City Council - Regular Meeting

you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. you ¶¶ Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. . . . . you you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you

All right. Is it on? It is on. All right. All right. Good morning to everyone. It's 915 a.m. Welcome to the one and only city council meeting here in the month of the hot month of July. City clerk, would you go ahead and please call the roll?

Thank you. Good morning. Council Member Perea. Present. Council Member Carbasi. Here. Council Member Arias.

Presente.

Vice President Maxwell.

Present.

Council Member Vang.

Present.

Council Member Richardson.

Here.

President Esparza.

Present.

Seven members being present, we have a quorum.

All right. Fantastic. So next, we're going to have the invocation after that, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. If you can, please stand. Our invocation will be held by Father Yvonne from the Shrine of St. Therese. Welcome up.

opportunity to serve the people of Fresno. We ask for your wisdom and guidance upon the mayor, city council members, city staff, public safety personnel, and all who have been entrusted with positions of leadership. Grant them discernment as they consider matters dealing with the well-being of this community. Help them to seek solutions that promote justice, unity, public safety, economic opportunity, and the common good. Bless the residents of Fresno, especially those facing hardship, illness, or uncertainty. Inspire us to be good neighbors, to care for one another, and to work together with respect even when we disagree. May today's meeting be marked by integrity, thoughtful decision, and a sincere commitment to serve the people of this city. Give us the humility to listen, the courage to do what is right, and the vision to build a brighter future for generations to come. We ask your blessing upon the city of Fresno and all who call it home. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Thank you. Council Vice President, would you please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance? All right, city clerk, we're going to move on to the approval of the agenda. Are there any announcements or changes that you have?

Yes. uh good morning first of all i want to make people aware that as usual we have interpretation and translation services available we are using the worldly translation service you can see today a little bit different there is an ongoing translation of english and spanish if you would like to make public comment at any point in a language other than english you may do so and the translation will be provided to the council members in english We also have online interpreters available in the Hmong and Punjabi languages. And here in the chamber and on Zoom, we are providing ASL interpretation as well as closed captioning. We do have many changes to the agenda today. I'll start those. Excuse me. Item 2A, ID 26-1004, regarding approval of the minutes for June 8, 2026, June 9, June 10, June 11, June 16, June 18, June 23, and June 25, all 2026, the budget hearings and regular meetings. The minutes for June 8th, June 9th, June 10th, June 11th, June 16th, June 23rd, 2026 have been removed by staff. Item 2K, ID 26-989, regarding the cooperative purchase agreement with AMS.net LLC for the lease purchase of enterprise-grade technology, the following changes to the staff report are as follows. To the recommendation, staff recommends that council approve a cooperative purchase agreement, CPA, with AMS.net LLC in an amount not to exceed $2075399-99 with a term of three years with two one-year extensions not to exceed five years for enterprise grade technology equipment required for the new PD 911 center facility procured through the Merced County focus cooperative purchasing agreement contract number 2026120 in accordance with administrative order 3-1 The underlying equipment is being procured utilizing a competitive purchase agreement. Financing for this equipment will be provided under the New Master Equipment Lease Purchase Agreement, MELPA, to be brought to council for approval soon. To the background section, the Information Services Department, ISD, is responsible for the network and data center infrastructure, supporting police department technology, including 911 dispatch operations, As part of the relocation of the PD 911 Center to a new facility, ISD must deploy new data center and network infrastructure at the new site, along with associated installation, integration, and project management services. This equipment is quoted through AMS.net LLC, leveraging the Merced County Focus Agreement, contract number 2026120, a cooperative purchasing agreement available to the city, and will be financed through a new master equipment lease purchase agreement, MELPA. A redlined version of this staff report has been distributed on the dais and printed for the public. Page 2. Item 2. GG ID 26-1024 regarding resolution providing for fee waivers and subsidies for eligible parades and special events. The following changes were updated in the resolution. From Section 3C, special event insurance was removed regarding Section 1B and has been corrected to or. Item 2. ID 26-1028, I believe that's item 2II, regarding resolution approving the Fresno Public Safety Infrastructure Restoration and City General Services Tax Ordinance with the use of tax revenue. The title has been updated to include bill for introduction and adoption, imposing a transactions by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration subject to Mayor Vito. Item 2II, ID 261028, regarding resolution, approving the Fresno Public Safety Infrastructure Restoration and City General Services Tax Ordinance with the use of tax revenue. Section 7-1607, use tax rate. There was an error in the language. The tax rate should read 0.50%, half percent of the sales price of the property. The following items were moved from consent calendar to city council section by council president Esparza. Item 2HH, ID 26-1027 regarding resolution submitting the city electors a charter amendment prohibiting debt and general fund financing of the southeast development area. Item 2II, ID 26-1028, regarding resolution approving the Fresno Public Safety Infrastructure Restoration and City General Tax, excuse me, General Services Tax Ordinance with the use of tax revenue to be reviewed and reported on by a Citizens Oversight Committee. Item 2JJ, ID 26-1029, regarding resolutions submitting to city electors a state a charter amendment creating a citizen redistricting advisory commission item 2kk id 26-1030 regarding resolution submitting to city electors a proposal to amend the charter to amend provisions related to political officers Item 4A, ID 26-934, regarding approved reappointment of Casey Austin to the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Board of Directors, was moved from the City Council to the consent calendar by Councilmember Carbasi. Items removed from the agenda, ceremonial item ID 26-876, regarding proclamation for Central East Boys track and field team, was removed from the agenda by the sponsors. Page 3, the 915 item, ID 26-971, regarding hearing to adopt resolutions and ordinance to annex territory and level a special tax, levy a special tax regarding city of Fresno community facilities, district number 9, annexation number 75, was moved to the August 27, 2026 meeting at 915 a.m. at the request of the developer. Items moved to contested consent for further discussion. Item 2C, ID 26-938 regarding approve the reappointments of Brad Hardy to the Civil Service Board. Kelly Greener, Chenier Derrick was moved to contested consent by Councilmember Arias. Item 2E, ID 26-983 regarding actions related to aviation land and building lease and agreement with Flight Level Aviation LLC was moved to contested consent by Councilmember Richardson and Vice President Maxwell. Item 2G, ID 26-995, regarding actions pertaining to Phase 2 construction of the progressive design build as part of the new terminal expansion project at Fresno Yosemite International Airport, was moved to contested consent by Councilmember Richardson. Item 2M, ID 26-988, regarding actions pertaining to the Fresno Airport's Public Safety Officers Association, FAPSOA, for Unit 11, was moved to contested consent by Councilmember Richardson. Item 2T, ID 26-1001, regarding approve the First Amendment to the Copper River Transfer Agreement with Copper River Development Company, was moved to contested consent by Councilmember Arias. 2EE, ID 26-1013, Regarding bill for introduction, adding Article 38 of Chapter 9 of the Fresno Municipal Code relating to tobacco retailer's license was moved to contested consent by Council Member Richardson. Item 2FF, ID 26-1023, regarding resolution directing the City Manager to terminate the marketing agreement with SLWA Insurance Services was moved to contested consent by Council President Esparza. Item 2GG, ID 26-1024, regarding resolution providing for fee waivers and subsidies for eligible parades and special events, was moved to contested consent by Council Member Richardson. And I believe this completes the changes to the agenda today.

All right. Thank you, Amy, for that very informative presentation. Yeah, thank you. Today's our first day, SB 707. So bear with us as we navigate. Maybe a little clunky. We've got a lot of new technology up here and such. More screens than I've ever had up here before. But we'll proceed accordingly. Thank you, Clerk. For my colleagues, are there any additional changes beyond what we have listed here on the agenda? I do, Council President.

What do you got? Clerk, I'd like to move the following items to contested consent. 2HH, 2II, 2JJ, and 2KK to contested consent.

Thank you. Just for a correction, those items have been moved to council items, so they will not be uncontested.

That is correct. Thank you very much.

Yeah, that was an oversight. So I moved them into the Section 4 on the City Council items. So those will be heard individually. If you're here for ballot measure proposition items to weigh in on those, we're not hearing those on the consent. We're hearing those as individual items all on their own. So those won't be on consent agenda anymore.

Okay. Council President, if I may pose a clarifying question. When do you anticipate we will discuss those items that you pulled to the City Council section?

We're playing Tetris today. We have the mayor out at a funeral right now. We may do one this morning, maybe two. Throughout the day? Throughout the day, yeah. We'll scatter it.

Council President, if I may, I have one more. Sure. Also, with regards to item 2HH at this time, I'd like to make a motion to table this item, 2HH, BEING THAT I'M STILL WAITING FOR THE FINANCIAL REPORT WORKSHOP FROM THE DECEMBER 2025 COUNCIL MEETING WITH REGARDS TO THIS ITEM. AND ALSO MY OFFICE AND I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE HAVE RECEIVED LETTERS CREATING ME TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A LAWSUIT WITH REGARDS TO THIS ITEM. AND SO WITH THOSE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM.

All right, a motion and a second for the grandstands.

Council President, I'd like to have a roll call on this.

All right, so we have a motion, we have a second. Do we need discussion on this or we just vote? Procedural. Okay.

It's procedural.

All right, so the motion is to remove item 2HH, which is the proposed ballot measure to prohibit public financing within SEDA. So a yes vote would mean Removing it from the agenda and no vote would mean that we'll debate it later on today. Just to be clear, Council President, I want the public to know this does not mean we endorse the item.

This just is a procedural decision, correct? This is strictly procedural in terms of keeping it on the agenda to discuss for later on. With a roll call vote, I don't want anyone thinking that this is our opinion. This is just about hearing discussion, correct? Yeah. Or not.

Yeah, we're just deciding whether we actually hear the item or not. Okay. All right. Clerk. Clerk.

For the roll call vote, Council Member Perea? Yes. Council Member Carbasi?

No.

Council Member Arias?

Si.

Vice President Maxwell? No. Council Member Vang?

Yes.

Council Member Richardson? Yes. President Esparza?

No.

There are four yes votes and three no votes. The motion passes.

Okay, item 2HH, removed from the agenda. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Clerk. Any further changes? All right, I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda. Second. All right, we have a motion, we have a second. Any opposition to approving the agenda? All right. Agenda is approved as is. Move into ceremonial presentations. We have two now that one was removed a little bit earlier. The first one we're going to have is a proclamation for the Central East Boys Volleyball Team. That's sponsored by Councilmember Perea and Councilmember Karbassi.

Good morning, everyone. It feels like with every council meeting, we're here standing in the front row highlighting champions from Central Unified School District. And today is no different. So let me have the boys volleyball champions come up here with me. And I asked them if they had their speeches prepared. They said they do. Come on.

Come on up.

All right guys, so years from now, your scores, your records will be a part of history. But what's not gonna be ever forgotten is the bar you raised when it comes to dedication, when it comes to the scoreboard, when it comes to what commitment looks like from young men. You guys are champions not just on the court, but off the court as well. I understand that you guys are academic achievers. I know that this would not be possible without the love and support from your parents. And so if any parents are here today or listening on TV. I just want to thank the parents for the dedication, the time commitment that it goes to investing into your children. Guys, I know practices are probably early mornings, after school, late into the evenings, maybe weekends, maybe a little bit of traveling. But you guys never blinked when it came to doing what you needed to do to support not just yourselves, your personal growth, but to support one another as well. And so I'm just really proud to be the council member representing Central Unified School District. I don't know what water you guys are drinking out there, but keep it up. Do we have seniors? Raise your hand if you're a senior? Junior? Sophomore? Any freshmen? All right. So we have a lot of returning players. So I think we're going to continue to see the scoreboard taken up year upon year. upon years. So I'm going to give the mic to Council Member Carbasi to say a few words as well. Congratulations, guys.

Thank you, Council Member Preah. Pretty much everything that had to be said has been said. Like the issue about the water. Look, I'm a Clovis Unified guy. They ought to represent because you guys are just kicking butt like everybody. Dr. Marshall, your kids make us look real good. I'm very proud of you guys. And I hope one of these days, you're doing a great job with volleyball. If you want to aim high and spike the ball, come up here on this council. We'd love to have you serve here because you do a lot of great things. Keep the work you're doing. So, Dr. Marshall, you want to say a few words?

We're so proud of our students at Central Unified. As you pointed out, they're scholars. We have our student athletes. So we have a great program in Central, and we're just so proud this morning.

I'm just proud of this team for this year for our accomplishment. In the past, our program haven't been the strongest, but this past year, we were able to finish second in Golden Valley tournament. We went to Las Vegas. We were able to take first place over there. As the season progressed, we just got better and better and make the improvement. We were able to capture our second central section title and within five years to the program and then we were able to capture our first southern section title for our program also and we were the runner-up for a state unfortunately we were able we fell short but it was a great accomplishment for especially for our program

Thank you, Coach. So it's my honor to declare today Central East High School Boys Volleyball Team Day in the city of Fresno. Congratulations.

City Clerk. Thank you. Whereas the city of Fresno is proud to recognize the Central East High School Boys Volleyball Team Grizzlies for a remarkable 2026 season defined by excellence, perseverance, and an unwavering commitment to teamwork as they represented Central East High School and the Central Unified School District with pride and distinction. And whereas through dedication, discipline, and countless hours of hard work, the Grizzlies captured the CIF Central Section Division II Championship, demonstrating exceptional athleticism and commitment against some of the top programs in the Central California area. And whereas, building upon that success, the team claimed the CIF Division III Southern Regional Championship, earning the opportunity to compete on the state's biggest stage and further establishing Central East High School as one of California's premier high school volleyball programs. And whereas they concluded their season with a runner-up finish in the CIF Division III State Championship, an accomplishment that reflects the resilience and competitive spirit displayed by every student athlete and coach throughout the season. And whereas the accomplishments of the Central East High School boys volleyball team have brought tremendous pride to their families, coaches, classmates, alumni, and the entire Fresno community, inspiring future student athletes through their leadership and commitment to excellence, both on and off the court. Now, therefore, be it resolved that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer, Councilmember Annalisa Perea, Councilmember Mike Carbasi, and the Fresno City Councilmembers, Do hereby recognize and commend the Central East High School Boys Volleyball Team for an outstanding 2026 season and extend our best wishes for continued success in the years ahead. And do hereby proclaim Thursday, July 30th, 2026 to be Central East High School Boys Volleyball Team Day in the city of Fresno.

All right, great. Congratulations again. Our next proclamation is going to be a proclamation for Li Fang Mo Veng Su Day. That's sponsored by Council Member Vang. Hello.

Ah, there he is. I believe he just got here. You know, proclamations are usually sweet, fantastic achievements, acknowledgements. However, today is a bittersweet for me. This is Lee Fong, Mo Van Su. He is my chief of staff, and he is leaving my office. Thank you very much for the seven plus years you've given to the Pseudofluorescent First, working for Council President Nelson Esparza. And then you moved over to planning with Director Clark. And then last year when I came on board, you came over and you became my Chief of Staff. And you took me and navigate with me through City Hall, every nook and cranny, literally. And I am very, very appreciative of the time that you've given not only to District 5 and 7, but to the City of Fresno and to the people in the City of Fresno. I am very appreciative of that. I'm not going to go into the details. The proclamation will be read by the clerk later on. But I do want to say thank you very much from the bottom of my heart. As a friend who knew you before I came to City Hall, and as a, in our perhaps culture, as an older brother, in this case, this last year, you were the older brother to me. And so I am so appreciative of that. I really want to be emotional and express what I really feel deep down inside. And if I say that in English, I think it's going to have some loss in translation. So I'm going to finish the rest of my remarks in my mother tongue. I have been working in the industry for a long time. I have been working for a long time. I have been working for a long time. And so with that, I wish you the very best of luck moving forward, and there will always be a place, at the very least, in District 5 for you, and I believe in the City of Fresno for you. So good luck, and his last day will be this coming Friday, tomorrow, and so by Monday morning, we will definitely miss you. So congratulations with some reservations, and the very best to you.

Thank you.

I did not prepare a speech for this, and I was very surprised. But first and foremost, I'm humbled to receive this recognition for my years of service here with the city of Fresno. It's been an honor to serve as a project liaison, your chief of staff, and also the deputy chief of staff for council member Sparza as well. City Hall is one of those places where we're one big family, and sometimes it feels like we don't always agree, but that's what family, they do, but we do have our hearts in the right place. And so it's hard to put into words or how to describe my journey here, but I do thank the administration, the council members, down to the managers, supervisors, and front row staff. Thank you for your mentorship. Thank you for your guidance. And thank you for your wisdom as well. And I'm humbled by the amount of outpour of support that I've received from each and every one of you. And so I'll just end it shortly that the city of Fresno always has a special place in my heart. And so thank you for allowing me to serve you.

And I'm going to read the last two paragraphs of this proclamation. Whereas a dedicated and steadfast public servant to the city of Fresno, Councilmember Vane and District 5 constituents, Lee Fong-Mua-Va Su has earned the admiration and respect of those who he had the good fortune to work with. Now, therefore, be proclaimed that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer and the city and the Fresno City Council do hereby recognize July 30th, 2026 as in the city of Fresno. Congratulations. Clerk, can you please read the rest of the proclamation into the record? Thank you. And if you want to take pictures with us, anybody who has worked with him or know him, you're more than welcome to come up here and take a picture with him. This is your last opportunity as an official Fresno City employee here. Thank you.

Lee Fong, we wish you a great amount of luck as you venture out of the building here. I'd like to say I have a good eye for talent. And when your resume came across the desk, it was like, yeah, we've got to hire this guy. And look at you now. So good luck out there. I'm sure you know all about the revolving door. You're a great public servant. I'm sure this won't be the last time you work here or contribute to our city. Thank you.

Council President, may I say a couple words?

Yes.

I forgot to punch in. Lee Fong, congratulations. It was great for us to be able to steal you from Council President Esparza and bring you over to the administration side. But then there was like a double uno move and Council Member Vang stole you back. But best of luck to you in your new job. I know you'll do great. You'll do great things. You have the right attitude and the right mindset to be able to serve. And we very much appreciate everything that you did for us when you were a member of our team. So thank you. Congratulations. Best wishes.

Go ahead and read the proclamation now. Whereas Lifang Muvangsu has contributed to legislative and executive functions in the City of Fresno by rendering more than six years of exemplary public service on behalf of City Council President Nelson Esparza in the 7th Council District, the City's Planning and Development Department, and City Council Member Brandon Vang in the 5th Council District. And whereas Lifang, a first-generation college graduate earned his bachelor's degree in political science from California State University, Fresno, and his master's degree in public policy administration from California State University, Sacramento. And whereas Lee Fong began his career in public service with Council President Nelson Esparza's office as a services aide and advanced to deputy chief of staff, where he managed the council member's schedule, led community events, assisted with constituent services, and performed policy research that improved neighborhood infrastructure to support the creation of citywide policy. And whereas in October 2022, Lifang joined the city's planning and development department as a project liaison, where he played an important role in facilitating development-related communication and helped align projects with municipal processes, and expectations, supporting positive outcomes for business, neighborhoods, and stakeholders navigating the development systems. And whereas in May 2025, Lifang joined Councilmember Brandon Vang's office as Chief of Staff, overseeing daily operations, budget planning, policy priorities, constituent services, and coordination with city departments and community organizations. And whereas Lee Fong contributed to the several noteworthy initiatives, including efforts related to the Responsible Neighborhood Market Act, the Evictions Protection Program, and smoke-free housing protections, and improvements to the Veterans Affairs Hospital parking district. And whereas a dedicated and steadfast public servant to the City of Fresno Councilmember Vang and District 5 constituents, Lee Fong Mu Vang Su has earned the admiration and respect of those who had the good fortune to work with him. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer and the Fresno City Council, do hereby recognize July 30, 2026 as Lee Fong Mu Vang Su Day in the City of Fresno.

All right, let's move on to council member reports and comments. We'll go and order council member Perea.

