committee. This was by Vice Mayor Wheeler at the time and Mayor Todd Lanz at the time. That was not correct. We had never voted for the creation of an ad hoc committee. At that meeting, our city manager, city attorney did not say anything to correct that misinformation it's not something that's taken lightly it's not something that was brought up casually it was in an official meeting and so that's compliance after that meeting I did contact our city manager and city attorney and asked them to clarify about the ad hoc and they said, you're right, there's no ad hoc committee that was formed and we should have said something. Well, that's your job. This item tonight was not recommended or voted as a future agenda item by the council. It appeared last minute put on the agenda by the city attorney. And there was a previous resolution that was struck from the record and erased because of its false and leading information. The previous resolution, instead of having a blank line to state who is going to be authorized after a discussion, had two names. And one of those names was never, ever recommended by our city council. So... What that shows to me is a pattern of bias by our city attorney. For putting somebody's name that was not authorized by council, you're acting outside of your authority. And with the previous actions about not reporting after the closed session and going along with an ad hoc that was never created, shows to me a clear pattern of bias. that has affected outcomes on the governance of Cloverdale and our situation with water. So leaving that behind, I just want to give you a little background on how we got here. Yes, there was a lot of requests for clarity from the community on what is, do we have a water czar? Who's in charge? Nobody knows because of the dereliction of our city attorney. If things were made clear, as an attorney should, there wouldn't be any questions. So because there was questions, it was for the benefit of our city attorney to put this on the agenda to cover his butt. That's why we're here. Moving forward... We got to deal with a contentious issue that has been very contentious in the past. I would like some clarity on exactly what it means to be authorized to represent an advocate on behalf of the city with the city's adopted position. Adopted position on what exactly? Is it the adopted position on the scoping document that we're submitting a comment to FERC and that's it? It's not clear. So where we're at now is that Vice Mayor Todd Lanz has been very active with his take on the Potter Valley project. And I think we should all be active. And so we've had conversations in the past that we've disagreed on. So that's a potential thing that... We can't necessarily prove anything without having conversations with experts. My chosen direction to go about this was not to necessarily have to pick somebody who's going to be the supposed water czar or who's authorized to represent some position that's not clearly defined, but the direction was to reach out to our neighboring organizations, Sonoma Water, IWPC, that's the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission, and David Manning, who is going to be the director of the NERF facility under IRPA, which is the EO Russian Project Authority. We had brought those, I had reached out to these folks, got approval for them to do a presentation to our city council and the public. I thought that that was a really positive direction to go where we can not have to argue amongst each other, but we have the experts and the people who are and have been working on solutions for our whole region where we can have a discussion with them. The public can have a discussion. That was the positive direction that's not going to cause contention between our city council. I think this move to bring this resolution today was a bad decision, and that's why I asked for it to be removed. We could have easily come up with a response to the scoping document. I think we'd all be in agreement of that. But to have to start talking about some position and do that now before we have these presentations, I think it's... not the best decision for our council it's not the best decision for our community because is there a rush to do it before we receive the presentations i don't think so that would be the way to do it that's why i wanted to pull the item and so i think that if we're going to move forward with having this discussion that we can we could all work on what we can do for the betterment of our city and if Any council member here wants to take a position that isn't the position that I want to take, allow them to do so. The position that I would like to take, and I don't want to have my hands tied, is to build partnerships with our regional organizations, work on building positive relationships, and maybe hopefully form a JPA similar to IWPC for our region of the Alexander Valley, where we can invest in solutions for cloverdale and that might be the second outlet from lake sonoma could be investing in uh... studies to to to raise coyote dam uh... many different things many options that we can try to figure out together uh... i don't want to be years down the road in the future where uh... you know we're at the whim of uh... sonoma water or a company selling us water and we didn't act on it when we needed to, to be purveyors. And so that's something that I've spent time going to board meetings, trying to build these relationships, just starting out as a fly on the wall and then eventually building trust with our neighbors. And I think that's where I'm at. I think they would vouch for me if I had more time. I would get letters of support from them to support me in that. And anything that I come up with, I would bring back to the council. I'm not going out there to advocate and say, this is where Cloverdale stands, but What can work, bring it back to the council. I think any of the things that would work and I think would get the support of our community and get the support of our council. That's what I would like to hopefully come out of this conversation if we're going to designate people. And if that means designating nobody, then maybe that's the best outcome. So I would like to make some comments after hearing from the rest of the council, hearing from the public, but I just wanted to set the stage and give a little history of how we got here today.