Thank you, council president. City manager, there's been a number of folks that have been reaching out to my office regarding the vacant buildings over on Fern and Maroa. There is a string of vacant units just east of Livingston's, Strummer's. There was an article recently about a lot of the vagrancy that those buildings have created, number of issues. I wanted to see if we could pull any data that we have on the number of calls to that side. I just want to get a good idea on the overall neighborhood impact that vacancy of this building has had over the years. I'd like to see if we can pull the number of police department calls, the number of heart calls, the number of code enforcement calls. One of the owners is a council member from another jurisdiction. And I'm sure if they lived here and saw this in their own backyard, they would be a little bit more proactive when it comes to the upkeep of this building. And so I really want to get a better understanding of what exactly the overall impact is. And then I will be working with our city attorney's office to see what potential next steps could be to help remedy. I think we've taken a tough love approach, but I think it's time to get a little bit more aggressive when it comes to this specific part of the tower district. So if you could help me with that, I'd really appreciate it.

Yeah, I'd be happy to agree with you. It has been an ongoing concern and we have been devoting a significant amount of resources. So happy to provide that information for you.

Thank you, city manager. And then I do want to let everyone know that this Saturday, August 1st, I'd like to invite families. We are having our first back to school event. It's going to be in partnership with Blackstone Chevrolet. It will be a drive-thru event. It'll be at Blackstone Chevrolet this Saturday from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Our well supplies last. Blackstone Chevrolet is 5735 North We're going to have backpacks and school supplies for school-aged children. That's this Saturday from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. at Blackstone Chevrolet. Thank you, Council President.

Great. Council Member Carbasi?

In light of the long agenda, I'll just forego my comments today.

Thank you. Council Member Arias? Thank you, Council President. Just information from my constituents. Just last week, I was gone for a little more than a week on the first family vacation, seven years with my kids out of country. So I ended up with about 150 missed calls, a few hundred text messages, and about 300 emails that I had to go through in the last couple days. So my apologies for not being as responsive as I usually am. BUT I DO WANT TO THANK MY STAFF FOR KEEPING EVERYTHING DOWN AND CONTINUING TO ENGAGE WITH THE CONSERVATIVES OF MY DISTRICT. A FEW INFORMATIONAL ITEMS, BACK TO SCHOOL EVENT TAKING PLACE ON AUGUST 8th AT 9AM WITH THE RETURN OF SCHOOL FOR ALL THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY. THE FREE BACKPACK EVENTS HAVE BEGUN ACROSS THE DISTRICT. and the city. Our office will be providing free vouchers for haircuts and reusable water bottles for our students as they return back to school. Additionally, we'll be doing a free admission to the Fresno Chappie Sioux. on August 8th at noon that will be included, will include lunch for children. We anticipate nearly a thousand residents of District 3 being able to access the zoo with the free lunch prior to the return of school. Additionally, I know the Kimber family is in the audience today, City Manager. The Kimber, Les Kimber Park is on the agenda for one more item that needs to be APPROVED. THIS HAS DEFINITELY BEEN THE MOST FRUSTRATING PROJECT FOR ME IN THE DISTRICT. THE PARK IS NEARLY A YEAR BEHIND SCHEDULE. THERE'S BEEN QUITE A BIT OF BACK AND FORTH DELAYS RELATED TO PG&E, UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE, ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, EASEMENTS, RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITIONS, EVERYTHING THAT YOU CAN POSSIBLY NAME. BUT EVERY TIME WE INTERVENE ON TRYING TO GET THINGS EXPEDITED, FINGER POINTING BEGIN BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES AND THEN WE'RE PROMISED THAT THIS IS THE FINAL STEP AND THEN ONE MORE THING POPS UP. WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA IS THE PROBABLY SEVENTH ITEM THAT'S POPPED UP THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO MY HOPE IS THAT WE GET ON THE SAME PAGE AS THE CITY AND ARE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE TO THE PUBLIC AND TO THE LES KIMBER FAMILY AN ACTUAL DATE OF OPENING BECAUSE THE DATE HAS BEEN SHIFTING FOR ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS NOW. I KNOW SOME OF THE SIGNAGE IS UP. THE PARK HAS BEEN UTILIZED BY THE PUBLIC. THERE'S BEEN EVENTS IN THE ADJACENT PARCEL NOT ASSOCIATED TO A PARK. BUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC'S BELIEVING THAT THE PARK IS READY. AND I KNOW WE ARE YET TO PLANT GRASS. SO IF YOU CAN GET A COMMUNICATION THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC ON AN EXACT OPENING DAY, I DON'T WANT TO hear about a press conference or ribbon cutting two days before the event takes place. I want the public to understand when the park will be completed so that we don't have to then be in a situation where we're kicking people out because it's still under construction, but people believe that it's operational and ready to use. So if you can help me with that city manager, that would be great. And then lastly, we will be commencing the artwork for a mural at California Intendment Park. This is in addition to the more than a million dollars that we've invested in that neighborhood park. So thanks to the Parks Department for moving that project along and the improvements there. Those are all my comments for the day. Council President, thank you for the constituents and for their patience. Council President, I think you owe me a lunch for all the last minute items that you have made me read for the last few days. Thank you, Council President. I'll do you a lunch.

You've got to pay for 25% of it. Council, Council Member Vang.

Thank you very much, Council President. Just a few remarks to make for the people in District 5 and the people in the City of Fresno. Last week, I had an opportunity to attend the groundbreaking of the Ventura Family Apartments on Ventura Avenue and 7th Street. This is a special and unique project. It is a 54-unit affordable housing, not only affordable housing, but affordable housing for migrant farmworkers as well. And so I believe this is the first in the city of Fresno that we have dwellings targeting this demographics. It provides a home for the most needed, but the location of it, it is by Ventura and 7th Street. Prior to that, this lot has been vacant for a very long time, and so we are starting to, one by one, lot by lot, fill in the infills in the city of Fresno. HomeGoods officially opened today at the Fanshawe Creek Shopping Center on Clovis and Tulare Avenues. This HomeGoods location will bring in more than 80 jobs to the people here in the Central Valley. Additionally, this coming Saturday, my office will be hosting the Southeast Fresno Hub for the Mayor's annual citywide community cleanup. I hope that you can join me and my team at the Farber Education Center at 8 a.m. That's this coming Saturday, 8 a.m., and help us beautify our community. And the location of Farber is on Ventura Avenue and 10th Street. Again, that's this Saturday at 8 a.m. Next week, my office will be hosting our second annual backpack giveaway to help students who start their school year. The first Backpacking Week will be Tuesday, August the 4th at Sequoia Middle School, located at 4050 East Hamilton Avenue, That's 93702. Again, the address is 4050 East Hamilton Avenue, 93702. And this is at Sequoia Middle School. And then the second backpack giveaway will be on Thursday, August the 6th at Jackson Elementary School located at 3750 East Platte, 93702. Again, that's Thursday, August the 6th at Jackson Elementary School. 3750 East Plaque, 93702. And both backpack giveaways will start at 5.30 p.m. Again, at 5.30 p.m. And I hope to see many students and many parents at these two backpack giveaways. Thank you very much. That's all I have, Council President. All right, Council Member Richardson.

Good morning, Fresno. Morning, everybody out there. It's a beautiful day in District 6 today. We had an addition to our staff. We brought on a liaison for services, which will include everything from people experiencing homelessness to veterans to anybody that we're able to help. So the final stone in the infinity gauntlet is complete. We participated in Fresno's 2026 Freedom Run. Got to get out there at Woodward Park and go for a long run with a bunch of constituents. It's a good time. Then we did the BAPS charity run as well, if you haven't been out there. It's about 4K. It's at Woodward Park. I won it. So if you're faster than me, come out and run it next year. And then some other community organizers and I ran 14 and a half mile run all the way around the outside of District 6 going and highlighting local small businesses. So if you're into masochism, please join us for one of those. We would like to welcome Rowe, the Teen Wellness Center, the Brow Bar, a new business in River Park, and my mother-in-law now to District 6. So welcome to all three of you. We hosted a neighborhood meeting. It's kind of a policy up in District 6. We like to do this. Every time there's a new development that goes in, whether it's apartments or business or a strip mall or whatever, that we have a meeting and we talk to the neighbors about it. Because, again, if you're going to come and develop something, you've got to answer to City Hall. That means you're answering to my bosses. So we sat down. We invited a bunch of neighbors out to talk about a new development going in on the northeast corner of Maple and Beheimer. And we probably violated some fire marshal rule because we had over 100 people in those tiny me and Ed's. So it was great to see. It was encouraging because people care what goes in their community. And having an opportunity... to hear from the developer, to hear from the council member, to hear from the parties who make these decisions, I think is a great part of the process. So we did it with the chicanes. We've done it with the developments. It's going to keep happening. Look forward to another one, if you're a District 6 resident, taking place within the next month for another developer, another piece of land in northeast Fresno. We're not paying for the pizzas this time. There's a lot of people. Congratulations to the newest Fresno Police Department Academy class. 180 got a chance to go do another run with them for two miles. That was motivating. It was great to see all those bright, smiling faces sign up to take one of the more difficult jobs in modern society. So I appreciate them. Volunteers, we had about 20 volunteers from Woodward Lake come out, driving through, just saw that there was a lot of trash on Friant. We got to pick it up. If you see the same thing and you live in District 6 in your neighborhoods, call us. Hey, along this strip, there's a bunch of trash. We didn't wait for the city. We didn't wait for a nonprofit to come out. We just brought a bunch of trash bags out, a bunch of gloves. I brought coffee. And a bunch of people just took ownership of the cleanliness and the safety of their community. And it was great to see that. It looks phenomenal now. Look at the east side of Friant. West side is probably next. And this morning, Bernard, you got the AV support ready? Okay, this will be the last thing. There was a constituent who came in who had some concerns about the regularity of trash pickup in his community. He is not a single-family residential home. It is a complex. He was not able to show these videos during his comments because when you publish it to the record, it has to be a PDF. Kind of hard to post a PDF of a video. So I will not go into detail describing these videos, but I will say if you are having issues with your services, your utilities, or how your home is maintained by the appropriate parties, be it city or an outside contractor, call. Report that stuff. Call your city council member. Use 311. Use Fresco. Use the methods that we have that if you're waiting for your trash to get picked up and it's full and someone drives right by it, there was probably some sort of miscommunication or confusion, so call us soon so we can fix it before it becomes a chronic issue. I know there are other people in the building who are very passionate about it, and they don't like to see people kind of hung out to dry when it comes to basic services. So... Uh, they were playing behind me again. This is, uh, probably about another 15, 20 seconds or so. You kind of get the concept at this point. Yeah, I think check the trash can and saw that there wasn't enough trash to be picked up by the camera and then got back in and took off. Like there's a phrase close enough for government work. That's not quite close enough. Meant to blur that out. Sorry. You can see it's a recurring issue. Should I get it? Nah, looks heavy. I'll get it tomorrow. There was a sweet soundtrack over this, too, but it had some profanity in it, so we cut it. Bernard, I think we get the concept. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Council President, that concludes my comments for today.

All right. Council Vice President.

Thank you, Council President. Just a couple of quick remarks. District 4 has been heavily involved working with the youth over the past few weeks since our last council meeting. I want to thank everybody with the Fresno Parks Department. And they helped us lead our first community meeting in the El Dorado Park neighborhood. El Dorado Park is the latest addition to District 4 parks here in the city of Fresno. We teamed up with Wesley United Methodist Church a couple years back to purchase a half interest in the park, which means the city is half owner. We held our first community meeting in the neighborhood to hear what neighbors wanted in that park. I kept on getting questions from neighbors and community members asking what's going to go inside that park. I told them that wasn't going to be a decision I made, but a decision I wanted them to make. And we got a lot of great feedback that night. And so I want to thank everybody who helped put that meeting together so we could build a safer, cleaner park for our kids. in the neighborhood formerly known as Sin City. This has been a neighborhood that has been plagued by a lot of crime and poverty in the past, but so many of the neighbors and community partners have teamed up to really reclaim that neighborhood, and it really is unrecognizable from what it was 10, 20 years ago. And having the latest addition of a clean and safe park is going to go a very long way in that neighborhood. So thank you to everybody that showed up and everybody that helped put that meeting together. I also wanna thank First Five and the Early Matters Policy Advisory Council who invited me to speak last week at their council about childcare and what the city is doing to advance childcare here in the city of Fresno. I had the honor of teaming up with Clovis Council Member Lynn Ashbeck to talk about the importance of early childhood education, some of the benefits of childcare and what local municipalities and local level government and nonprofits and private sector can do in order to do their part to further the aims of childcare here on the local level. Also wanna thank everybody at Fresno Unified who gave us a three hour guided tour last week to many of their summer camps that they have going on. We were able to stop by the Fresno Chaffee Zoo to check out their summer camp. We stopped by McLean High School where they're doing scuba diving lessons and we also stopped by Fresno State to check out the track and field and culinary arts programs. There are over 100 programs going on for Fresno Unified students this summer. I think all of them are free and they are all amazing programs. Whether your child wants to get involved in physical activity, culinary arts, mixed arts, martial arts, scuba diving, they really have something for everybody. And so if you have a child in Fresno Unified, I encourage you to check out one of these amazing programs that they have available. And lastly, on July 14th, I had the honor of stopping by a nonprofit in Councilmember Karbas's district. I don't know if you're familiar with Good Dirt. I think that's Barstow and West. An amazing nonprofit of folks who have an inclusive pottery studio that connects people of all ages and abilities through art. It's a nonprofit that also provides foster youth and underserved children with mentorship, job training, and creative experiences. So thank you to the owner and all the employees of Good Dirt for the tour that you gave me and my staff a couple weeks ago. Really was an insightful visit, and we appreciate what you're doing for our community. And that'll be all, Council President. Thank you.

All right. Thanks, Council Vice Presidents. All right. I'll try and keep my remarks relatively short. I'm excited to invite everyone in particular D7 communities to join us for our final and eighth annual Beat the Heat over at Romaine Park on Wednesday, August 12th. We'll be there from 4 to 7 p.m. as usual. Free food, fun games for the kids, water slides. The adults tend not to beat the heat, but the kids, they do, and all the water slides and such. Community resource fair, backpack giveaway, to get kids ready for school. As always, it'd be great family friendly event and hope to see folks there. Additionally, I recently had the pleasure of hosting a delegation from Australia. through the American Council of Young Political Leaders. So it was a really great opportunity to get to share Fresno's history and culture, learn a little bit about theirs as well, and just the work generally that we're doing to serve our community, and again, and learn about what they're doing in their own communities and out in Australia as well. So a great exchange, miniature exchange there. I do want to thank the city clerk along with ISD and really all staff who spent their summer working to prepare to get us ready for 707 today. It's sort of similar to what we had back during COVID and the resolution that council vice president and I brought back then, but even goes above and beyond that. So I know there's a lot of work that went into that and Wanna thank everyone who was involved. I know you were here in the chambers all last couple of weeks, trying to make sure it all worked out very, very smoothly. And lastly, you've all been watching the news. We're gonna be hearing a few different proposals today for November, 2026, the ballot measures from the city of Fresno. Look forward to hearing all those. It was gonna be four, looks like we have three now. And I'm delighted to have brought together the right and the middle and the left and the further left to beat down one of them early on in the meeting. But it's all right. Obviously, it's not the end of that discussion. We have that policy to take up at some point this year. Regardless, we cannot avoid it. But otherwise, looking forward to the next three discussions here throughout the day. That'll conclude my remarks and I'll pass that on over to the city manager or the mayor if there's any remarks from the administration.

Just a couple of things. I'm checking on Les Kimber Park. Council member, you said that, I thought you said that we had promised that it was gonna be done a year ago. And I don't know if that's entirely accurate because we are usually very, very careful about promises that we make. We usually don't give a date until like we know, which is why we usually notify like five days before when we know for sure. So we're looking at it. I have Nick Messia. who's overseeing capital projects right now, digging in. So we will make sure we get a schedule, a current schedule to you. Also, I just wanted to clarify your comment about the California Tupman Park mural. I know you've got an agenda item today, and I just want to clarify that parks involvement, obviously, as for the park, we were not involved in the mural. That is something that's being done by your office. So I want to make sure that that's clear. And then with regard to the video, Council Member Richardson, Thank you for that. We did put the contractor in default. They did respond to our default letter. Staff is going through all of the material that they provided back to us and we are also fed up I share your concern and that of your constituents. And so we will be doing everything within the authority, within the administration and what is allowed within the contract to get them to perform because it's unacceptable, the service that they've been providing. That's all that I have, Council President. Thank you very much.

All right, great. All right, it is 10.09. We're bouncing around the agenda a little bit. I know we had a 10 a.m. appearance by a D6 resident. Is Aiden Gonzalez here? All right, welcome, Aiden. You'll have three minutes for your presentation.

All right, thank you. Thanks for having me. I just want to say that if you're failing to use your massive platforms as city council members to condemn the Trump administration and the DOJ for the disgusting mishandling of the Epstein files, you're pussy and a waste of our tax dollars. Thank you.

All right. Let's move on, I think, to, at this point, the consent agenda. We're going to skip over some of the timed items here. So open up the... consent agenda, and we'll do public comment on that first. So again, I want to reinforce, if you did not hear before, if you're looking to speak on any of the ballot measure items, they're not on the consent agenda. We're going to hear them individually under the city council items. So I'll invite, at this point, public comments with respect to anything on the consent agenda, contested consent, or closed session. Go ahead and open that up now. Let's see. Most of the cards I had were specific to either unscheduled communication or a specific item. But if there's anybody who would like to comment on the consent agenda, now would be the time. Consent, contested consent, or closed session items. I see no one in the chamber. I don't see anyone on Zoom. We have one person on Zoom. No, I just said that about three seconds ago, that the ballot initiatives are separate from the consent agenda as individual items. We'll have individual public comment on those. I have one person on Zoom, Nikki Uriel.

Hi. I like to comment on the contract about the pressure washing that it was not bidded out for whatever reason. Um, they don't, I don't know if they really provide exclusive type of performance, but, um, yeah, same person who owns, um, pave now. So that's kind of, um, I don't know if this person is getting contracts or what's going on. They just opened their business a few months ago, so it seems like it was cut out for that. Yeah.

All right. Thank you, Nikki. Again, any additional public comment on the consent agenda or contested consent or closed session agenda? Again, that does not include the ballot measure items. We'll hear those individually later on. Seeing none on Zoom or in the chamber, I'll go ahead and close public comment on the consent agenda. I'll entertain a motion. Motion, second and third. Any opposition to approving the balance of the consent agenda?

All right, seeing none, that passes.

Is that six-zero? Six-zero. All right. 10-13. Let's move into... Actually, one second. We'll go back into some of the timed items here. Knock out some of those at the beginning. Let me make a comment real quick. Yeah, sure.

I just want to make a comment. The timed item is a great opportunity for you to bring forward something that you are passionate about. You tell the clerk's office ahead of time, they'll pick a time for you to come up. For example, the gentleman who just came up and spoke a minute ago from District 6... I take those things seriously. It was under budgeting. We sat in my office for probably 20 minutes and talked through budget stuff, and I opened binders up, and we talked about personnel budgets and overhead and maintenance and operating budgets and all these things, and I gave him some budget information to study so he could speak more intelligently about it. And then that was what we got. So glad to see that the effort to exchange information and share things and be transparent kind of...

Not time, sorry, not recognized. All right, we're gonna go back to the 9.10 a.m. item. This is actions pertaining to acquisition of property rights on a parcel located at South Cedar and East Dwight in D5 to benefit the fax bus stop ADA improvements. Council member Vang, do you need a presentation on this?

Council President, I do not need a presentation on this unless my colleagues wants one.

I think we're okay, but we will go out to the public comments again on the fax bus stop ADA improvements project in D5 at Cedar and Dwight. So we'll go out to the public comment on the specific 9, 10 a.m. items. Is there any public comment on the 9, 10 a.m. item? One person on Zoom. Oh, no, never mind. That was left over from before. All right, I don't see anybody on Zoom. I don't see no one in the chamber. We're going to close the public hearing on the 9-10 a.m. item, FACTS Bus Stop ADA Improvements Project. Councilmember? A motion. I'll second that. We have a motion and we have a second on the 9-10 a.m. item. Is there any opposition to the 910 AM item? All right, seeing none, that passes seven to zero. We're gonna move back, sorry about that, yeah. All right, let's get into something interesting. We'll wake everybody up. Let's move over to item. We're not contested. We're going to take on item 2JJ. This is the proposed ballot measure item creating a citizen redistricting advisory commission. So we're going to go ahead and take that one on. And again, this is its own individual item away from consent agenda. So we'll have full public comment just on this item for itself. Proud to bring this forward with my colleagues, Council Vice President Maxwell and Council Member Carbasi to, again, create a citizen redistricting advisory commission. You know, we last had the process after the last census. The council redrew the boundaries. This is an effort to codify within our city charter a more independent process that more folks will be able to engage in. Not that we did not engage last time. There were a number, a great number of different meetings and opportunities for public input. But we're excited to bring this forward and codify it. Our charter here in the city of Fresno is much like our constitution, if you will. Our sort of North Star governing document. And this is something I'd like to see implemented on a permanent basis and unable for future councils to be able to change and abide by, you know, as time goes on. I don't know if my co-sponsors had any comments before we went out to the public.

I'll just add briefly some of what I mentioned at the press conference earlier this week. This is something that we want to get codified in the city charter so that it can't be changed easily by future city councils. I was heavily involved with some of my colleagues when it came to the last redistricting, and I was very new to the City Council at that time, and one of the things I heard over and over was how much the community wanted an independent commission to be able to guide the lines and the redistricting during that process every 10 years when we do the census. The council districts have to be equal. when it comes to population. Right now, they're just under 80,000 people per district. At the time, my district was one of the largest when it came to population. Some were smaller. We had to even them out at that time to make sure that they were all about 80,000. What we're trying to do today is ask the voters a question. Would you like city council to continue to be the ones to move the lines, or would you like to create an independent commission that is codified in the city charter so that every 10 years, the community would be the ones that would publicly in the open decide where those lines get drawn and how they get drawn. The idea is to take a lot of the politics out of it. I'm not saying or guaranteeing it's going to be a perfect process, but I do think what we're proposing today gets us closer to a more perfect process. And so I'm excited to hear what the public has to say about that.

Thanks, Council Vice President. Council Member Garbasi.

Thank you, Council President and Vice President. I'm proud to join you in bringing this item forward. I think this is a pretty simple reform item. It's very unique that we have the opportunity to provide change to our charter to make the process actually work better. The power to redistrict lies with the council entirely. And that doesn't sit right with me. It's important we have people that are not political. Maybe they're engaged, but they're not members of central committees. They're not candidates running for office. And I think those are the really important provisions that are put into this policy. So you can't be a politico. but you can be a resident of this city who is passionate, cares, and is fair. Because what's really important when we draw these lines is that we keep whole neighborhoods together and we don't cut them in half like it's happened before. So I'm really excited about this measure. I hope my colleagues do support it. It makes a difference to pass a charter amendment versus a policy because a policy can be changed by the council, but a charter amendment requires a change by the people. Let's put the authority in the hands of the people once again. Thank you.

I have several council members punched up. Did you all want to start a discussion now or you guys are cool with going out to public first and then coming back up here? I just wanted to give the co-sponsors just an intro moment. Okay. All right. Let's go out to the public. I didn't have any cards specific to this. Let's see if I got any new ones. Okay. Let's see. So the first card I have is for Amy Arambula. Come on down.

hi my name is Amy Arambula and I had not planned to speak today but I was actively involved in redistricting the last time around and I am very passionate about the subject and I have some issues with the comments you at any given Tuesday could decide that you want to have an advisory commission to provide advice to the City Council From my minimal understanding, the way this is set up is this advisory committee will make recommendations to you, the council, and you, the council, in the end, will make the choice. That is not an independent redistricting commission. And if this wasn't brought up at the last minute, I guarantee you the League of Women Voters would be here and I wouldn't have to be making the statement. Currently, public hearings are required. The state of California requires all kinds of public hearings, all kinds of people get to come forward and give their opinions. Anybody that participated the last time around at the county level saw that process take place, and then at the very last minute, the Board of Supervisors. Anyhow, long story short, legal women voters would be here making a statement regarding an advisory commission. There's absolutely no need for this to go to the ballot at this point in time. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Jagmeet Singh.

Thank you members of the council. I'm in agreement with Mrs. Arambula. This is not the gold standard for redistricting commissions. I've been a part of many redistricting efforts throughout the Central Valley. An independent commission is the only way to go. this proposal that you guys are putting forward. You're just going to stick it full of people who are part of your campaigns or part of your political parties, and you're just going to do what you have always done and keep power in your own hands. And so it needs to be an independent redistricting commission so we don't have these crazy gerrymandered lines for city council where we have you know, District 1 where there's a small little piece that's jutted out. And it needs to be fair for the people. It needs to be independent. It needs to be reviewed by an independent third party that's not affiliated with any of you or any of your political parties or any of your staff members or any of your family members. This is just a blatant push to keep power in your own hands. and redraw the lines whenever you wish to serve your own needs. So this does not need to be on the ballot, and it needs to be an independent commission. Thank you.

Next card is Ariana Martinez-Lott.

Good morning, Council. It's actually Arianna Martinez-Lott, resident of District 7. I raised my family and my husband for 10 years, and I am opposed to this ballot initiative because it takes $150,000 to put something on the ballot each initiative. That could actually go towards installing a new playground in our district that could go towards fixing multiple sidewalks in our district. Council Member Esparza, I actually have a list of residents that are in need, happy to pass that along as well. And so at a time where we really need to be using every single dollar to give it back to families that are hurting financially, This is a waste of taxpayer dollars because as many residents have already said, this is not an independent redistricting committee. At the end of the day, it is council that would decide who is on that commission. And it is council that would have final authority over these maps. And we have seen multiple advisory commissions. We don't have to wonder how this would play out. We've had multiple advisory commissions on the city council. that have made a recommendation to city council only for council to go and change what the commission advised. We have Measure P. We have the Parks and Arts Commission. We have the Planning and Development Commission that multiple times what the advisory commission suggests is not what this dais passes. So we are opposed. Please do not waste our taxpayer dollars with something that you could bring to council. Next meeting. Thank you.

And go over to Zoom. We have Daniel Brennick.

Hey there, Council President. Council, can you hear me? Yes. Thanks. Hey, good morning. First of all, I really appreciate that you're able to make comments via Zoom. Again, it makes life a little bit easier. I'm probably going to go along with, I think, what the council has said, but also some of the concerns that were raised there. The idea of You know, more input, depoliticizing the redistricting process definitely sounds great. I've been involved in redistricting in my prior work. I did a bunch of, you know, got into the nitty gritty of doing stuff for school district touch sea areas and, you know, worked really hard to, you know, to fit those things. So seeing processes like where a map comes in at the very last minute and suddenly that becomes your map for the next decade is ultra frustrating. With what's like before you, as alluded to by the other speakers, it seems like ultimately the decisions is councils to make. So I don't know if there's any way to include something like if council is going to deviate from what is recommended by the advisory body, that you have to expressly make findings. I don't know what those findings would be, if they could do anything or just articulate a rationale. I think that if there's capacity to amend and do that, that would make this whole thing more palpable to the voters if they wanted to take it on. Because the framework makes sense, but ultimately if it was like, Thanks a lot for volunteering for this committee for a year, which is going to also preclude folks from participating in other civic things for a minimum of four years or 10 years if they wanted city elected office. That would be a real insult to injury to say, thank you for your time. We're going to disregard what you say. So that's my two cents there. Thanks again. I appreciate that this is something in the consciousness and hope you'll have a good rest of your day. Thank you.

Next speaker we have is going to be Nikki Riehl.

Hi. I just wanted to say that it sounds like a community or what is a civil, whatever it's called. But most of the times, the stuff that you guys bring forward, especially when you got Mike behind it, it seems pretty sketch. A lot of stuff you guys are doing is sketch. That's it.

Next on Zoom, we have Brandy, New Vegas.

I thank you 1st, I want do you want to mention I mean, I'm in agreement with many of the people here who spoke very eloquently and I do want to mention that we need to work on and I'll mention some scheduled more accessibility for city council. As far as I know, I've never, I haven't really seen that. We take public comment. on consent agenda items. And then moving it around before the timed items is really difficult for people to make these means during the daytime. And part of it is kind of gauging.

Brandy, we're talking about the item related to. And I agree.

I mentioned that because with this item, it's difficult. You know, there's kind of a sense of when people might be able to be able to speak on this public item. And then it's at a time it's, couch during a time that was not expected, but I'll address that later. Regarding this item, because I would have been there in person, I was heading over there and then realized that things got moved, but I want to agree with the things that were mentioned before. One, that putting such Major permanent changes in our governance on the agenda to consider to put on the ballot 72 hours in advance is not enough for our community members to be able to read through to be able to look through to be able to hear from each other on information that other people might know about to factor into these things. And that's one reason to not. put this on the ballot is that our community, as Amy had mentioned, that we need, the community needs more time. And I know that there will be an opportunity to vote on anything that ends up on the ballot. But as Arianna mentioned, it's quite costly. And it is concerning that, and as well, there's not the opportunity to have those robust discussions and for the city council to hear as much from the community, um, information that be useful. Um, I want to note that what people said that this is not independent because as it says for membership, the citizen redistrict advisory commission, so it consists of seven members, each nominated by individual member of the city council. And thus it is not by definition independent because it is dependent on the council themselves, um, choosing and, and, uh, affirming who is going to be on that council. Um, And that is a concern as far as ensuring that is truly independent, that the people are doing what is best for the community, and in no way is this affected by the priorities of the council members that might be choosing them. I was there for both of the redistricting for the city and the county last time, and I saw many community groups work together for redistricting committees and work really hard and go together and reach out. There are groups that have been working with members of the community, members that often don't feel heard, and those members of the community came to these meetings.

Thank you, Brandi. Our next speaker on Zoom is going to be Kay Birkin.

Sorry, my name is Kate Burke and I am with the League of women voters. Apologies to Amy Arambula. I was not able to be there in person this morning. The league for years and years and years has supported independent redistricting commissions. And I'm just afraid that this is not that. Just as Amy said, and she was a perfectly reasonable spokesperson for our position on this, if you're appointing these members, it is not independent. If these members must suggest to you what their recommendations are for your final approval, it is not an independent redistricting commission. It's window dressing. I apologize for calling it that. I think recognizing the need for an independent redistricting commission is wonderful. You're to be commended for that, but that's not what this is. I would recommend highly that you vote this down and reconsider what an independent redistricting commission really is and bring it back at some future date after there's been time for the public to weigh in more fully. Thank you.

Thank you, Kay. The sign needs to come down if you're going to sit in the front, or you can sit in the back and hold it up. Yeah, just don't want to block anybody's view. Yeah, thank you. Sufficient, yeah. Okay, I don't see any more probably comment on Zoom at this point. If you didn't submit a card, but would like to speak on the redistricting advisory commission, now would be the time, either in chamber or on Zoom.

Good morning, my name is Diego Rivera, and I just want a quick comment on the redistricting. Yes, I just want to say that California Indians, I want to say thank you for giving space and acknowledgement to allow us here to be able to hold this session. And also, I just want to say accountability is coming. We are in 2026. There has been a pattern of the same things going on since the founding of this nation. the founding of this city. My constituent right here, my fellow citizens holding signs, a perfect example of of leadership, of accountability and transparency when things are not done independently and independent commission is the only way. When she's holding a sign that refers to criminal activity that has taken place under leadership and it shows a perfect example when leadership is allowed to investigate themselves that accountability and transparency are pushed under the rug. I see this time and time again where corporation and political party are allowed to investigate themselves. That is not going to bring truth and transparency. The money, there's the money there. So the funding and our city members, the funding in our city need to develop. We're being oppressed. The money's there. The money's being, I don't know where the money's going. Community Alliance has tracked the money. So the money and the data is there. The money is going to all these other different places that keeps our communities really oppressed. It's very interesting because there's other cities in this nation and even in Mexico that It doesn't take money to be creative. You guys mentioned arts. It just takes intelligence and it takes heart to give to the people and provide what we need. You're talking about parks, putting new parks, and we really need to rehabilitate the parks that we have and care for everything in our neighborhoods. Thank you. I appreciate the time. You still have about a minute left. I still got a minute left. That's basically it, just bringing truth to power, transparency. And then I also want to comment on the Jerry Dyer thing, but that's at a different time, correct?

That's correct.

Okay. And I just want to say that this city has been founded on white supremacy. The documentation is there. So please stop being complicit. Please stop being puppets because that is 2026 and accountability is coming. We are coming. We are here. We are watching. We are watching you guys. Jans, everybody at Carbasi, you guys are being watched and documentation and you and so accountability is coming. We are coming. And it has been too long that white supremacy has controlled our city. And so I'm just telling you, accountability is coming. Expect this. The last time I was here is when we forced cannabis, legalized cannabis. It was the people we forced. You guys had no choice but to allow cannabis to be legalized here in the city of Fresno because the numbers showed up. So thank you guys. I appreciate it.

Thank you. Any additional comments on the Redistricting Advisory Commission?

Hi, my name is Daylon Gilbert. I'm not going to take very long. I have to go to work, so it's part of the problem a little bit. I feel like I share the sentiments of most of these people. It doesn't seem like you guys are above board on this whole advisory thing. I feel like an independent... redistricting assembly would be the best bet. That's all I have to say. Please listen to everybody here. Take their words into consideration. I don't want anything, you know, any scuffle or anything terrible going on because people are angry. Have a good day.

Okay. Any additional public comments on the redistricting advisory committee?

Hi, my name is Joseph Rodriguez. Thank you, Council. Hey, welcome back, everyone. I wanted to speak on this particular item because I feel like what's happened is that there's this premise that's given, hey, we want to work with you guys. We're the people. You're the ones who we've elected. We've put you in charge to help us. So it's this thing of like, hey, you guys want that power back? It's like, oh, maybe. It's like, well, we'll put you on a commission and we'll listen to what you say. And it's like, oh, that sounds great in theory. But when ad hoc committees are assembled and all the people that have put their time together for many months are ignored and things are changed at the last minute, with no one able to change that, it's not like the people could come up and be like, hey, we're going to stop you guys. You have to not do that. And then you guys actually go, oh, OK, jeez, the people showed up. So we're here to let you know that we would love to work with you guys. We would love these commissions. We would love to have actual authority. But what happens is that authorities cut short. It's cut short when the council members who are like, whoa, we're going to select the people on this committee. So it gets to the point where you're wasting our taxpayer time. You're wasting our taxpayer money. It's like, hey, you guys want this? And we're like, no, we're all going to say no to this. And it's like, hmm. How do we get them to say yes? So I would say if you really, really want this to pass and go through and actually have this independence from the decision making, it needs to go a little bit further. You guys are almost there. You're so close. You're throwing darts, and the bullseye is getting closer and closer. If you really want the people to back you guys and be like, this is a great idea, just think a little bit more about the ramifications of like, we get to select the people and then we get to ultimately make the decision. Because Measure P, we didn't want $350,000 as the cap, but it was completely ignored months and weeks and all this time. I showed up to the parks and recs commissions or the meetings thinking I was really doing something standing up here talking to them. And I thought they were really doing something with their time. And it turned out to be a whole wash. Just everything ignored. Just given what was already given. And we knew it was the fix was in because the paperwork already had it on the website. And it was already dictated how much money. It wasn't like it's... It wasn't like we actually had a say. So if you guys want these commissions to pass, if not, we'll smack you down when it comes to voting. And then you guys are just going to have to crawl back with your tail between your legs and go, oh, we're a big waste of time. So save you some time. Consider actually making it worth our time.

Next speaker we have is on Zoom, Robert McCloskey.

Thank you and appreciate Zoom being back. Just to tell the public that the Zoom could have been installed much earlier, especially for the budget hearings, which should have been done, which many of us recommended from our public input. At any rate, yeah, I agree with the majority, all the comments, that there should be an independent registering committee. That was the will of the voters in California yesterday. That is what happened in the county, although there was undue political influence by the county board of supervisors on who went on that commission. It's the will of the voters of the state of California to have independent commissions for all forms of redistricting at all levels of government. That's the general consensus. And excuse me for saying this, and I know y'all don't support Trump, but this sounds very Trumpian. Set up your own commission. You're handpicked. Just like what's coming up for future comment here on the Ballard initiatives. You guys are seizing power. Everybody, Miguel, everybody rails against Trump for his immigration and all that. That's good. But don't act like the guy by trying to seize power with these two moves. It's inappropriate. And Brandy and others mention it. There's not enough time for the voters to mull over this, to look at the options, and to see if the city's trying to get around California requirements to have independent redistricting commissions. Thank you very much.

All right. Thank you, Robert. Any additional public comments on the redistricting advisory commission item? Yeah, go ahead and come on down. If it's on this item, if it's not on this item, no, and I'll be the time.

No, I just want to make a statement about the entire situation.

I'm sorry, yeah, this would be the time only for the redistricting commission. It's about the redistricting? Commission, yes, item. So if you're going to speak, it would have to be about that.

Well, I didn't study that on that too much, but I know it's illegal. You shouldn't be changing people's vote patterns.

Okay.

Thank you, Edna. Well, I have your card for later. Okay. Thank you.

So your money, you should be looking, I gave Miguel some paperwork.

Thank you. You should be looking into that. Thank you. Yeah, we're going to continue the meeting.

Stop supporting the socialists.

All right. I don't have anyone else on Zoom. I don't have anyone else in the chamber. We're going to go ahead and close public comment and come back up to the dice of our discussion up here. I have a few folks punched up. Council Member Carbasi, you want a clarification? That's okay.

Yeah, I really do appreciate the public comments. I think there's a little bit of a misunderstanding on who actually can serve on this potential future commission. I'd like the city attorney maybe to look at the actual language we're bringing forward. Just give a summary. There's a lot of conditions, maybe a big summary on some of the biggest restrictions. Is that okay, Council President?

There are a lot of restrictions. And so I'll just reference pages 11 and, 12, and 13. Under membership, commissioners shall have voted in two of the three primary city elections previous. You are ineligible to serve if they or their spouse, a domestic partner, or child is or has been within the last four years under the following situation, a paid employee of the city, a registered lobbyist, a contractor or consultant, You're ineligible if you are a candidate for a city office, an employee of a pay consultant or contractor to a campaign for an elective office, an employee of a consultant to or consultant to someone under contract with the city, and members of the commission need to file a Form 700, which is a statement of economic interest.

Just to be clear, no politicians, no campaign consultants, no campaign staff, no central committee members, no politicos, is that correct?

That's my reading, but I would ask the sponsors for whatever their legislative intent was.

And you have to file a statement of economic interest, like all of us do, meaning you have to disclose your financial positions, who you work for, where your money comes from, correct?

That's correct. Okay, that's all. Thank you. And then the additional prohibitions for folks who do serve going forward after their service. All right, Council Member Richardson, you're punched up.