My big comment is I think whatever has been going on has not been transparent. I don't feel like it's been transparent to the whole entire council. And so I know that due to the fact that I don't feel like it's been transparent, I'm sure a lot of the community doesn't feel it's been transparent. And that goes against the Brown Act. And I think we need to, moving forward, be very transparent about what's going on and how we're dealing with the Potter Valley water thing and make it very public and take a lot of input from the public. And I would like to see all five of us work on it together because it's very important. And I don't think it's something that just one person should be working on.

What I did hear was there was nobody representing Cloverdale. But what I understand out of that is The mayor represents Cloverdale in most of those public forums or public meetings. The mayor is the face of the city, and that's basically where all the information gets disseminated from. So all good points. I would, for transparency, I don't know where that came from, but I think we're all up to speed on what is happening with the PVP. but I would say that the mayor represents the city and come back to council and give us a presentation and inform and along with like the resolution we passed, we can have the public speakers from those organizations come and enlighten us and the town as a whole.

There's a lot to unpack, so I'm just going to touch it lightly first and see what everyone else has to say here. This didn't start in 2025. This started when I got onto council and no one was dealing with the water issue. They were believing some of their politicians and constituents that said it was a done deal and things along those lines. So we began the conversations in 2022 that you're talking about now. I've established the relationships with everyone from our county representatives, Sonoma Water, state representatives, through our assembly and our senate, through the federal government, all the way up to Washington, D.C. at this point. I've had misused the word ad hoc. We've already... I can't say it enough. I'm sorry I used that in a meeting. It was the wrong wording for the name of that group that we were meeting with regarding this. But that group included engineers that decommissioned the Klamath dams. It included CPUSUC attorneys. It included the head of Department of Fish and Wildlife from the state that Governor Newsom sent to us. Our city staff with our managers and attorneys and the vice mayor because he was the vice mayor. There was a lot of confidential information and people involved, and not every single thing could come out in the meeting. So I gave you guys, and that was the discussion that we had in closed session, that was going to be known that some of this was going to have to be confidential. I gave updates at every, I think it was every meeting, at the end of every meeting for quite a while until... Someone on the council was going, and anytime I'd mention a person's name, they would go and basically say that I'm not telling the truth because they had a different opinion than what I did. So we had to stop a lot of that because it was actually burning relationships that I had been building to create. I'm not going to dig deep because it's not worth the energy, but I will tell you this. Anything that has ever been brought up here has been discussed at length with whoever it needed to be with. If you think that we're just talking about trying to save the dams, that's just one step. We've talked about every single water storage problem. We've talked about reservoirs. We've talked about the pipeline. We've talked about raising the dam. We've talked about aquifer recharge. We have geologists that work with us trying to figure out where they can go. We have many private parties. I work with PG&E. I mean, I can go down the list of the things I have. Look, Lake County supervisors, Mendocino County supervisors, Sonoma County supervisors, several state and federal reps. I have a meeting with the federal government on Friday. It's what we're doing to make sure that the cards are aligning in the best interest of Cloverdale. It's not a pissing match for who gets to have the conversations. It's about trying to do what's best for our community to make sure that we have access to a reliable domestic water source. And if the dams are not in place, or we'd change the matrix of NERF, we will not have that. And we're already seeing that because they're already cutting our water back to a variance that is so low that the Russian River probably won't flow in the summer. So you can't just be trying to say, you know, President Trump is involved, so that's bad. It can't be saying, Supervisor Gore said this, so that's the word of God. Or David Manning, or anyone else that you want to name. They all have a part, and they're all playing that part. Sometimes I believe them, sometimes I don't. Sometimes it's for political aspirations, sometimes it's not. But I'm looking out for Cloverdale. I'm looking out from the north border to the south border. And our river and our water source. And if we don't find a better solution than what Sonoma water has come up with, we're in trouble. The urban water management plan from the county shows it. They said they're going to have to reassess every five years because we have to reimagine the water use in the upper Russian river. You ask Sonoma Water for the number of acre feet that would have been diverted using the new NRF diversion versus what is being diverted now, and they will not give it to you. And the only answer I get is, well, we would have diverted some water, and this is in a year that we have more than average rainfall. The matrix doesn't work. It's all about numbers. It's not about the system. I've told them if they change their matrix to how they could divert water, we wouldn't be having these talks. It's very simple. There is a, NERF could work, but not under the conditions that they've created. With what we have right now, All of our unincorporated areas on the east side of our town will have their wells going dry every year. People that live in Palomino Lakes, they're already at 40 gallons a day per person. It's probably going to go lower because they will probably run out and have to be trucking water in. It's that dire. It can be. And that's why even under our UWMP tonight, I brought this up because water is going to be very scarce. There is other solutions that the federal government wants to look into. There's other solutions that private parties want to look into. There's other solutions the state wants to look into. The problem was Congressman Huffman, when they did their independent engineering report, didn't allow those other solutions to be looked into. Those are ones that the independent engineer actually said, we can do these for about 10% of the cost. And that's what we need to look at is, why wouldn't you? Why wouldn't you look into something that's going to cost the taxpayer 10% of what they're proposing and would provide you more water? Why wouldn't LA allow that? There's other reasons behind that. If you look at the cost of this, the decommissioning right now, PG&E is saying $1 to $2 billion to decommission the dams just to take them out. With that, it goes down to your PG&E bill. It's the way it goes. It's already approved to go on to your PG&E bill for that. They don't know what the cost of the NERF facility will be. They won't give you a solid number. It's added to zero since the last discussion that I heard. The cost of an acre foot of water, no one knows what that'll be, whether it's through Sonoma Water or through a private entity like Elsinore Valley or San Gorgonio or any of the other water utility people that want to purchase the dams. They don't know either because PG&E has not been giving them the proper information. They have been hiding everything until this week. They literally just got the NDAs signed from PG&E so they could actually start reviewing the private information that is secure from the dams and the seismic reports that we don't have. So there's a lot of things going on and you have to weigh everything. The pipeline from the dam, Sonoma Water set a billion dollars. That's your tax money, not all of the region, that is you. That is our Alexander Valley, which bringing up Alexander Valley, we have supported them in their water district. We actually wrote a letter to support them for their water district. We will fight tooth and nail to help them get their water district because we want to be good neighbors. That water district actually hurts us in curtailments and drought in Cloverdale. However, they need to have water just like anybody else, just like I brought up today. Us using more water can hurt the people on the unincorporated area. So you have to be good neighbors. We're working very hard to make sure we have water and it's paper thin. It can be really bad and it can be decent. It's never going to be like it used to be. But there's certain things that you can't always mention the names that you're talking to. And you can't always mention the plays that are being done behind the scenes. But know that I've been doing them on the behalf of Cloverdale as I was instructed to do by our council prior and current.