All right. Uh, I appreciate that. We're going to, we're going to get to other comments later. I think I, um, I'm not here to take questions from the audience. That's his job. Um, okay. So anybody look at the agenda today, you have it on your phone. We got like a paper copy or anything like that. Just a key here. So under every item, like let's look at two FF. So two FF, if you look at it, it says, Hey, this is brought by council member areas and council member Richardson. Um, So if you have an issue with that item, like don't, don't direct your anger at say council member Vang for that because he probably doesn't even, he probably wasn't part of the planning process at all. He probably found out about it when you found out about it because it made its way onto the agenda. So if someone up here takes a vote that you don't like, Yeah, I mean, mention it to them. Get ahold of them, whatever else. You can call them whatever name you want, but I mean, don't confuse everybody up here for someone who brought something forward that you're not a fan. I mean, you can, it's just, I'm telling you, it's not effective. Okay, so to Council Member Karbasi's comments first and his question, what I read is that the rules applied to the spouse, child, or domestic partner of the member of the commission Is there any rule that applies to them that doesn't apply to the member themselves? Maybe it's written differently, maybe I just missed it, but I feel like I did a lot of homework on this one. Is there any, and I'll give you a second, city attorney, to read through that and get back to me. I got a couple more things. I just want to make sure there's no rule that applies to, say, you know, this guy, if he wants to serve on the commission, that applies differently to his spouse or domestic partner. It should be the same for all of them. I feel like that's what makes it, right, impartial. The second thing, with a lot of these ballot measures, I'm kind of on a crossroads here. Because you've got to understand, there's a difference between voting yes on something from up here or voting no on something from up here to go to the ballot or sending it to the voters to decide. It was something such a bad idea or so dumb or so misleading or whatever that it's going to require me to hop in and vote and prevent it from going to the voters and just kill it here before it even makes it to the ballot. Or is it worth it to send it to the diplomatic process, to let democracy take place and send it out to the 600,000-ish people in Fresno and let them say, hey, let our voices be heard loud and clear. We don't want this. So that's kind of an internal struggle. And it doesn't involve any of you. But I just want to tell you about the mindset here. So not quite yet, ma'am. There's going to be another point to comment for unscheduled. City attorney. So Joseph brought something up that was pretty decent. He said that, hey, look, I think this is something in the right direction, but it's close. It's not there. It's not it. It's not entire. If we want something that's impartial, if we want something that's driven by the people, if we want something that's above any sort of influence by the council or by any elected officials, we can do that. This isn't. It's not quite there. I think the metaphor you used was like throwing darts. You're kind of hitting all around the bullseye, but you're not quite hitting it. I think what would finalize this and something that I would be interested in supporting is something where not only was there a commission that involved people who were not part of political parties and they're not in the central committee and they're not city employees and they weren't candidates or whatever else. but also just letting them decide. Because if they put all this effort into coming up with the redistricting lines, which to another comment, it has to happen every 10 years with a census. It's not like you're depriving someone of their vote because they go through redistricting. Everything on every single level of government goes through redistricting as population changes. It doesn't make sense to give Centerville most of the votes in the county now, but it did when they were the county seat. See what I'm saying? So would it be possible, and I understand it would probably be a charter amendment, to include something where this commission would be able to, in an unbiased manner, in an impartial manner, come together, make their recommendations, or have their alternate fill in for them for one of the conversations or what have you, and then just decide what the districts are so it doesn't have to come back to a body of elected officials. Would that be possible with the charter amendment? With the charter amendment, yes. Would that be something that, since it would be a charter amendment, we could include on this ballot with this item and kind of finalize this idea of an impartial commission?

you can make a motion to amend this document. It would have to come back for another reading at a future council meeting date, but yeah, you're free to make a motion to make changes to this document. Okay, keep that one in your pocket.

The other question I had is, okay, we put a lot of rules in what people from the commission can have done in the prior four or 10 years, depending on the position, right? which I think is important and I think it's good and I think the way this is worded actually provides more accountability for the people who are going to serve on the commission. I think it is a positive step forward. But there's no use in making a rule if you can't enforce it. So on the backside, it states later on, hey, they can't for four years, they can't run for office, they can't take a job in the city, they can't be a registered lobbyist, they can't do all these important things that may show some sort of perception of impropriety. What ability do we have? What avenues do we have to stop them? For example, and I don't know this because I've never been a lobbyist, but maybe somebody up here can answer this for me. If I want to go register as a lobbyist in the city after my time in City Hall, who do I go to to register as a lobbyist? An officially registered ominous, ominous lobbyist. Maybe one of the lobbyists out there can answer this for me. I don't know.

Probably a city clerk.

City clerk. Okay. So is this one of those things that if I go to the city clerk and I say, hey, I want to register Nick Richardson's extreme lobbying company and I'm going to be a lobbyist, is that something the city clerk would then look back and have the ability to look back and say, well, three and a half years ago, you served on this independent commission for redistricting. So therefore, I, in my capacity, am going to stop you from doing that. Yes. Okay. That would be within the purview of the clerk. Okay. Would it also be in the purview of the clerk if after that someone went to go fill out their form 400 and whatever's to be a candidate for office that you could say, great, thank you for doing this, but we're going to take an extra step now. We're going to stop you from doing that because three and a half years ago you served as somebody on this commission. The rules are good. I just want to make sure we have an ability to enforce them or they're pretty useless.

We do check all of the eligibility requirements prior to certifying someone as a candidate.

And you call them back and break their hearts?

That's Bernard's job.

He's a heartbreaker. I get that. Okay. So you would be prepared to do that and let these people know, hey, you abided by the front side rules or else you wouldn't have been on the commission in the first place. You broke the backside rules. Sorry. You got to wait and run in, I don't know, 2040 or whatever else is next. Okay.

If they're not eligible, we let them, we inform them. Yes.

Okay. Then I'm going to, I'm going to save some of the diesel for some of the rest of these. But I would like to, well, let me say this before it comes to a vote or anything else. I would be interested in an amendment to this that not only implements all of these restrictions on who can serve on this commission to make sure they're not political folks or leaning one way or the other. In addition to that, I would be interested in amending this to where the wording reflected that since they're so impartial, they can decide the district lines, and it doesn't come back to a body of elected officials to decide at the end of the day. I think that's the final step. I think if we're going to go toward this transparency and impartiality, I think we've got to go all the way, not just stop at the screen door. That's all I had for now, Council President.

I'm just one of three of the co-sponsors, and I'm very open, if legally possible, to make amendments to build consensus. But I'm a little bit concerned about taking ultimate authority away from people that could be punished by the public. Giving that authority to an unelected body, despite the restrictions they have, could be a problem, because the voters can't vote them out. But they can vote us out. They can fire back if we make a mistake. So I think this is a happy medium. It allows independence, but also allows accountability for the public to be able to punish those that they don't agree with. And if they do agree with them, they get reelected. That's kind of how the process works. It's not going to be a perfect policy. It's very clear in this room, it is impossible to make things perfect. That is why it has been at least 10 years before anyone's tried doing a reform to our charter. This is a good reminder that you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. So thank you.

Clarifying question. Yeah.

So I totally love that. Big accountability fan. Would it be theoretically possible that, say, whoever was appointed from District 6 to be on this commission, if they made some decisions that the public didn't like, they could take that up with me and hold me accountable because I'm the one who appointed them?

Possibly, but you're saying you want someone who's unelected to make a monumental decision like that. They don't have to show up to a council meeting where the ultimate authority is. You know, I want to be accountable for my actions. I want the council member who's elected in the charter to be accountable for that. This is my take. I think that we're the ones that are elected. We're the ones that are paid to do the job. And we should be the ones that pay for the consequences if a bad job is done, not someone we appoint. That's kind of like the CPUC. Whenever we complain to politicians of the state, our power bills are too high. They say, oh, it's not us. It's this independent commission. I don't want to create that here.

Thank you, Council Member. And for reference, before we move on to the next speaker, I mean, the next census is not until 2030. That's when we'd see this process kick in. The super majority, or at least the majority of us, aren't going to be here. Council Member Richardson, I suspect you will be. Council Member Vang, I suspect you will be. But the bulk of us here are gone. We're gone in six months or less. So ultimately all of this, keep this in mind, it's going to be for a future council, an unknown council. We don't know who's going to hold power when we actually do this. And that's kind of the beauty of it. The folks voting on this now are not going to be the ones actually implementing and actually solidifying those lines in six years from now. All right, Council Member Vang, followed by Council Member Perea.

Thank you very much, Council President. And I hope to be here when the next redistricting for Fresno City Council presents itself. Thank you very much to the sponsors of this legislation, to Council President Esparza, Vice President Maxwell, and Council Member Karbasi. A few questions for you and perhaps confirmation. I heard from one of the speakers from the floor is, To have this be on the ballot for the November 2026 ballots, it's $150,000. Is that correct or is there a different number that you have? Because I don't have that information.

That's a rough estimate from the county clerk's office. And I'm glad you asked the question because that, I mean, the elephant in the room. We just finished our city budget. Obviously, we spent every dollar, allocated every single dollar, so it will not be easy to fund any priority, right? Any additional priorities that are coming up in the middle of the fiscal year, including this one. But I'll commit to my colleagues that I will identify the funding without harming any of your priorities. by the next council meeting, contingent on which of these ballot measures that we end up approving for the ballot.

I'll take care of it. Thank you, Council President. And just to reiterate, that's $150,000 approximately for each measure ballot that's going to be on the November... 2026 ballot, correct?

That is correct, and that is a bargain because of how much space we're sharing with all the state propositions. So typically would be a lot more expensive, but that is unfortunately on the lower end of what it would cost to put something on. Yes.

Thank you. Now, as I started my comment that I hope to be here when the 2030 or 2031 redistricting comes around, A hypothetical situation, scenario, if this legislation passes and it's on the ballot and the voters approve this, what is the threshold for approving this if that's the case? What's the threshold for passing this if it's on the ballot for numbers of 50%? 50% plus one. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Also, if that's the case, what happens if a council member is drawn out of his or her district? Does that trigger a special election once the redistricting becomes official? What is the plan?

I'm glad you asked that as against law. So it's in the item and you legally can't do that. I believe it's state law, correct? That is a very good point. Yep, you can't draw someone out of their district.

So in other words, if council member A is redistricted out of that area that council member has the right to serve his or her full term?

Well, you can't be removed from your district regardless. So let's say I'm in district two right now. They can't draw the, and I'm kind of on the middle left side. They couldn't draw me out and then still have a district two. That would not be legal.

So regardless of how the redistricting map looks like, whether it is amoebic, it doesn't make any sense. If I happen to live, let's say, at the very edge of District 5 right now, and it is redrawn, I would have to be included in the next redrawn map.

Yes, and you would also have the final authority on what map is approved.

Correct, correct. And that's part of the legislation here. And so thank you for the clarification. I really appreciate that. Senior Attorney, when you read Category A membership, And I just wanted to read the first, I guess, two sets, the first three sets of that section. And I quote, the Citizen Redistrict Advisory Commission shall consist of seven members, each nominated by an individual member of the Fresno City Council, as reiterated here. A, section two, commissioners shall be a resident and registered to vote within the boundary of the expiring council district of the nominating city council member. And three, commissioners shall have voted in two of the preceding three primary city elections or have resided within the city of Fresno for a minimum of 10 years. I wanted to point that out because these conditions are put in place in this case in District 5. You would eliminate a huge majority of the people or the voters in District 5. And so when you do that, you put these conditions in place. Not everybody who lives in District 5, not every voter who lives in District 5 meets these criteria. And so, yes, we want to illuminate the bad apples, the people who have interest in serving on this commission, if it is passed. But we also put enough conditions where we eliminate people with good intentions, the average person. In this case, I'm talking about the average person in District 5 who can serve on this commission. And so, again, at the end of the day, this is an ad hoc commission. They make recommendations to the council member. Not only that, the council member himself or herself will handpick the person sitting on this commission. And as some of the speakers have reiterated, if I want to pick somebody to serve on a certain commission, that person has to be aligned with my political philosophy, my vision, et cetera, et cetera. It doesn't make any sense for me to pick somebody who is the opposite of who I am. That is deserving. And so my concern is if it costs $150,000 to place a measure on a ballot, I don't know where you live, but where I live and the people who I represent, that is a lot of money. That could be going to hiring a police officer or a battalion chief. That is about $190,000 for one. Or it could go to fix the sidewalk outside of a resident who lives on Ventura and 10th Street, where the majority of that area, the infrastructure has been neglected. dilapidated and so for me the concern is I'm sitting here how can I best utilize the taxpayers dollar every penny of that and in my district infrastructure is probably one of the most neglected of the seven if not the most neglected in particular on the western part of district five I had the honor of canvassing the last two years walking and knocking on doors By all means, these last two years, I've knocked on more than perhaps 20,000 doors, and I brought that, and I want to make a comment on that, because when you walk the streets, you walk the sidewalk. When you walk the streets, you see the street, the conditions of the street. When you walk the street, you walk past churches, you walk past grocery stores, you walk past schools. And if I were given, whether it's $150,000, $450,000, or $600,000, God damn it, I'd rather put it on infrastructures that goes to fix a sidewalk or a street. And many of the people in District 5 have been waiting for that for decades. And so for me, my concern is this is self-serving for the city council. This is not, as somebody put it, independent. Because again, at the end of the day, we picked who is going to be on this commission. and where and how the map's gonna be drawn. I did not have an opportunity to sit here and go through the process of redistricting for Fresno City Council, but I did have the experience of sitting on a local school board that went through redistricting. Now with this commission, maybe I'm wrong, but are they gonna need expertise? demographers, et cetera, to assist them on how to draw the maps, questions to ask, demographics, et cetera, et cetera, and the conditions that's attached to redistricting by state law. And where's that expertise gonna come from? Again, we're probably gonna have to source out two people, demographers who have done this kind of work to provide information that is necessary for these commissioners to make an informed decision. And so the last two years I've been here, we went through budget. Unfortunately, we've been in the red. And because we are or had faced two consecutive budget deficits, every dollar that we spent, I want to ensure that we spent at the interest of the taxpayers. And so I want to thank the members for asking the questions that I have. And I look forward to hearing from my colleagues here on the dais on this subject matter. Thank you very much, Council President. That's all I have.

All right. Council Member Perea, followed by Council Member, Council Vice President Maxwell.

Thank you, Council President. You know, I too wasn't here four years ago on the council when the current lines were drawn. I will not be here in four years when the new lines are drawn. And Council President is right. We are going to be asking voters to create a rule that would be applicable to whoever is sitting up here four years from now. I do want to thank the co-sponsors for getting this kicked off. I think it's a good start. I think we are still missing the mark of where this should be. If this is truly an independent commission, then let's go all the way. As it's currently written, I would not be able to support it as is. However, if the co-sponsors are open to making some changes, I do believe that we do have the ability to create a truly independent commission by changing the charter, so I'm still okay with sending this to the voters, so long as what we're asking for from them actually makes sense and actually achieves the goals that we are set out here to achieve. So with that being said, I'll keep my remarks short, but I do wanna hear again from the co-sponsors if they are willing to make some changes to their text. I would like to see a truly independent commission, but if that's not something they're open to, then I will not ask the voters to do something that we simply could do on any given Thursday. Thank you.

Council member Arias.

JUST A FAIR WARNING AND DISCLAIMER TO THE COUNCIL. I GOT ABOUT 30 MINUTES FOR QUESTIONS INTO THE PUBLIC. AS I NOTED, THIS ITEM CAME TO US ON FRIDAY WITHOUT THE MATERIAL BEING AVAILABLE UNTIL SOMETIME MONDAY. And the material that I reviewed on Monday was different than the final material that we're considering today. I don't know what the hiccup was, but what was uploaded to the record is not what was uploaded on Monday. So a lot of confusion for mine. I'm going to start out with some process questions for the city attorney and the city clerk. City attorney, does this item require two approvals or one? One approval. If there are substantial changes or amendments to the item, would it trigger a second approval?

If it is deemed a substantial amendment, yes.

Is making this a independent commission with the authority to adopt the maps without coming to council, would that be substantial in nature?

I DON'T WANT TO ADVISE ON THAT ON THE RECORD. IF YOU WANT TO SIDE BAR WITH ME, I'LL GIVE YOU THAT LEGAL ADVICE, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO ANSWER THAT UP HERE.

FAIR ENOUGH. ON PROCESS, HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN WORKING ON THIS ITEM? HOW LONG HAS STAFF OR CO-SPONSORS BEEN WORKING ON THIS ITEM?

ANSWERING THAT QUESTION WOULD VIOLATE CONFIDENTIALITY WITH THE AUTHORS OF THE MEASURE.

ISN, I KNOW YOU HAVE CONFIDENTIALITY WITH THE AUTHORS OF THE MEASURE, BUT ONCE THE AGENDA ITEM IS PUBLIC, THEN YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO SPEAK TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT THE CONTEXT OF THE ITEM, CORRECT? THAT'S NOT CORRECT. SO WHO WROTE THE ITEM? WHO WROTE THE LANGUAGE?

I SIGNED THE DOCUMENT. I'M THE AUTHOR OF IT. YOU WROTE EACH OF THESE PROVISIONS? Again, that gets into work product and confidentiality, and I'm not going to go there.

Were there any consultants hired to develop this proposal?

Same answer. You declined to answer that? That gets into confidentiality. I'm not prepared to answer that question.

Are the sponsors allowed to answer that question? Yes. Thank you. Can the sponsor speak to whether there were any political consultants hired to develop this proposal?

I shopped out this ballot measure work to the city attorney's office and worked with my office, my policy director.

So are there any consultants that have been working on this?

I think I get the gist of your question. Just to be clear, this is something that we as policy makers after seven years have fleshed out.

Correct.

I recognize that you're the official sponsors. So whatever's in there is what we've instructed to have in there.

Just to be clear. So what I'm asking is who actually wrote it and whether there were political consultants involved in the development of this proposal. Okay, I'll take that as you kind of answered the question. No, it's a question we can't answer. The city attorney confirmed that you can't answer it. You're just choosing not to, which is fair.

Let me clarify. You're really good at what you do. I'm saying that we, as policymakers that have been doing this for a while, have thought about this and put this forward. We asked the city attorney to prepare what we said. They prepared it, and that's what's here. The three of us did this.

I understand that, Council Member. The reason I'm asking- I know what you're trying to insinuate. I want to be clear. Thank you, Council Member Maxoff, for answering the question. The reason I'm asking is there's a lot of questions I have on the actual language. So I want to know who originated that language. If it's political consultants or if it's charter officers or if it's a city attorney. There's language in here that clearly is legal in nature, which I'm assuming is the city attorney's office inserted. There's language here that's discretionary in nature. So I want to make sure I direct my questions to the right person. First, I want to point out that there is a legal DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AND ADVISORY COMMISSION. AND THIS LANGUAGE AS SUBMITTED MAKES IT CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT IT IS ADVISORY ONLY. THAT THE COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL AUTHORITY TO ADOPT WHATEVER MAP THEY CHOOSE TO ADOPT. IT IS EXACTLY, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE IT AS SUBMITTED, WE WOULD BE APPROVING THE COUNTY OF FRESNO'S REDISTRICTING PROCESS, WHICH WAS ESTABLISH AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, IGNORE THE ADVISORY COMMUNITY'S RECOMMENDED MAP, AND ADOPT ALEX TABIAN'S POLITICAL CONSULTANT'S PROPOSED MAP. SO JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CRYSTAL CLEAR FOR THE PUBLIC. NOW ON THE QUESTIONS OF THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE, THE PROVISION HERE ON PAGE 11 CONFIRMS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE APPOINTED BY EACH COUNCIL MEMBER. It also notes that the eligibility for a commissioner to serve on this commission must be that they voted in the two out of the three last primary elections. For those who don't understand political science, if you did not vote in the last two of the three primary elections, you're not eligible to serve on this commission. That means if you became a new citizen, and you're finally eligible to vote, you can't serve on this commission as written. If you became a new 18 year old with the legal right to vote, but you have not been 18 the last two of the three primary elections, you're not eligible to serve. So upfront, it is intentionally removing what we would describe as low propensity voters. People who got a whole lot of stuff going on, raising families and working multiple jobs, that cannot vote in every single primary. The reason I ask about who wrote it is, that information is only accessible to political consultants who are experts in this field. The consultants will tell you that if you want to eliminate low propensity voters, primary people of color, you put a provision that requires primary participation in a primary election. Because that's, typically when white, older Republican voters turn out. People of color, younger folks tend to turn out during presidential elections and general elections. So I'm struggling to understand what was the rationale of eliminating new registered voters or young people who just became legal to vote or identifying primary election as a requirement versus a general election. Who determined that that was the best criteria to eliminate eligibility?

These are my ideas. Yours? Yeah, and I think you should be, I mean, you can be engaged, but if you're gonna draw city council district boundaries, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that you're engaged in city policy and what's going on at City Hall.

And your definition of engagement is primary elections, two out of the last three?

I think it shows a level of engagement. It's one criteria, as well as the residency requirement.

But it's a disqualifying criteria. Well, that's kind of the point. Okay, so we're intentionally disqualifying a big segment of our voting population from participating.

We're limiting it to folks who have an interest and background and knowledge in the operations and how city hall kind of goes and who are actively paying attention to what their representatives are doing and getting engaged in city policy generally.

Understood, but none of this requires you to have experience with city politics. None of the criteria requires experience with city politics.

No one said anything about city politics. It's just engaged in city policy. Politics is different from policy.

But none of this criteria requires experience in city policy. Now, let me get to some of the loopholes. There's been references of we're going to ban certain people from participating. There's a, on section, page 12, section 3, a paid employee of any redistricting contractor or consultant. So if you're a political consultant involved in redistricting, you can't participate in the commission. Kudos to that. But if you're a political consultant to a city on every other matter, you're able to participate. That's as big as the loophole that you can run a train through. So if you're on the city payroll, to deal with the police department, the fire department, to deal with the city council. You can be a consultant to the city council members. You're able to participate in the commission. You just can't be doing redistricting work specifically. Additionally, this would allow paid campaign staff of partings. This indicates in this section that if you're a member of the Fresno County Partisan Central Committee, you can't participate. But if you work for their campaigns, you can. If you're a paid employee of a consultant or someone under contract with city elected officials, I'm trying to understand why would we want the Democratic campaign staff or the Republican campaign staff to be able to participate in this commission? Isn't the point to remove partisan out of it? But yet there's a second loophole that's big enough for a plane to fly through it. If the goal is to make this about engaging the public, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, SOMEBODY WHO VOTED ONCE IN THEIR LIFE, BECAUSE THEY'RE 18, IS AS IMPORTANT AS A VOTER AS SOMEBODY WHO VOTED THREE TIMES IN THE LAST THREE PRIMARY ELECTIONS. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY POLITICAL CONSULTANTS THAT WORK ON REDISTRICTING ARE NOT ALLOWED, BUT ANY OTHER political consultant to the council, to the mayor, or a consultant to the city is allowed, we are rigging the system. And I know somebody made references to President Trump, who it should be noted I'm not a fan of. It's clear that we're trying to rig the system for the next grouping of elected officials. I wanna also get to page 14. of this document. It states that a recommended boundary map must be submitted within 120 days following the publication of the census. It's very prescriptive in that nature. There's also, in page 15, minimum boundary requirements. We are prescribing exactly what kind of map we want to see on this document essentially 10 years in advance. I don't know if the council is aware or the authors or the public, but there's been some recent Supreme Court rulings related to congressional maps and redistricting maps. This document as written prescribes in detail how each council district shall look and what we should consider. I don't think it takes into account recent Supreme Court rulings. much less changes in laws that may occur next year or Supreme Court rulings the following year. to Member Richardson's point, if we're gonna establish independent commission, we should allow them to take all matters that are required at that time into consideration, not prescribe it in a charter and constitutional amendment. Yes, Member Richardson.

Can I ask you a question real quick on your last point? You mentioned the 10%, and I see where it's listed here. Under the current system we're operating on in the last census, wasn't the requirement that the council districts be the same population plus or minus 1.2%? Correct.

Yes, and the 10% has been part of the litigated question at the national level. So the 10% could change to 5%, you know, in passage of the California Voter Rights Act or revisions to that law or anything else. So I'm concerned that we have spent four pages prescribing what a future map would look like, a couple of pages excluding low participation voters, another page creating loopholes for political consultants, then we won't acknowledge what political consultants were hired to actually write this language. And my last question on this is, it's unnecessary. More of a statement, I guess. Any given Thursday, and I'd be happy to volunteer to help draft this, this council can adopt a truly independent commission. But this does not meet the legal description of independent commission. It's simply advisory. And as much lipstick that they put on the pig, it's still a pig. It is a commission of the council PRESCRIBED BY THE COUNCIL, DICTATED BY THE COUNCIL AS TERMS OF THE MAKEUP OF THE COMMISSION, AND ULTIMATELY ADVISORY AND THE COUNCIL CAN MAKE THE FINAL DECISION THAT COULD BE SELF-SERVING. SO UNLESS THERE'S CHANGES MADE, AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF MEMBER RICHARDSON'S AND MEMBER PEREA'S REQUEST FOR CHANGES, I'M ALL FOR AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION. but let's not put more lipstick on the pig. It's unnecessary and it's a waste of $150,000 of city funds to simply confuse the public and mislead them that this somehow is an independent commission.

All right, Council Vice President Maxwell. Thank you, Council President. Council Member Arias, point taken. I know you're working really hard on that law degree, so I appreciate the quasi-deposition there. You know, when we bring these things forward, they're never meant to necessarily be a final product. This was a recommendation. I'm open to changes. I've heard some really good ideas up here. I don't know if my co-sponsors would necessarily be against those. I mean the fact of the matter is my colleagues have had eight years up here to come up with legislation similar to this and have failed to do so. It's easy to criticize something when others have taken the time and effort to put something forward. I mentioned this wasn't going to be perfect. I think that's been made clear. I'm open to ideas and suggestions moving forward. I don't think we need the verbal spanking. I think we're all trying to do something that's best for the public. And if that looks like something slightly different than what we brought forward today, let's amend it and make it the best possible piece of policy to move forward. I DON'T THINK THIS HAS TO BE ADVERSARIAL. I DON'T THINK THIS HAS TO BE NECESSARILY CONTROVERSIAL. I THINK WE COULD CRAFT UP SOMETHING, AND I'VE HEARD SOME REALLY GOOD IDEAS TODAY FROM COUNCILMEMBER RICHARDSON, WHICH I APPRECIATE. SO IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TAKE THE LEAD ON CRAFTING THAT LANGUAGE UP HERE RIGHT NOW, I'M ALL YOURS.

Councilmember Maxwell, IF I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND, IF YOU WANT TO CONSIDER IT.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR, UNLESS COUNCILMEMBER RICHARDSON HAS SOMETHING THAT HE'D LIKE TO specifically motioned for because I know he had come up with some good ideas.

Sure. This may not include all of the different points brought up by all of my different colleagues who have spoken here, but from listening and taking some notes, some things that I've been able to distill that I think could get this to a place where I could approve it, where I could actually kind of take that last final... Oh, Joseph isn't here anymore. Well, whatever. Rip. If this were to include, and city attorney, whatever we have to do to kind of work this in there, And Councilmember Arias, I'm going to come back to you to see if there's anything we want to adjust with the population percentage, but I think that's one of the smaller potatoes here. I would like this not only to be an advisory commission, but I'd be interested in this commission actually making the decision for how they want their city redistricted instead of sending it back here to the council for us to adopt. So this would take essentially the name and the charter of this commission from advisory to the actual commission, the chartered commission. The second thing I would like to include in the prohibitions for who can be allowed I would like to make sure that in the last, this will probably go on the four-year column, in the last four years, no member of the commission can have been an employee of any campaign. not a member of the party, not necessarily, not a candidate themselves, but a member of the campaign. Officially, the member of the campaign committee is probably the easiest way, FPPC-wise, to determine whether or not that was true.

So far, these all sound good, Councilmember.

Okay. And I would also like to include they cannot have been in the last four years a recipient of a city consulting contract. I think that's fair as well, and that was brought up by one of my colleagues. And I think with those amendments... the things that this does, the restriction. If we were to pass nothing here today or just kill us in the crib, essentially all of these requirements to keep the folks on the commission non-political would go away and there wouldn't be a change and they could stay political. And I don't think that's the intent here. So in order to take the step that has been presented and go the second step, those are the amendments I'd be interested in making. Charter commission, prohibition from campaign staff in the last four years, prohibition from anyone who's had a city consulting contract in the last four years.

Can I accept those as a friendly amendment, City Attorney? Or does it require?

Yeah, I was just advising Council President that I'll probably need to do some work over the lunch hour just to make sure that this is legally sound. And just a clarifying question, Council Member Richardson, Are you talking about paid employees to campaigns? Because as you and I know, there's volunteers and things like that, so I'd need a little bit more direction.

Personally, I would like to bar anybody who is a volunteer. However, that is so hard to do. I mean, anybody who likes you and is handing out ball caps, that's going to be impossible to track. And again, if you're going to make a rule with no way of enforcing it, it's a waste of a rule. So paid staff of a political campaign.

Yeah. I agree with all that. Thank you.

Council President, can I have the floor?

I need to apologize to Council Member Vang. I was a little bit confused when we were talking about what you were asking. I want to be clear. Current charter rules do not allow a council member to be drawn out of his district. However, there is a bill called AB764, the Fair Maps Act, does not allow an incumbent's residency to be considered. So no matter what we do, that is the law. Our charter is actually not in line with the law. I want to be clear on that. I apologize. That bill also does not allow us to give final authority in an independent commission. That's why we didn't do it. We wanted to, but it would violate the Fair Maps Act. That's the dilemma we face. This is the closest we can get to complying with state law and creating the independence we wanted to create.

Yeah, to your point, Council Member Carbasi, with respect to AB 764 and SB 1018, the direction I think we want to go is going to be a lot further layered. Um, and if we are going to hand over again, final, you know, final, uh, say to the commission, um, then we've got to, we've got to kind of redo the process.

We can't, but we would be in compliance with state law if we gave it the final authority has to come to the council because there's procedures for judicial judicial review. The law also allows that if we get challenged.

And that's what I want to look up over the lunch hour just to double check.

Yeah, let's get a little bit of a clarity. I know what we had was compliant, but again, we're changing some major components here, and changing certain major components may add 13 more layers of bureaucracy to this.

And you wouldn't be able to pass it today anyway?

Sure. Okay. Shall we table for now? Not table, but hold the discussion until after the recess? Yeah.

Council President, I'd just like to ask Member Richards if you'd consider a couple more changes. Go for it. One, to include former council members as an excluded party to serve. Yes. And then to remove the requirement to be a voter, to have voted in the last two or three primaries.

It's funny, before being elected, I hadn't voted in three primaries in town because I was still on active duty. I think I voted in two. So what if we lower it to have voted in the last primary?

I think in the last election I'd be comfortable with versus primary or general. It's an election.

I would be okay with that.

Thank you.

Now, as the authors, do we have to accept it?

Well, these are just suggestions right now. I mean, and there's not, has there been a formal motion? I think we're just discussing it at this point. So there's no motion. There's no accepting or denying anything. We're just talking. Just the public discourse. Council Member Vang, do you have a point?

I do. I have a comment to make. If the conditions with regards to having the experience to vote, to be able to serve on this commission, We are, in fact, as my colleague from D3 mentioned, if I turn 40 and I become a citizen, then I'm excluded. If I'm 18 years old and this is my first time that I'm eligible to vote, I'm excluded. And yeah, we sent our 18-year-olds to fight for democracy and freedom, but this statute, if that condition's in place, they're not allowed to serve on this commission. And I think that in itself is injustice. And so if we are going to eliminate the number of experiences we have in terms of voting, whether it is special, primary, or general, we are excluding certain populations. And so I would strongly consider putting that as one condition of eligibility to serve on this commission. Because I have kids, and when my kids turn 18, that will be the first time they voted or have voted. And yet, as a voting citizen in District 5, they're not eligible to serve on this commission if those are the conditions. And so if you want transparency, we should not exclude anyone who can vote. If I may even consider, what is the criteria eligibility to run for Fresno City Council? perhaps we can consider that as a criteria for, in terms of age eligibility, to be on this commission. And so I am listening, but at the same time, I want this process to be as fair as possible and to be inclusive as possible. Thank you.

Council Member Vang, I think the difference is that when you submit yourself to the electorate as a candidate, they get to decide. Here we'd be handing over power to non-elected folks to make a last and final decision. So I'm not sure I would match, I'd go so far as to match it to the criteria to be able to run for council, but I appreciate the dialogue. Council Member Karbasi and then Council Member Richardson.

Super sensitive to those comments. My parents immigrated to this country. They became citizens. They earned the right to vote. They lived here many years before, contributed to our economy, went to school, weren't able to vote. I understand that. But they earned that right. And that's just the reality of the process. And I don't think we're taking anything away from anybody. This does not say that someone who's 18 now can't ever serve on the commission. Or someone who's 40 can't serve on the commission. If you want to vote in a city election, you can't just vote if you live in Clovis. You can't vote if you live in County Island. You have to meet certain criterias and live in the city for a period of time before you can vote. So I think this is in line with that. It's just the reality. I get the dilemma there. but having some level of engagement showing that, hey, you actually do participate, you know what an election is like, you know the consequences of an election, I think that would help. I wish we could find a happy medium. I'm open to suggestions, Council Member.

Sir, Council Member Bang. I understand my colleague from D6's concern. Sometimes we underestimate the experience and intelligence of an 18-year-old. Number does not define experience. If I'm 18, it does not necessarily mean that I am out of the loop when it comes to politics and how it functions. We have 18-year-olds who are exceptional. We have 18-year-olds who attend college. We have 18-year-olds who are intelligent enough to be able to sit on that commission, whether they lack the experience to vote or not. And so to cast a wide net in terms of age Again, going back to the eligibility to sit in this seat, what is it? And I think that should be the starting point in moving forward in considering the experience slash age of the person to be eligible to sit in this commission.

Thank you. If I would just add, if you're old enough to go to war and you're old enough to sit on this council, then you're qualified to be on the commission, period.

Well, look, there are age requirements to go into Congress. You can serve in a war, but you can't serve in Congress until you're 25. You can't be president until you're 30. You can't be a senator until you're 35, sorry. Understood. I mean, it's unfortunate, but that's the Constitution.

Correct, but the age requirement to serve on this council is 18 and being a citizen. It has no requirement for previous elections.

Will you bring forward a charter amendment to raise the age?

It's not necessary. My point is, why are we trying to be restrictive when it comes to democracy? That's a Trump thing.

Okay, good one, Miguel. That's not what's happening. Look, you're going to let people get involved in something and they have no idea? How do we know they're not just some straw candidate for someone else?

We're going to have order. It's getting a little loud out in the audience. I think we're going to hold this item. So we've had public comment on it. We've had some discussion. I think we're going to continue the discussion later on in the day. We're out of order right now. I'm sorry. Edna, I'm giving you your first warning for the day, please. Thank you. All right, so we're going to hold this item to be continued after lunch. Before we do break for lunch, I did want to hear the 11 a.m. item.

Sorry, on this item, city attorney brought up with the substance of changes, it's going to have to come back to a future meeting anyway. So instead of rushing his work over lunch, would it be amenable to push it to the next meeting so he has time to go do all the legal digging through it and make sure that it checks out? Not yet. I'll decide after lunch.

Okay. Yeah, I'll think about it over lunch hour. but that may be an option. And look at the calendar for when we may be able to convene next. Obviously the final deadline would be August 7th. So we would have to do a meeting by no later than next Friday. All right, let's move on to the 11 a.m. item. So again, the Redistricting Advisory Commission item remains open. We'll come back to it. We'll circle back and make a decision. We're going to move on to the 11 a.m. item that is titled, let's see here. Resolution supporting the Fresno Housing Authority maintenance workers. And this is sponsored by Councilmember Karabasi and Councilmember Perea. Councilmember, did you want to give an intro or do you want me to go straight to public comment? Okay.

I think we'll just state, before we go to public comment, there has been some concern raised to us by some of our maintenance workers in the Housing Authority, which is a very important organization, about them potentially losing their employment and having the uncertainty to that. Now, we have a good relationship with the Housing Authority, but half of their commissioners are appointed by the City of Fresno, and I think we want to be very clear. We are probably the most labor-supportive council in the history of the city. And we stand with our workers. And I'm sure we're going to hear from the Housing Authority. I'm sure we're going to hear from a lot of the workers. I think they're the best folks to explain why this is on the agenda and why they need our support. And I'm hoping that the council will support this item. I don't know if my co-sponsor wants to make comments before we move forward.

Yeah, I'll give Councillor Perea a chance to speak before we go to public comment.

I'll keep it brief. I just want to extend my support to employees. I know that there is no malicious intent ever when there's discussions about possibly laying off positions. A number of our agencies are drastically being impacted right now by cuts that are happening at the federal level. They're trickling down all the way to the local level. And unfortunately, big decisions have to be made. And in some cases, they are made to a level of employees that definitely do not deserve it. I know that our relationship with the Housing Authority is a good one. It will continue to be a good one. But I have always stood with our employees during extremely tough times, and I will continue to do so. But with that being said, I would like to just hear from the employees that are here today.

Okay, great. We're going to go to public comment on the 11 a.m. item. The first card I received was from Judith Rojas.

Good morning, Council President Esparza and the members of Fresno City Council. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. My name is Judith Rojas. I am a Masters of Social Work graduate student at San Jose State University. I am here today to express my support for Resolution ID 26-978. One of the reasons I chose social work is because I believe every person deserves to be treated with dignity and to have their basic needs met. I believe everyone deserves the opportunity to live in housing that is safe, healthy, and well maintained regardless of their income and circumstances. As a social work student, I've learned housing is one of the most important factors affecting a person's physical health, mental health, and overall well being. When maintenance problems like mold, plumbing issues, broken heating or systems or electrical hazards go unresolved they create unnecessary stress and can make existing health concerns even worse this is why maintenance workers are so important their work often happens behind the scenes but it's essential to keep home safe and livable they protect the health and dignity of their of low-income families older adults people with disabilities and many others who depend on public housing supporting these workers is really about supporting the people they serve every day As someone preparing to become a social worker, I believe investing in safe housing is also an investment in healthier families and stronger communities, preventing problems before they become crisis benefits everyone. Thank you again for your time and for your consideration of this resolution. I respectfully encourage you to support resolution ID 26-978. I appreciate the opportunity to share my perspective with you today. Thank you.

All right, next card I have is for Priscilla Herrera.

Hi, good morning. My name is Priscilla Herrera. Bear with me. I'm a little nervous.

You're doing great.

I'm a property manager with the Fresno Housing Authority. And I am a member of the SEIU Local 521. Gotcha. I'm here to ask for the council support and standing with the workers. Facing layoffs and families who depend on safe and affordable housing.

Priscilla, we got you. You got this.

We already stretched thin, and I manage three properties myself. Yeah, I often have just one maintenance guy to respond to routine repairs, emergencies, and unit turnovers. That means longer waits for families and more delays getting people into housing. If layoffs are perceived, This would further delay urgent repairs for vulnerable families in our units. We care about the mission to serve families. We have gone the extra mile to help get units ready for moving. I, myself, and my coworker, painted doors, scrub units, and done whatever to get families housed because we are a team. And our residents are counting on us. We don't just manage properties, we build relationships and trust that families rely on us. These layoffs will only make an already difficult situation worse. I respectfully ask the council to work with the Fresno Housing Authority to find alternatives to protect frontline jobs and the residents who depend on us every day.

Thank you for your time. The next speaker is going to be Anthony Esparza.

good morning my name is anthony sparza i am a safety inspector with the fresno housing i have been there over 20 years as the safety inspector i'm also a member of the local 521. i'm here today to ask this council support and standing with the workers facing layoffs more importantly the vulnerable low-income families that depend on safe, decent quality public housing. Fresno Housing Safety Inspections do far more than complete inspections. We do help save and change lives. We help prevent dangerous living conditions before they become emergencies. We identify fire hazards, unsafe electrical, plumbing condition, unhealthy living environment for children, especially with the usage of possible lead-based paint, infestation, and more. These layoffs can put families and the communities we serve at risk. We also encounter situations involving criminal activities, unsafe environment for children, and properties where our intervention can protect these residents. Our work does help ensure our families have safe housing with working utilities, safe decent homes where children can grow up healthy and ready to learn. Recently, a safety inspection Recently safety inspections were scaled back and shortly afterwards workers received layoff notices due to the supportedly loss of work due to the reality is that our inspection team has struggled to keep up with demands of our workloads for years. Reducing oversight does not eliminate the need. It delays the discovery of potential serious problems. until they become more dangerous and more costly to repair. Just a week ago, a tragedy lost its life in a fire. I cannot say whether that the tragedy could have been prevented, but it should remind us all that housing safety requires investment and not less oversight. I respectfully ask the council to stand with the Fresno housing workers who receive layoff notices and to work with the Fresno Housing to find alteration to protect frontline jobs and the family and the community who rely on safe, decent, affordable housing. Our family's safety and public should never be balanced on the backs of most vulnerable neighbors. Please support our workers. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right, next speaker is Estevan Pineda.