I'm not going to give no comment on that. But I know I have been working with Vice Mayor lands on this and have him not as deep into it as he is and don't have the connections that he does on this so from that point what i did is step back and get briefs from him when to the point of he would give me briefs the person working on it when he could there was names like he mentioned out there names right there when you get up to the level that he has climbed the ladder to right now that I didn't need to know at the time. And I was perfectly good with that sitting back because I know the process that's taking place like he just explained. There's a lot of information being tossed from PG&E that we're not getting all of it, getting some of it. Some of it you have to read between the lines on it. So like I said, all I can say to this is you got to know we're working for Cloverdale, for the water, for Cloverdale. and the Potter Valley project is right at the top of the list. There's a lot of players involved in this, the ones that Vice Mayor Lanz just mentioned, but we are working for the city of Cloverdale.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, before we go out to public comment, if I could make a quick comment. I just want to clarify, when we mean in closed session, that's confidential. And there are certain things required to be disclosed by law. Other than that, nothing can be disclosed by law without the authorization of the council. It's illegal to do that. It's a misdemeanor. So it's not the city attorney's job to decide what the public should know. That's the council's job. And the council met on February 26 to authorize the vice mayor. He gave updates on March 12, June 23, August 13. August 13 was the first time he referred to a committee. August 27th, we met in closed session again. No one raised that they wanted something to be released out of closed session. No one raised that at all or that the vice mayor had been misrepresenting himself. If the council had wanted something released out of closed session, I absolutely would have done it. But it's the council's decision whether or not things get released.

Just to comment back on that. you know, when you have a majority on a council, you don't just ask for everything when you know it's not going to fly. So it's not necessarily the reasoning to make. Certainly, we've had trouble in the past. One instance was our flag policy about flying at the library where things were misrepresented. There was a consensus amongst three council members to have a single flag fly and without confirming a consensus uh... somebody said i want all flags and then that just became the consensus even though there wasn't a clear consensus so we've been doing things different since then because there was a problem that was pointed out and so This closed session meeting goes before that problem was solved, and that was the lack of clarity. I think it is a city attorney's job to make decisions clear. And certainly those things, you know, it's reportable action that these decisions are made and clarified to the community is a prudent thing to do.

If the council had wanted me to disclose something from closed session, I would have absolutely done it. Otherwise, without that, it was illegal.

And when it came up about the ad hoc conversation, why didn't you clarify it?

The vice mayor has convened a committee. Ad hoc, I'm not familiar with when he used the word ad hoc. I know he used the word committee multiple times.

So sometimes it's good to pay attention in our meetings. I know sometimes you might be on your computer doing something else, but it was brought up in an official setting when I requested to create an ad hoc committee. And then they said there was already an ad hoc committee. And you know that wasn't correct. and you didn't do your job.

So let's keep this respectful up here. We can't sit back and bash the city attorney, which has been going on for the last 15 minutes.