Good morning, council. My name is Estevan Pineda. I've been working for the housing authority for six and a half years. And I'm a union member of the SEI Youth Local 521. I'm here today to ask the support from the council in standing with the workers facing layoffs and the families who depend on safe, quality public housing. From the view of the maintenance department, these layoffs are a safety and healthy issue. Our workers keep homes safe, functional, and livable. Repair HVAC systems, electrical issues, appliances, plumbing due to a flood, and countless other problems that affect families every day. The reality is we're already short staffed. In one area alone, there was 15 people. Over the past years, it has gone down to six, while our housing units continue to age, and we take on new developments. The preventive maintenance of these properties are already falling behind because of short staffing, and we have never been shortage of work. If these layoffs move forward, our workload won't disappear. It will only double or triple for the maintenance staff who are remaining, which will affect our residents and our taxpayers. Keeping the work in-house is also the most cost-effective option. Our skilled employees can perform the work of outside contractors at a lower cost. We have built trust relationships with our residents. We know our communities. We treat tenants with dignity. And we have pride in serving our families, including those transitioning from homelessness. Our company is about housing. But what happens to our employees that are family that are unhoused due to the layoffs? And what happens to the taxpayers, residents, and the quality of public housing throughout Fresno County? I respectfully ask the council to stand with the workers who receive laid-off notices and with Fresno Housing to find alternatives that protect frontline jobs and their families, and also the families who rely on safe and affordable housing. Thank you.

Next speaker is going to be Frederick Florentino.

Good morning. First and foremost, I just want to thank our God. Thank you, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I'm truly blessed. In 2015, I began my journey with the Fresno Rescue Mission. I did the year program. I was able to get a maintenance job there at the Fresno Rescue Mission and worked there for six years doing maintenance. Soon after, I was employed through Fresno Housing for two and a half years now. And blessed. Not only did they pay me well and house me, but it was an opportunity that I truly appreciated. And June 30th, I was given a notice of a layoff. And during that time, I was really stressful. Besides having my 11 years of sobriety and my six years of background, working maintenance and plus the background, I was pretty sure I could find a job. But thank God, they reinstated my position and they gave me back my position. So nothing bad to say about housing or nothing bad to say about the union. I mean, I'm just up here to say it's tough being human. You know, the world we live in today, it's hard. You know, violence and hate and blood has been spilled since day one. And I truly pray for everyone here in power, everyone who has a position of authority, you know, from our CEO, Mr. Williams, to our representatives here, to many of the people who are being laid off, despite I was blessed to keep my position, you know. Yeah, so it's time we put our best foot forward and love one another and do what's best as far as common sense and doing what's right. And I know sometimes your hands are tied. We have to do what we have to do regardless. But I'm just here to encourage everyone. Pray for one another. Pray for one another, please, because it's tough being human. I don't care where you're at in this planet. It's no joke. And as far as our homeless population, I even thought of a project concrete of government. I even spoke with Mr. Williams, and I spoke with the CEO, Matt Dildine, and trying to combine as far as nonprofit and government together to create this environment that will help the homeless who don't want the help. You know, because if we continue to push them into the corner and let them do what they do, you know, we're creating biohazards. Because, you know, if any of you understand Skid Row and how that developed in L.A., I mean, it's crazy. But anyways, keep up the good work. You know, I know it's difficult in these days and times. And like I said, love on one another. Love on one another. Keep petitioning God. And thanks for giving me this moment.

Have a blessed day.

Thank you. Our next speaker is going to be Tyrone Roderick-Williams.

Well, good morning, President Garza and the members of the City Council. I'm Tyrone Roderick-Williams, CEO of Fresno Housing. And before I begin, I want to acknowledge that the decisions that we are discussing today affect real people, employees who have dedicated themselves to serving our residents. These were incredibly difficult decisions, and they were not made lightly. Over the past year, We have conducted a comprehensive review of our operations to ensure that our expenses align with our revenue. Our responsibility is not to serve the residents today only, but to ensure that Fresno housing remains financially strong enough to serve residents in the years to come. Before making any staff reductions, Fresno Housing first took numerous steps to reduce costs in other ways. We left vacant positions unfilled when employees departed. We reduced operating expenses where possible. We carefully evaluated alternatives. Only after exhausting These options did we make the difficult decisions to eliminate positions. Like many housing authorities across the country, Fresno Housing is facing multiple financial pressures. Federal funding is not kept pace with the rising operating costs. And while Fresno Housing is authorized to administer approximately 13,000 housing choice vouchers, rising rental costs Driven by significant increases in market over the past several years mean current funding only allows us to assist about 11,400 households. Because HUD provides administrative funding based on the number of households we're able to serve, our operating revenue has declined. combined with increasing operating costs, these realities required us to make difficult and responsible decisions. We carefully evaluated every available option. We made difficult decisions to eliminate positions across the organization, and these decisions were made to maintain long-term financial health of Fresno Housing so we can continue to serve residents throughout the county for years to come. Because this has been a significant discussion about regarding maintenance staff, I want to address that directly.

That's going to be three minutes for the speaker.

Anyone else? Anyone else? No, I have no questions.

Okay, no. Yeah, I'm going to treat you the same as everyone else, Tyrone, but we appreciate you being here.

Yeah, appreciate the public testimony. Mr. Williams, you don't have to stay up here. Council President Garza, if I can make a couple of statements. I appreciate everyone who spoke today. Appreciate the comments. Housing Authority is a great organization we're happy to partner with, but I do hope that the director and the commissioners reconsider their decision. There are, yes, long-term concerns, and we have a $2.5 billion budget in the city. Every day we've got to make tough decisions. But one thing we know is we can't achieve anything in this city without taking care of our workers. And I think the same goes for the housing authority. And far often, whenever there's cost-saving measures considered, it's always the folks at the very bottom that get picked on. And that's why we're standing here today to support our workers. And I will say, moving forward, when Housing Authority items come forward, I am going to be asking about looking with a lot more scrutiny to make sure what decisions have been made and are we making the right investments. So that's where I stand today. I appreciate my colleagues today to support this as well and defer to my...

So I did omit the Zoom speakers. Oh, bring them on. Go to that. So we have public comments to open right now for those who have not spoken. So on Zoom, we have Alessis Sims.

Can you hear me?

Yes, you may begin.

OK, thank you so much. Let me pull up my comment. Sorry, my hands are shaking. Good morning, Council. My name is Alisa Sims, and I call on behalf of the citizens of District 6 and all Fresno tenants who have been affected by habitability issues, specifically mold. When I noticed a strong, musty odor in my unit just days after moving in, I immediately reached out to my management team. My family began to fall ill, and after two months of several failed attempts to locate, identify, and remove the source of odor, reached out to code enforcement, who was able to cite what they believed could be mold, while maintaining that they are not mold specialists. Out of desperation, we withheld a portion of our rent to afford mold testing, and on the following day, we were constructively evicted while they filed an unlawful detainer against us in the courts. After giving maintenance access to my unit on December 19th, I was told that it was safe to reenter without being given any prior warning or knowledge of what they did and used in my home. I inhaled what I believed was ozone 03, the same toxic gas that they used weeks prior. I have proof of that with intentions of eradicating the mysterious stench. I called the fire department out the next day to identify the new chemical odor, and we were told that it just smelled really, really clean. The mold specialist arrived, sorry, the mold results arrived on Christmas Eve and proved that we had toxic mold actively growing in the HVAC system. I shared the results with the landlord and the city, but I was ultimately told to seek legal counsel. After numerous calls to the city attorney's office, I spoke with city attorney Mr. Andrew Janz, hello, who commended my efforts to help my family and said he wished there was more he could do. But this was before I learned of the EPP program, which ultimately could which ultimately could not help me because we lost more than a small claim. I was sick for months, I still am, and I'm still dealing with the aftermath of being put through hell. I vacated our unit and had to dispose of nearly everything due to contamination and due to money and time restraints. A similar story was reported recently by Fresno Land encouraging me to speak up. No accountability has been taken, but I want to propose a solution in hopes to prevent this fate for other tenants. I would like to introduce the idea of installing a mold specialist position in code enforcement to conduct the necessary training that code enforcement officers need to effectively site mold and offer proven and safer mediation solutions to prevent further damage. We do not need to reduce oversight. We need to increase it. Thank you.

All right, thank you. Wanna be clear, maybe it was not clear, but this public comment is for the 11 a.m. item only on the Housing Authority Resolution. So the next speaker I have on Zoom is going to be Nikki Real.

Hi, could you guys hear me?

Yes, you may speak.

Okay. Hi. What I wanted to say as far as we see the layoffs and trying to find other ways to cut costs, I'd like to mention is that, let me see, as far as some of the top executives in the last few years, I'd like to say, what is it? Tyrone Williams. Has got in substantial raise year after year since he's been hired by the Fresno housing authority. Um, one of the third in command was making 178,000, 2018, six years later. It's about see if I'm reading this, right? Let me see. Brandy Woodward, 2018 was making, oh, this is Tammy, Tammy Townsend. She had left this position already. 183,000 just a few years later, well, six years later to 276, about $100,000 raise within six years. My notes are kind of sloppy, so that's why I can't really, I should be more neat in my notes. But if you look at some of the top executives, The raises have been substantial. And I don't know if it's because they got too comfortable with this COVID money the last few years. But my question is, it speaks to a bigger issue. What do the reserves look like? And why haven't they planned for this like more? I don't know if they thought these federal funds that this substantial amount of federal funds that they received are going to continue. And also, yeah, well, work needs to be done on apartments. I'm pretty sure it's going to have to be done. So I don't understand. I'd like to know what they're planning on doing because from what I hear, these maintenance workers are saving a lot of money anyways. So, yeah, when it comes to cutting costs, maybe they like to slow down on those raises because that's one thing that I know that's not really regulated. It should be.

Thank you. Next on Zoom, we have Lisa Flores.

Good morning. How are you guys doing today?

Good afternoon. Welcome back.

Well, you could have had me earlier in the year, just saying. Anyway, long story short on this whole mess is as the COVID money came in, people went to the trough and got increase in their pay. And that's mostly management. And these poor workers, what do they get? Less numbers. Has anybody at the Housing Authority done a cost analysis? How much each one of these individuals who are going to get laid off, how much it's going to cost both the city and the county? And lost revenue from their wages going out to the community, what happens if they become homeless? What happens if they can't pay their credit card bills? What happens If they become unhoused, what happens? What is the economic impact of each one of these workers? Each one of these workers that have to put up with the mold that nobody wants to talk about, that has to put up with the overwhelming number of corrections that has to be done in these housing units, should be paid more than what they're getting. There should be more staff in the maintenance area versus management side. That's all I have to say is you keep these workers on board. You keep people housed. What are they doing? Reducing these numbers so they can outsource these jobs because that's what it looks like from the cheap seats. Thank you for your time and I'm glad to be back on Zoom.

Next on Zoom we have Eric Payne. Can you all hear me okay? Yes, sir. You may speak.

Eric Payne, Executive Director of the Central Valley Urban Institute. A couple of things. We certainly stand in solidarity with the dedicated public employees and SEIU members whose lives have been impacted by today's resolution and proposed layoffs because we know that behind every position eliminated is a family that's trying to pay their rent, buy groceries, care for children, and contribute to our community. Workforce decisions are never just budget decisions. We know that they're human decisions. And at the same time, I'd urge us to approach this moment not only with accountability, but with collaboration. If the city believes mistakes have been made, we know that the federal administration has not trickled down the necessary resources, as Councilmember Perea has stated, for our residents to survive in this climate. More importantly, they are attacking DEI and they are attacking affordable housing every step of the way. So I commend Mr. Williams for his ability to lead through these extremely turbulent times. But I think we need to... foster collaboration with the housing authority as this resolution admonishes the decisions that are being made. We need to have collaboration with both the city and the county and pair it with a commitment to action. There should have been a convening with labor and management and the work group with city council members members from the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor, because unlike other public agencies like Fresno Unified, which is a billion-dollar organization operating with significant fiscal reserves, the Housing Authority is a much smaller public agency. with support from not just the city, but from the county. And so we really need to buckle down and figure out how we can support this agency in this really difficult transition as families on the front lines of this work with our maintenance workers and other folks in property management how we can sustain this, because I think the agency has done its due diligence, but they continue to hemorrhage with their budget. The state has not stepped in with human capital, only with capital to build more housing. And so I think there needs to be a balance. And I think the city and the county need to progressively pursue state and federal funding and initiate conversations that help save our housing.

Thank you, Eric. All right, next card I have on this item is going to be for Michael Lynn Lewis here in the chamber.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Michael and Lewis, and I didn't expect to say anything about the housing authority, um, uh, issue. However, I just want to let you know, when I was a kid and my father would be driving past housing authority properties, I used to always ask daddy, can we move in there on those places over there? Because they were well kept, they were grassy. And I liked the fact that they had, they didn't have backyards or fences around the backyards. Cause that way you didn't have to ask permission to go play with somebody who just go outside and go play. That tells me a lot about how the housing authority after all these years have been maintained in the city of Fresno. Now I've traveled around the country and I've seen various housing authority projects in different cities and Fresno has to be one of the top ones for maintenance. And I think that's a contribution to how we look at our city. One thing I'd like you to look at is these places are not islands. They're in communities. They're in neighborhoods where there are single family homes and homeowners. Have you ever thought about how the property values would be devaluated if maintenance failed in the housing authority properties? I'd like you to make that consideration. And I'm in favor of you keeping the maintenance workers going. And let us just be a city that takes care of our own, even during a crisis. Let's be a city where we can thrive instead of having to cut back, having to sacrifice and everything. I know it's kind of hard for budgets, and I know that the current administration is not helping us at all, but I think we can do better. Fresno has always survived. Fresno has always been able to figure out a way to make things work. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, any further public comments on the 11 a.m. item regarding the housing authority and maintenance workers? Council President, just to clarify. Yeah, well, seeing none, we're going to close public comment at this time. Council Member Carbasi, are you recognized?

I just appreciate the last speaker. Thank you so much for your comments. I do want to state, though, unfortunately, this decision does not lie with the City Council. If it did, every one of these workers would keep their job. This lies with the Housing Authority and their commissioners, half of whom are appointed by the City. Please reach out to them and make your voice heard and stand with the workers.

Thank you.

I'll make a motion to approve.

There's a motion and a second. I have a couple folks punched up. And Council, just to incentivize your brevity, we're gonna finish up this item. We're gonna do at least one short closed session item before I let you go for lunch. So yeah, I have Council Member Arias followed by Council Member Richardson.

I accept the brevity direction, Council President. I just wanna point out that the Housing Authority is required to adopt a balanced budget. BY LAW, BY EXPECTATION, BY AGENCY REQUIREMENTS. AND UNLIKE THE CITY, OUR CITY'S BUDGET IS BASED ON HOW MUCH PEOPLE SPEND IN THE CITY. SALES TAX. HOW MUCH THE PROPERTY VALUES ARE WORTH. EVERY TIME A HOUSE IS SOLD, WE GET A PORTION OF IT. AND THEN OF COURSE ALL THE FEDERAL AND STATE RESOURCES WE GET. THE HOUSING AUTHORITY DOESN'T GET SALES TAX OR PROPERTY TAX. IT'S ALL BASED ON WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ESSENTIALLY GIVES THEM. And we all know that the Trump administration has made cuts intentionally to housing and housing authorities. We also know that Congress passed a budget that even makes it worse. If this resolution was condemning President Trump and Congress for defunding housing authorities, you would have my support in a split second without any comments. What I worry about though is that as we require them to adopt a balanced budget, that we intervene and tell them how they should reach that bonds budget. As a council member, I don't know every single revenue that they have or every single expense that they have. That's the work and the responsibility of the commissioners themselves. And I worry that we would start a precedent where the County of Fresno, Clovis Unified, or Fresno Unified would come to us and say, we don't want you to make these cuts in your city. Instead, do this. It's a very thin line between our responsibilities. So I want to be very thoughtful about that. I recognize reductions means people's lives are impacted. But I also have to trust that those 14 people have studied the budget, looked at all the possible savings, that they're gonna hold the executive staff to that responsibility. But I'm not in a position today to intervene and to suggest that we're gonna condemn any types of adjustments to budgets that we have not studied. I have never seen the Housing Authority's budget. I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE CITY'S BUDGET. IF THIS ITEM WAS CALLING ON THE CITY TO INVEST CITY MONEY TO HELP THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AVOID CUTS, YOU WOULD HAVE MY SUPPORT. I DO THINK THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF Fresno HAVE A ROLE IN PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO HOUSING AUTHORITY, POTENTIALLY MAKING UP FOR SOME OF THE FEDERAL CUTS. But simply what we're asking in this resolution is to tell them this is a bad decision, which I understand it has an impact on people, but we're not providing them solutions. And I want to be thoughtful of that. So I'm going to, I think I have abstained one time in my seven and a half years from votes. But in this case, I'm gonna abstain because I don't want to tell somebody that they should not adopt a balanced budget as required by law without knowing what their budget is or without offering them help to close that budget gap. So I want you to understand the reason for it. If we could be helpful as a city, we too receive housing funds As the new projects and partnership to housing come forward, you have my commitment to look at whether we can provide additional funds in those agreements to provide some ability for the housing authority to maybe reduce the amount of cuts and operationally help its employees. But simply telling them not to do it blindly, I think I'm simply not comfortable with that approach. So again, I appreciate you guys' time. I KNOW IT'S HARD, AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WILL FIND A WAY TO REDUCE THE IMPACT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. BUT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE IS SITTING IN THAT WHITE HOUSE, AND THE CONGRESS RESPONSIBLE IS SITTING IN CONGRESS. AND THAT'S WHERE OUR FRUSTRATION SHOULD BE TARGETED. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER RICHARDSON.

FIRST OF ALL, 11 YEARS OF SOBRIETY IS NO JOKE. YEAH. All right, I got four questions. Keep them pretty quick. Of this 14-member commission, seven of them are appointed by the City of Fresno, as I imagine. Anybody who can answer these questions for me, please do. Are they selected by district? Mayor selects seven? Okay. And how long are their terms? Do we know? How often do they get reappointed? Four-year terms? Okay. Okay. This is the first time I've seen something like this come out from the Fresno Housing Authority or about that commission. And if they're not doing their jobs to ensure that we can continue providing the same thing, I would be interested in some of those folks. Instead of some of these folks being laid off, I'd be interested in some of them being laid off. I think that's probably okay with me. That's an unpaid position. Is that correct? It's just an appointed position?

I'm checking. I believe it's unpaid. There are some positions that have very modest stipends. I don't think this is one of them, but I'm checking right now.

Copy. Thank you. This is probably a question for one of you on the front. How is the ratio measured? How many maintainers do you need? Is it per unit? Is it per resident? Is it per year? Is there a minimum standard? What's that ratio? Tyrone, if you've got the answer, please. You in that bow tie, come right back up here.

Okay. The standard is approximately one per 50 units.

Okay.

Currently we have 36 maintenance workers. This reduction will take us down to 32. So this whole discussion is related to four positions as it relates to maintenance workers at Fresno Housing.

Cool. I'm not a math major. So 36 employees tells me ratio of 1 to 50, that's 1,800 units. How many units are there?

No, as far as maintenance workers.

How many units are there? How many units do you guys manage?

100. I'm sorry, total?

Yes.

Over approximately 6,000 units total.

Okay. So that 1 to 50 ratio, you've got 36 maintainers. That would be 1,800 units. So you've got, I don't know, over 10 times that number of units.

OK. So I've just been corrected. We have one per 100 units. And we manage, with our staff, approximately 2,500 units. OK.

So one per 100 units, that's only 3,600 still. That's just over half. OK. I'm hearing from the employees over there, 1 to 50 units, is that not easy work?

No, 1 to 100, I'm sorry.

Is that an easier one to 100? Okay. Got it. Now, with the delta in their money, how much money is actually missing? I know that they're looking to lay off staff because there's some sort of delta in the money. What we need to operate, what we actually have, what is that difference? The administration does a very good job every year with the budget saying, hey, this is exactly the difference down to the dollar of what we thought we needed and what we need. We're going to go back and do some work on it. What is that delta?

Consistently, what we have been challenged with is about a $2 million deficit on an annual basis. The total reduction that we're looking at provides us with approximately enough $2 million in costs Not only with the reductions in staff, but the other cost savings will, for the first time, really put us in a position to have a balanced budget without having to dip into reserves.

What's the salary of the four employees looking to be laid off?

Excuse me?

What's the salary of the four employees looking to be laid off?

I don't know exactly at this point. I can't speak to that.

Six employees? Yes.

Well, we've had an employee who is a maintenance worker who has gone on to find additional work. As was stated, and I didn't get a chance to complete my statement, but we are looking at ways in which to rehire any person who is being laid off for the next 12 months. So in addition to that, we've already hired or eliminated one position, as was stated today, that was scheduled for elimination. So we're looking at ways to Reduce the number of staff, including maintenance workers, whose positions will be posted for layoffs.

City Manager, in order to reduce our expenditures as a city, one of the budget procedures that we go through is maintained attrition. Roughly 6.25% of city employees. Are we laying people off to meet that number? Or is that just holding the vacant positions mostly and reducing of operating expenses?

Just holding vacancies.

We didn't lay anybody off to meet that?

No, not as a result of attrition.

Got it. If we could maybe write some letters or something and explain how that was done to the commission. I'm not looking at you. I'm looking at the commission. I know this wasn't your decision. This is the commission's decision. But if we could teach them how to do that, how to maintain saving money while not laying people off, that'd be fantastic. And the final thing I had is for the authors of this, I believe it was you two, District 1, District 2. Do we have any alternatives? We talked about alternatives, and I'll be frank with you. I think Eric Payne was the public commentator who, or public commenter who said we have to apply for more grants. Well, if the federal government and the state government are cutting the money they're giving, I don't think applying for more grants is going to be the band-aid that fixes this. Have we proposed any sort of alternatives for them to be able to save money?

So I can answer that question if I can ask a question, if you don't mind. Council President? I'm going to take the floor for a moment. I do have a question, Mr. Williams, just one question. If the president of the United States, Trump, gave us all the money we wanted in the world today, he can't manage the housing authority. Who has the power to give them back their jobs? Is it the commissioners? Is it you? Who is it? It's not this council, unfortunately, which is why we're here today. Who has the final authority to make that decision?

I do as the CEO.

Then I'm asking you, and I'm hoping your commissioners ask you, to save their jobs. That's how we solve the problem.

I like it. Could I, this doesn't have to be right now, but that's the end of my questions. If I could get a list of these seven commissioners who were appointed by the city of Fresno to this board, that'd be fantastic.

I've got them right here.

Okay. We don't need them out loud. I'm not trying to dox people, but I personally will take them and follow up on those things.

We'll shoot you an email.

Appreciate it.

All right.

Any further comment from the council? All right. We have a motion. We have a second. Did public comments. Is there any opposition to approving the 11 a.m. item? Yes, we can do a roll call vote. No? Okay. All right, any opposition to approving the 11 a.m. item? Do you want to wait for Council Member Norris? Paging. Oh, okay.

He did indicate he intended to abstain.

Okay, great. Okay, all right, any opposition? All right, so that passes 6-0. It is 12.30 now. Probably need 30 minutes on this closed session item we're going to do. Let's say we'll be back in this chamber at, for the benefit of the public, I'm going to say 2.30. We'll be back here at 2.30. Council, get your babysitters, cancel dinner. We're not going home. Telling you right now. Oh, city attorney, will you please read off the closed session agenda?

Do you want me to put...

Today in closed session, we have item 5A, Conference with Labor Negotiators, all units listed on the agenda. Item 5B, Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation, City of Fresno versus Ravinder Sethi. Item 5C, Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, One Potential Case. Item 5D, Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, One Potential Case. Item 5E, Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, One Potential Case. We may have reportable items after closed session.

do do Thank you. Thank you. So, you ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. . . . Thank you. . . . . . Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ you Thank you. so so Thank you. so so Thank you. do do so so Thank you. ¶¶ . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you you Thank you. ¶¶ . . you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . . Thank you. you you ... ... ... ... ... ... Thank you. . . you . . . . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you . . . . . . ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . . Thank you. you you you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. you you ¶¶ you Thank you. you you you Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ Amen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thanks for watching! Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ you do do Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I love you. Thank you. So, Thank you. Thank you.

All right we are back to 42 PM. We're going to move over at this point to one of the workshops that we have and that is the item for C workshop on the. Expiration of measure C potential impacts to local transportation and the city's workforce. This was sponsored by both councilmember Perea and councilmember Carbasi. If you want to give a quick intro or just go straight to the presentation, the workshop.

I'll just make a few points. Sure. Thank you mayor for agreeing to give this presentation. I think this one is timely. We still don't quite know yet if we will have a replacement measure on November's ballot, but I think it's good to start having these conversations about what exactly the impact will be and then what potential options have we currently vetted in order to determine what is the best option for moving forward. But Measure C was first approved a year before I was born in 1986. It's a half cent sales tax. It required a two-thirds voter approval threshold, which was passed both times. And as a result, today we have freeways 41, 168, 180. We've seen improvements to many interchanges. We've seen countless miles of roadways repaved, reconstructed throughout the county. And we have the public transportation system we have today because of Measure C. But after 40 years, this current measure is set to expire on June 30th of next year. And it's expiring because I believe it accomplished everything it set out, everything that it promised the voters it would accomplish. And it's expiring because Fresno COG decided that it would no longer pursue a third transportation measure. And so we are where we are today because of those reasons and many more, some would argue. But I just thought this was an important time for us to publicly have this discussion for the council to be able to talk amongst ourselves as far as what we felt the best next steps would be for our city of Fresno residents and to get any lingering questions that are out there answered. Council member, I don't know if you have any other words. Otherwise, I'm going to hand it over to the mayor.

Sure. I completely agree with my colleague. I think today, pretty soon, we have a monumental decision to make. It is a position none of us want to be in. It is something we inherited. And, you know, we have a lot of our city employees listening. These are people, Mayor, I know how hard you fight for them. They serve us every day. They make us look good. They're the only way we deliver services. But the reality is, if Measure C is not renewed, and it looks like because of bad politics it's not going to be renewed, there's going to be a cost. And before we make that decision, I'm hoping this workshop will help us realize the cost of doing nothing. And thank you to the council member for co-sponsoring this as well and getting it forward. Thank you.

Okay, you ready, Council President?

Yes, Mayor.

Okay. Well, thank you, Council, for allowing me to provide somewhat of an overview. Council Member Perea did a good job of kind of providing you the history, and I'll just catch up a little bit in the middle of that. But effective June 30th, 2027, Measure C, as we currently know, will expire in the County of Fresno. And as was stated, Measure C is something we have heavily relied upon over the years for not only building our roads out in terms of our freeways, but also fixing our neighborhood streets and enhancing our transportation ability within FACTS. And every year we put in about a million-plus dollars to our airports that is then used as a leverage point to maximize outside dollars at the state and federal level. So as was stated, that... that a replacement measure of C was working its way through the process with a steering committee that was put together. The steering committee was keeping the COG informed along the way, but it became very apparent at some point in time there was going to be a division within the COG and also within the steering committee. And fast forward, the COG decided at that time that we were not going to pursue a measure, the renewal of Measure C. Part of that had to do with some statements that were made by Board of Supervisors that they were not going to approve a Measure C renewal being placed on the November 2026 ballot, which proved to come to fruition. So again, fast forward, a citizen-led group went out WAS PRIVATELY FUNDED AND GAINED 32,000 SIGNATURES TO PUT A MEASURE ON CALLED BETTER ROADS SAFE STREETS. THAT MEASURE ULTIMATELY DURING THE RANDOM SAMPLING AND THE COUNT BY THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE WAS DELAYED BECAUSE OF SOME ERRORS, SOME REPEAT SIGNATURES. SO THEN THEY HAD TO GO BACK AND DO AN ITEMIZED COUNT ONE BY ONE. AND THEY DID THAT. They needed 22,000 signatures or thereabouts, and ultimately they got those 22,000 signatures. So it was in place before the Board of Supervisors to be approved, and three of the five Board of Supervisors voted not to put it on the, as is, November 2026 ballot, but to order a study that be done. Unfortunately, that study was a 30-day study, and before the study would come back... it would cause us to miss the deadline by one business day. So having said that, there's been repeated attempts to get the the Board of Supervisors to hold a special meeting. There was a group of folks today that met in Clovis, about 300, held a rally calling on the supervisors. There was also a request made by the COG last night for the Board of Supervisors to revisit this and have a special meeting. But it does not look like that is going to happen. But there are some last-minute efforts by the folks, the citizen group, to still try to get this on the ballot for November of 2026. So here's what it means to us. As it stands today for FY27, that would be Remember, it's going to be at the beginning of FY28, actually, but from that point forward, we would lose money annually. This year, it would have meant, if we didn't have it, a loss of $54 million to the city of Fresno. And those are real dollars. And it would increase every year based on sales tax increases. It would impact 217 employees hired by the city of Fresno, not to mention employees that are hired by private contractors that we outsource with along the way. Here is the impact by department. In the public works department, it would impact them negatively to the tune of $33 million a year. and 85 employees would be impacted. In the FACTS department, $19 million annually, which impacts 93 of the employees. In our capital projects department, $1.1 million, and it would impact 39 employees. Now, you can say 1.1 doesn't equal 39, but they receive pass-through dollars, generally from FACTS and other, not FACTS, but Public Works, And so it would impact them. And then the airport, $1.1 million. Here's the real loss. Of the $54 million, $20.6 million is utilized annually by our departments as a match to seek federal and state dollars. Those monies would no longer be available. On an average annual basis, with the airports, facts, and our public works departments, those monies have translated into $368 million, which would no longer be available to the city, primarily for capital projects. I want to just switch gears in terms of what that means to us. About four and a half years ago, our pavement condition index in the city of Fresno was at 60%. We have since utilized, with the support of this council, American Rescue Funds to do additional paving in our city. We've created a pothole elimination team. We've also used the $100 million bond towards Pave More Now, Pay Later, and we still have those funds available to us. And then we have new development that comes in that is supported by community facilities districts where they put in brand new roads. All of those are what helps us determine what the pavement condition index is. And proud to say, over the last four and a half, five years, our pavement condition index went from 60 to 64. And again, that's out of a scale of 1 to 100. And so we were at 64. And if we continued, we still have, as a result, about $1.2 billion of deferred maintenance on our streets. And we still have about $300 million left. of deferred maintenance on our sidewalks. But according to our public works department, that if we continued the pace we were spending with measure C dollars, our PCI within the next few years would increase to over 70, which is remarkable. That means over a 10-year period to go from 60 to 70, if not less time. But if we do not have a substitute funding source for Measure C, and we lose it, as I said, to $54 million. Here's the impact. Not only would our deferred maintenance costs rise above the $1.2 million and the $300 million, our PCI, or Pavement Condition Index, would begin to decrease on an annual basis 3% to 5%. So it would only take us about two years to lose what we would have made up in about 8% to 10%. And so very mindful of that in our neighborhood streets. The impact on our bus service is that we obviously look at what we added last with Measure C dollars. And those would be the ones that we remove first. And that would be our night service on weekends. And so what that means is routes would now end around 8 PM. during the week as well as on weekends, and so people that need to get to someplace after 8 p.m. would have to find an alternative transportation source. Wait times would also increase, and many of our routes today, they're at 30 minutes, Those wait times would increase in some cases by 45 minutes or to 45 minutes, and in some cases to an hour in between pickups at transit stops, depending on which routes we're talking about. So with 70, almost 70% of our general fund makes up our public safety, our police and fire. So there really isn't a way to make that up because our other enterprise dollars have to stay within their individual enterprise departments, whether that's Department of Public Utilities or airports. So the only avenue we would have is another revenue source or to impact our general fund, which would ultimately impact public safety. And so those are the impacts. And I'm open to answer any questions that you might have. I know that we have an item coming up that Council Member Esparza and I co-sponsored. And I can... Answer questions now or I can wait till the item gets brought up.

So I think the sponsors had one more presenter and then we can go on to our Q&A.

Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

I also wanted to hear from Alfredo Molina with ATU. Just wanted to get kind of a deeper dive into the impacts to the fax system and to your employees. Alfredo, thank you.

Afternoon, Council. So I rise today in support of this measure here. And, you know, I wanted to bring to the attention of everybody, you know, that as things are kind of working through at the county level, you know, I hope that, you know, we see that there's a lot more impacts that are going to happen here at the city level. And I appreciate the city leaders that brought this forward to try and find solutions, right, as we as we work our way through this. And I think it's important to take away that at the city level that we operate in at this moment, without this funding, it's not just about our members. Our members being able to have stable jobs, have stable funding, it's great. But I appreciate that there's going to be citizen oversight at this. I read that part of the document. And I think that our members being able to get up early in the morning and get people to work, our members being able to take the children home in the afternoon, and our members being able to take the senior citizens back home after they've had their doctor's appointments in the evening. It's a lot of jobs that are going to be lost outside of fax and transportation. And I appreciate the fact that you all are taking the time to have the discussion. uh, here today. And, uh, you know, I just wanted to make sure that, that I rose in support of this and I hope that, you know, we're able to move this to the voters, uh, here in November as we don't know what's going to happen, uh, at the county side. So, uh, thank you all.

Thank you, Alfredo. Um, council president, I know we have one potential solution that we're going to be hearing more about later this afternoon, but, And anyone can answer this question. I just want to know what other solutions have been vetted to possibly serve as a Measure C replacement at this point.

Is that directed towards us? Okay, I think as far as a replacement, there is no replacement. I mean, it is a loss of revenue. I think what we've talked about internally is whether or not we could find a way to hold on until 2028. And if we could find a way to minimize layoffs and reductions in service. And so, We haven't spent, it took us a little while to try and figure out what the consequences of the $54 million loss and then obviously the leverage of that money as well. So I can't think of another replacement. I mean, it's taking a huge source of revenue away and to make up $54 million is, I would be at a loss. I don't have a plan B for making up that revenue. And Mayor, I don't know if you have any other ideas on that.

Well, and all of them being painful. And the ones we've talked about is certainly on our streets is stretching out our pay more now dollars for a longer period of time. As the city manager said, up until 2018. And even if the measure is passed in 28, there's a period of time that it takes for that money to come in, approved by the state. So it's not an instant. There's still about a six-month, at least seven-month gap there. So we have looked at stretching those projects out, delaying our counseling projects, stretching out our Measure C. But what it would mean is, for example, the project we just um, broke ground on in, uh, Martin Luther King, uh, that would probably be our last, um, paving project for a period of time. And, um, so that, that would be the impact there on the, on the backside, we've talked internally about, is there, is there money that we generally would utilize as a leverage for, uh, for federal dollars to come in, and those are state dollars. Would we use those to try to offset some of the impact to our employees? We could, but then we would lose significant dollars, millions and millions upon dollars on our leveraging. So there is no easy answer, and I don't have a plan B either. Those are kind of Band-Aid approaches until 28.

And what we're talking about here is a temporary solution with the hopes that we would either see this measure on this November's ballot or in 2028.

Yes, this is a stop gap to having to lay employees off. It is a stop gap that will allow us to continue with our momentum and paving streets, fixing neighborhoods. And again, this measure, I know we haven't gotten into it yet, but it is a measure that would sunset, um, It would sunset if a county transportation tax did pass in Fresno County, or it would sunset in 10 years. And I know we'll get into that. So this is a stopgap measure. And the one thing we did not want to do is I didn't want to hurt the efforts of the Better Roads, Safe Streets folks in order to draw opposition publicly. And what we definitely don't want to do is have two ballot measures on the same thing on the November ballot, because I think that would hurt our efforts to get one or both of them passed. And so I can talk about that here in a little bit, too, in terms of what I think a solution might be.

And if I also may add, you know, having been through, you know, part of the administration during the recession when we had to do layoffs, man, I don't ever want to go through that again. And it's not just the direct departments because of seniority. So while it may be the public works department that may be facing a cut, it doesn't necessarily mean that the public works employee is going to be the employee going out the door because of bumping. And so, you know, we would have to go through that exercise of figuring out which employees, because Public Works has, you know, laborers and other employees that are also citywide employees. And so it could affect that. frankly, every department in the city who has the same types of job classes. So that is so disruptive to the organization to have somebody who has, you know, maybe worked in the public works department for 15 years, you know, working in the streets division, getting bumped into code enforcement or to DPU or to a different department. It becomes very disruptive to the organization as well. I can tell you that during the recession it was extremely disruptive and productivity, there was a lull in productivity because you're taking people out of an environment that they've been used to working and putting them in a brand new environment and there's a little bit of a learning period. You know, I really hope sincerely, also for the sake of our employees, this is a horrible conversation to have to have because I know that there's stress within the organization of the employee saying, gosh, what does that mean for me? Am I going to lose my job? And, you know, we don't want to put that type of fear in our employees. But, you know, the reality is the reality. So obviously hoping that we can do something with the stop gap. But just a reminder, the entire organization likely will be affected if we have to do layoffs because of bumping and seniority.

So if it does expire on June 30th, how much longer after that would we have to spend down any less to measure C dollars?

Well, I think it's going to depend a little bit, but I don't think we would wait until June 30th to start making decisions and starting to delay projects and start with attrition. We would have to start that in December, January. And the reason is otherwise we're going to find ourselves in a position July 1st of 27 where we are having to lay off more people. and stop all sidewalk repair and perhaps street paving. So we would want to plan. If we're not able to get it on the ballot, then we'd want to start impacting that today.

Mayor, I think you alluded to it earlier, but is it a possibility to bring all of our Pave Now work in-house?

It is. It is a possibility to not outsource things And to do them in-house, obviously, it's going to take us longer to perform. I have every bit of confidence in our employees that they are able to do that. And that was one of the things. Would that allow us to stretch out our money? It would have an impact in terms of decreasing the number of projects that we were able to do in, say, the next two years.

And I guess I'm just trying to... figure out if there is a creative way, if we're just calling this a stop gap. What I'm hearing is this is just a temporary, we're attempting to identify a temporary solution with the assumption that measure C at some point will be renewed. So if we were to bring Paid Now in-house, that would be about two to three years of work for our in-house employees. for public works and capital projects?

I don't know.

I don't think it would be two to three years. No, not even.

Because we've done so much in the last year. I think it would stretch it maybe 18 months.

Yeah, I think that's probably closer. I'm looking at Brian Russell. Brian said about 18 months. Maybe 18 months.

And I guess I'm just trying to think of other solutions to where we're not just kind of putting the stopgap on the backs of our taxpayers.

Yeah, and here's the other thing. This Better Road, Safe Streets will go before the voters in November of 28 as it stands today. If there's no last minute special meeting. So it would pass in November of 28. And then there's probably going to be a six to eight month delay in terms of getting money back. And so, or starting to generate sales tax revenue for that. And so if... the Better Road Safe Streets doesn't pass, it's not a stopgap. It's a 10-year solution.

Understood. Okay, those are all my questions for now, Mayor. Thank you.

We'll have the other sponsor and then Council Member Richardson.

Yeah, Mayor, I'll try and be really brief. So, just to be clear, until further notice, Measure C, the renewal, will not be on this ballot, regrettably.

Unfortunately as it stands today, it will not stands today a measure measure C renewal will definitely not be on but the better road safe Street Still has a chance right that measure but as of now, there's no news that unfortunately that we will make the ballot Yes, that's correct.

Okay, so we have to plan obviously for that for what happens And just for the record this entire City Council unanimously voted to support a That measure, correct?