I have the right to respond, and I'm responding. I have the right to respond. I have the right to respond. You have the right to respond in a very respectful manner. It is respectful. This is my meeting. It is respectful. I'm saying when this happened... And it was falsely claimed that there was an ad hoc. You let that fly. I'm just saying that happened. And it was an official setting. So I was just pointing out there's been a pattern of bias. And that's what I was saying. That's what got us here to this meeting. So we could have just left it at that. And I would like to just leave it at that.

would like to suggest to all of you if you have not already done so do you know who Brock Dolman is from the Sonoma County Water Institute he's one of our neighbors at the Occidental Arts and Ecology Center. And they have facilitators over there that know exactly what to do. And the reasons why we're in this situation right now, those people have all the answers. So expand your minds and have a facilitator come or go over there and have a facilitator explain to all of you what's going on. Take some money out of the budget and expand your minds and learn about how we're all going to make it over there. Because that started in 2004, long before you showed up here. I went and got my permaculture design there in 2008. I was a cook in that kitchen in 1998 when my daughter was at Harmony School, and I was on the garden committee. And we used to take all the kids up to the Occidental Arts and Ecology Center to learn about resiliency and food in the Mother Garden. And we taught them about the Pomo Indians, okay, who are being fully disrespected right now. But you all need to go and educate yourselves about how we can get through this and don't depend on Todd Lands because he is no water czar. Okay. The water czar of Sonoma County, his name is Brock Dolman.

Daniel Frankston, Cloverdale. I see three things going on here. The first is a private session and authorization that was not disclosed. I don't know the extent of the authorization. Was it for one particular trip? Is that something that can be said? So regardless, I think it would be good for the council to adopt a policy that when decisions are made in a private setting, in closed session, that when something has an outward appearance, i.e., I'm authorized to speak on behalf of Cloverdale, that as a routine matter, you vote, you at least discuss whether that should be disclosed to the public. I think that would have avoided a lot of confusion. I looked at the agenda item. I follow you guys pretty closely. I had to scratch my head and say, authorization? I don't know. So there's that one aspect, and that would be my suggestion there. With regards to the response, I know why this matter came on calendar, because you got a letter on the 26th, and that July is the period in which the response is due, so it had to be put on the calendar. To the extent that the authorization tonight is to respond directly to provide responses for that, I don't see a problem with authorizing one individual to do that one item. But I think the idea that the council would vote to authorize one individual to speak on behalf of all of Cloverdale in closed session and to not disclose that is an absolute disgrace. Absolute disgrace. I have no problem with the vice mayor being a spokesman with regards to water rights with Regarding Potter Valley. I see the problem here as needing multiple solutions I see no better person in this room to deal with a Potter Valley aspect of this than Todd Lance He's been a steady advocate for years. I admire and respect the work that's been done and I don't agree that the outcome will be good, but if you can make it work, great. All the more power to you. Fight those windmills. But in the meantime, we need to have a backup plan. We need an alternative solution. We need to have an all-hands-on-deck approach. What I see is happening here is I see one individual taking all the action, which is great, But I also see other individuals who are equally interested and equally concerned in the water rights in Cloverdale being shut off. And that's not right. I think it's important that we, just like we allow you to go loose and keep Potter Valley up and keep that dam up, you need to let others go and explore alternative options. Because if Potter Valley comes down and we're not dealing with the regional... solutions, we're going to be screwed, and we need to have an all-hands approach. So I would like to see an individual response to this one-letter authorization. I would love to see you continue to work on Potter Valley, but I would also like to see Councilmember Marquis freed up to look at alternatives here in this region. Thank you.

Do you mind if I respond to that? Go ahead. So the thing we have to be careful of is the Brown Act, number one. have to report to the mayor who has been part of this since last year if we do one item only then what do i do when i get information that's confidential then we have to go back every meeting and ask if i can have another meeting it doesn't work that way there's two people that have been reporting to the city attorneys to the city manager And to anyone else that needs to be reported to, it just doesn't, not 100% of the information makes it back to the council when it's confidential and it has to be kept confidential. However, I report out, excuse me, it does.

I apologize. I didn't even consider this. The resolution provides for two individuals to be authorized. Whoever is authorized needs to report to the mayor, correct? Report back to the mayor on the actions that are taken.

And that would be two people, the one plus the mayor.

It can't be two plus the mayor. Why can't Council Member Marquez also be appointed?

Because then it's going to be the mayor and Council Member Marquez. That's an option. That's an absolute option.

And that's what I would request, is to have Council Member Marquez listed as the second individual and yourself listed as well. Then we can't talk to the mayor.

We're not together. We can't. We're separately.

but it becomes a serial meeting. The council could also decide that the mayor didn't need to be updated if that's what the council wants to do as well.

Okay.