That's correct.

Okay. That's really important. Because I know there's some concern that if we do this, it will take away our interest in renewing Measure C. And I'm very sensitive to that because I think renewing Measure C, we've seen how it's been a critical resource for 40 years. Do you have any thoughts on that?

I do because our measure that is being put forth, as you know, has a sunset, and that sunset is if, in fact, a county transportation measure passes, whether that is a Measure C renewal or the substitute measure with Better Road Safe Streets, then our measure would, again, sunset. So we're not going to double tax the people of Fresno. We're going to not increase taxes. Whatever they pay today, they will pay after our measure passes. And if there's another measure that passes, that will still pay what they pay today.

That leads me to my next question. The current sales tax rate in the city of Fresno is 8.35%. What will the sales tax rate be if this measure is passed and the voters approve it?

8.35%.

So no net change?

No net change, up or down. Okay.

So how long have we depended on Measure C as a... standard funding source for this city. It's been about 40 years, Mayor?

Since 1986 was the initial passage. That was a 20-year measure. It was again renewed in 2026. That was another 20-year measure. So 40 years.

And when I say measure C, I'm using the term interchangeably for measure C and the measure we were hoping would qualify for the ballot. Okay. So forgive me for that. when you announced you were working on the budget for this fiscal year that we had passed um you had said that at one point there was you were starting with a 34 and a half million dollar deficit yes i know there are some saying well you know we can belt titan and you know we've been there before here's my concern theoretically if measure c wasn't there you wouldn't have had a 34 and a half million dollar deficit it would have been what 88 and a half million dollars so How on earth could we keep the eviction protection program, not cut jobs, not cut open hours for parks? I know there's measure P or staffing for police and fire dispatchers. How in your experience, having passed seven budgets so far, how can we make it work without making cuts? Is there any way to make it work without making cuts?

No, no. I, I, there's two things. Cutting people, cutting services.

And oftentimes cutting people leads to cutting services, too.

Exactly. Okay. So those are the two options we have, or bring in a substitute revenue. Okay.

My last question, you did cover this, I think, before. How many transit workers are potentially at risk?

There would be 93 transit workers that are impacted, that are paid for today by Measure C.

And potentially, if some of them aren't working, potentially buses aren't running or running as much on time, and the workers, the working families that depend on these buses and the seniors to get to medical appointments will not have access.

That's correct. They would have access, but there would be an impact in terms of wait time, and they would only have access to a certain hour during the evening.

The reason why I'm harping on this, it's a tough decision. Look, I've been told, Mike, you can't vote for this. You're running for office. Your opponent's going to watch. They want to use this against you. But here's the thing because of failed politics, whatever we want to call it, measure C or the measure is not getting renewed. That is extremely unfortunate. I do not want the residents of the city to suffer like the residents of the West side are about to suffer. So it's, I know we're going to talk about this item more, but I do want to focus on the fact that we will potentially have dozens or more city employees that are, that will be, will be let go or laid off. But the service impacts that are made are also very significant.

Yes.

And it's a tough situation that we inherited, but I don't know how much of a tough call it is to find a way to be proactive about this and just wait till everything's done and say, okay, well now we're gonna do something before it's too late. I think it's an interesting irony that we're faced with the decision of putting this on the ballot, letting the voters decide when that's kind of how we got here in the first place. But hopefully when we talk about this item, my colleagues will do that. But if this doesn't get on the ballot, if it doesn't pass, I'm looking for co-sponsors. I'm going to bring an item forward to change the official ice cream flavor of the city to Rocky Road because that is what's going to happen if it doesn't pass. So those are all my questions. And thank you, Mayor.

Thank you. Council Member Richardson, followed by Council Member Arias.

I just want to take a second and acknowledge the ice cream joke first. Okay. The original sponsor, the first sponsor on this item is yourself, Council President.

That's not correct. We're on the workshop 4B, but we will move into the actionable item. So this is not the actionable item yet?

No, just a workshop. All right.

You can ask questions. Do you want to yield your time? I mean, look, it's all the same questions. Just ask me. It is.

I mean, it's up to the Council President. I can answer them now or I can answer them when the item is presented.

Council President, can we avoid going to jail on the Brown Act and just get to the workshop questions?

To what now?

Well, I don't think it would be a Brown Act. Well, whatever.

All right.

You know what?

We're going to get to I.I. later on. I'll hold my comment for that. Okay. Mayor, safe for now. Okay.

Councilor Vargas? Thank you, I just don't want to go to Lisa Smith Camp Jail for having discussions at the right time. Mayor, first I want to thank you genuinely. You, like I, went to the Board of Supervisors meeting to present the signed petitions and ask them to move forward the item for approval as they're required to do by law. And you stood there to answer all their questions, as did the proponents. And I've never seen elected officials be so dismissive and limit the time and control the environment so much that they didn't allow for an actual presentation that was based on facts. I heard a lot of name calling. assaults, you know, the usual rhetoric that you would expect in a talk radio show, not in a government policy making body. And it reminded me of a quote that basically states that it takes years of hard work by smart people to build something that any idiot can destroy in minutes. And that's what we saw. We saw a multi-billion dollar conversation, limited to 20 minutes, as if it was just routine in nature. And I wanna point out a couple of facts that they failed to acknowledge in that conversation. First, they repeatedly indicated that the county was not at the table, which is a blatant lie. The county chose to remove themselves from the table, and work with other mayors in the county to come up with a proposal. They chose to leave the table. They also indicated that they needed time to study it. The fact is that the petition was submitted on January 26th of 2026, and by the time they considered it on July 14th of 2026, they had 169 days to ask for a study. They chose not to. the remarks and the questions that were being referred or referenced by the supervisors, clearly they had read an old document, which reinforces the fact that they never bothered to actually read the initiative. They came in prepared to engage in a political win, diminish people, name-call folks, act like they were worried about, you know, things that ARE SIMPLY NOT TRUE. THEY REFERENCE THAT WE'RE FORCING PEOPLE FROM THEIR CARS TO THEIR BIKES. SIMPLY NOT TRUE. I THINK ALL OF US WERE CALLED ENVIRONMENTALIST WACKLES AT SOME POINT. ULTIMATELY WHAT OCCURRED IN THE PROCESS, BECAUSE I WAS IN THE ROOM, AS WERE YOU, MAYOR, AND I THINK MEMBER MAXWELL, WAS THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS CAME IN AND TOLD US, UNLESS YOU CUT HALF OF THE PUBLIC TRANSIT FUNDS IN THIS MEASURE, WE WILL NOT APPROVE IT. THEY SAID ON THE RECORD AT THE COG MEETINGS, AT THEIR MEETINGS THAT THE PROPOSAL WAS BETTER THAN ARRIVAL. MONTHS BEFORE THEY EVEN READ THE PROPOSAL. WE EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT OUR COMMUNITY RELIES ON PUBLIC TRANSIT. IT TRANSPORTS PEOPLE TO AMAZONS, TO FOSTER FARMS, TO CLINICS, APPOINTMENTS, TO SCHOOLS. THEY JUST SIMPLY DIDN'T CARE. THEY WANTED US TO GET PUBLIC TRANSIT FOR MORE FREEWAYS. IN EXCHANGE, THEY GOT ZERO DOLLARS FOR FREEWAYS BECAUSE THERE'S NO MEASURE. THEY CLAIMED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO THEIR OWN MEASURE. HAD A FANCY PRESS CONFERENCE WITH THE CLOBIS. council member about their own fix the roads measure, and they failed to do the work. Again, it takes smart people, dedicated, working after hours on weekends, reaching compromise. The easy part is tearing it down. I know that a concern for a lot of us have been, as a city, the fact is we're a contributing city in Measure C. we contribute more taxes to Measure C than we give back. But we've done that for 40 years, knowing that my parents live in Mendota, many people's parents live in small towns, and they too have to be able to travel to a big city. So we don't mind subsidizing and contributing to small communities to connect them to the city, but what we did mind was building more freeways, that's a state responsibility, and interchanges, that's a federal responsibility. We wanted to keep the money local, fixing residential streets. So I'm hopeful now that a couple things have occurred. Member Chavez, the supervisor, recently published an op-ed asking for them to conduct a special meeting and to reconsider placing this item on the ballot. I think whether they have 30 days or 29 days, They've made it clear that they don't intend to vote for the proposal, which they have a right to oppose the proposal. They just don't have a right to suppress democracy and not put it before the voters, both morally and legally. The mayors, as I was in the Cog meeting this week, also called for the same thing. They called for county supervisors to allow the ballot initiative to go forward this election cycle because the devastation to those cities is humongous. You heard the mayor state that it's hundreds of millions of dollars that the city of Fresno would lose. It's not just a tax measure. It's a state and federal dollars that require a local match. hundreds of millions of dollars that if we don't have, guess where we have to take it from? The police budget, the fire budget, the parks budget, or we have to raise taxes for everyone. because at the end of the day, we have to come up with providing essential services. And without a tax measure for roads, the other only option that's viable is to take it from the general fund, which would lead us to essentially gutting police and fire services in order to fix road conditions. So I'm hopeful that we could proceed. I'm also hopeful that IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY, MAYOR, THAT WE HOLD ITS SUBMISSION TO THE COUNTY CLERK UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE SO WE GET THE SUPERVISORS TO DO THE RIGHT THING. NOT THAT I'M HOPING FOR A CHANGE OF HEARTS. I'M HOPING FOR THEM TO HAVE A REALIZATION THAT THEIR DECISION WOULD DEVASTATE EVERY SINGLE COMMUNITY IN THE COUNTY OF Fresno. AND I LIKE THE SMALL COMMUNITIES. They have not had a chance because they don't have a significant staff like we do in the capacity to quickly put a measure on the ballot. No other city has had the time to try and create a stopgap measure like we have. So those cities, irrespective of what happens, are going to be devastated. And so that's my request, Mayor, is that if we proceed with giving you the authority to pursue a tax measure as a stopgap, that we do so, but not immediately. That we give the supervisors and Member Chavez and the Board of Supervisors to convince his colleagues that a special meeting is warranted so we can all avoid it. The measure itself I'll get to when we get to that item, but I just want to again thank you, Mayor, for crossing political and partisan lines, crossing lines with the suburbs and the rural communities. The coalition is amazing. A suburb of Clovis, urban of Fresno, and rural communities, 80% of the communities in Fresno County said, we want this measure. and three individuals chose to suppress democracy because they wanted to have a political win and then disappear when the ramifications of their decisions have now become more public. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PRESNO, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ACROSS THE COUNTY THAT WILL NOT BE DRAWN DOWN OF FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDS, AND MASSIVE LAYOFFS. AT ONE POINT, ONE OF THE SUPERVISORS SAID WE ONLY HAVE 23 EMPLOYEES FUNDED BY MEASURE C. AGAIN, NO CONCEPT THAT WHEN YOU FUND PUBLIC WORKS, PUBLIC WORKS FUNDS HR. It funds general services, it funds risk management, it funds your employees department, and no clue that that includes the matching funds that they get for state and federal funds. And now cities have to stop the adoption of their master plans, disqualifying them from state and federal dollars for transit and roads, because it was based on the assumption that measure C would be on the ballot.

regional transportation plan.

Absolutely. So again, thank you. I was hopeful that one, at least that the supervisors would be here to explain themselves or even that the councilwoman from Clovis would be here to answer to that because for the record, those three supervisors all represent the city of Fresno. All three of them. represent the city of Fresno, and they won't be around to explain to people why the city can only fix one side of the road that's in the city and will not touch the other side of the road that's in the county. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Tyler.

Okay, anybody else on the dais want to provide a comment before we go out to the public? Anybody else on the desk? Okay, seeing nobody, we'll move on to the actual item itself. I'm being told we need to take public comment. Okay, we'll combine it on the next item.

Okay.

All right, this item is being sponsored by Council Member, Council President Esparza, Council Member... Carbasi and Mayor Dyer. I see Council President walking in, so I'll give him the floor as soon as he's had a moment to sit down and collect himself.

All right. We are on to item 2ii. And before we dive right in, we'll go ahead and take public comment. I know people have been waiting for a while to provide input. And we had some of the conversation already through the workshop. So at this point, we'll go ahead and take the public comments. I do have some cards that were submitted already. And the first card that I did have was for Sanfranc.

Welcome. Hi, Council President. The first time I've actually written my comments down on a piece of paper. That's how important this is to me. 30 years. Good afternoon, Council President, Vice President, and members of the City Council. I'm here for two reasons. The first is that I was robbed of my right as an American citizen to vote for a Measure C replacement measure. a measure that my signature and over 20,000 other voters' signatures legally placed on the ballot for this November. I was robbed by three county supervisors who said to hell with my right to vote and who gamed the system to delay my vote for almost two years. Why does this make me so angry? On August 12, 1982, I raised my right hand and swore an oath to defend the Constitution with my life and became an American soldier. I did this out of a deeply held conviction that my right to vote a right won by the blood and honor of hundreds of thousands of other American citizens needed to be defended so that nobody on this planet would ever take it away. This right maintained a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Measure C embodied that right because for decades the citizens of Fresno benefited from their vote with improvements to the critical infrastructure and transportation necessary for their quality of life in a large and growing city. My second reason is that I represent over a thousand city workers whose jobs rely on a budget that is already constrained to the max. Their jobs are funded by the citizens of Fresno to provide services that they need on a daily basis, services that impact their ability to work, live, and recreate with their family right here. Measure C money and the millions of dollars has been a significant part of these workers' ability to do the work the voting public expects to be done. This is job one. We cannot cut any further into these essential services. In code enforcement alone, 33% of our community revitalization positions are being intentionally held vacant to balance this budget. Are you willing to allow this to get even worse by denying the public the right to vote on this half cent replacement tax, which will only backfill the loss of Measure C dollars? That would not be good governance under these circumstances. It only exists that Measure C tax or its replacement of the county Um, it only exists if measure C or tax or its place in the county does not exist. There is good governance in the citizen oversight committee, which will view audits of the spending. There's good governance and letting the voters decide this not special in his groups and certainly not self-serving politicians. There will be a three months to study this and report about it before the elections. The people are never wrong. Let us vote.

Thank you, Sam. Next card I have is for Jagmeet Singh.

Hello again, council members. Yeah, I was actually there with Mayor Dyer the day that we turned in the signatures for the Better Roads, Safer Streets initiative. And just, you know, not getting the time to really be able to read through the measure that is being proposed here today. I have just a, you know, fair amount of concerns, especially with the prescriptiveness of the funds. The reason why I support the Better Road Saver Street initiative is all of the percentage of the funds are allocated very specifically within the measure itself. And reading through this measure in the, you know, chance that I've gotten to, it's not very prescriptive. And so that is my main issue with this. I do support a stopgap in order to retain some of these public services and keep our streets improving our streets. But I would just ask the council members to add maybe some amendments to maybe even prescribe these funds in the same way that the Better Roads, Safer Streets initiative asked for. Those specific allocations of funding are in there for a reason. We need these streets to be fixed. We need safer routes to school for our children. We've had so many deaths of young people kids going to school, walking to school and getting hit by cars. There's so many unfinished sidewalks and it's just so dangerous for kids to go to school. And so I would just ask that the funds be allocated in the same percentages that the Better Roads, Safer Streets initiative outlines. And that would be my main issue with the measure.

Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to go over to Zoom. I have Lisa Flores punched up.

Good afternoon. I hope everybody's lunch was really good. Got a couple of things on this whole Measure C thing. Before you put it on the ballot, you guys really need to go, for the sake of transparency, out to the community and ask them what they want to see in the minutia of the bill. And has anybody ever looked at rescinding What is it? Measure Z and getting those dollars that you're giving away to a nonprofit at the zoo back to fill our potholes. That's something to think about because, you know, funding the zoo benefits the county as well. Well, you know, if they're going to be playing a game of chicken, ratchet up because that's what this really is. It is a game of chicken at the moment. It's a game of chicken with dumb and dumber. You know, it is just silliness all the way around. Why your budget couldn't be planned with anticipating this. You just passed the budget last month, and you did not anticipate, you know, dumb and dumber pulling this and getting people ready for a potential layoff. Now, I don't like laying off employees, and I really don't like potholes. I hate potholes. And I would hate to see code enforcement get lessened, but you guys are in a game of chicken, and you need to be very transparent. And if it doesn't make the November ballot, okay, fine. How much would it cost you to go out for elections? an election or whatever in the spring to do this and do it right and do it right the first time. Because I can see you guys having problems further down the road with your current measure that you're thinking about. I thank you for this opportunity. Just come before you and speak. Thank you.

Next speaker is going to be Brandi Nusviegas.

I'm sorry about that. Again, I appreciate the presentation that was done before as knowing the full scope of the impact of this gap is know we knew it was bad but it's very sobering um and i appreciate um those who are being impacted speaking up on that and um hope that there will be uh some uh change so that it is on the valid um but regarding this one um i just want to reiterate um some of the concerns with that were brought up by um regarding prescriptiveness uh we have a lot of need and so much community input that went into exactly what was going to go for better roads safer streets uh and glancing over here and i feel like again because we have so little time to look into this to ask questions to do different things that there is a concern about how this would be uh implemented and and ensure uh on the front end, especially to strengthen any sort of oversight commission, what these fundings will be used for. Because the concern is that the funding would go to the needs that we have, the needs that we're on better. And I agree with the idea of it aligning having language that aligns it with better roads safer streets to ensure that the needs that are meant are making that stop and the money is only going towards the the needs as well as what the community through a lot of community participation had put into what became safer roads uh better roads safer streets we need to ensure that you know what we are supporting is is what is what is needed as far as public transportation as far as roads i saw when i had my car in a shop how the needs that regarding public transportation just re-emphasized and without going into those things we need to ensure that Anything that we do is making sure that the needs that the people had asked for had met and that the funding is not used, potentially used for things outside of what was supposed to be allocated for Better Road Saver Street and meeting those and covering the gaps that would be caused as far as roads being used. and transportation of things. So as for more consideration on those of what my previous commenter said regarding this issue. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Nikki real.

I Let me see. I really didn't want to, I didn't care so much to address this because I think enough people had said, but it's kind of not really funny that we just passed a budget last month and this was not, of course, this wasn't anticipated. I guess you guys thought you had it in the bag, but that ended up happening at the Board of Supervisors meeting. So this is what happens in when you're not like finding appropriately. And so we're back over here and this is not, um, like the city of Fresno residents. It's not a problem we create. I think it's more of a problem that you guys are responsible for and you guys should have anticipated. And, um, maybe the language and how it's written because we don't need the rest of our city funds being pillaged. That's it.

All right. Next speaker on Zoom is going to be Robert McCloskey.

Yes, thank you. I'm not sure What we're discussing is specific to Major C. Are you talking about the city's proposal to increase the sales tax at this point?

Is that part of this? That is correct, yes. That's the subject. Oh, okay.

So my only comment would be that, sure, Bradfield, Mendez, and Magzig are deplorable representatives at the board, but What we're doing here is we're making city taxpayers pay the price when there should be more of a political effort to hold these guys accountable. Now, I know it's controversial. You guys have did your part in trying to get Major C on the ballot. You know, but I think that we should. One issue with putting on a ballot November, of course, is. is low voter turnout in these midterm elections. There's rarely, it runs around 40% in California, and I think in the city it's even lower. City council races aren't, you know, not a lot of voters show up for these local races as well. So my concern is that, yes, we need to have a stopgap measure to ensure that our roads are safe. but are there guarantees in there that the monies that are going to be allocated from the sales tax will be done with the better roads safer roads initiative in terms of what that mandate was because there were numerous numerous uh meetings around the county which you know transportation for all which i was a part of many of us participated in those meetings And those that are in the rural areas are going to take the hit because there is no alternative for them. So I don't know. I don't have a real solution, but I see the need for stopgap measure, but I don't know if it's like failing to hold the people that did this accountable is a big issue. Again, for those reasons, perhaps we could take some time to reconsider, at least until the next council meeting, whether to put this on the ballot and look at ways. We don't know yet if any effort is being made on the part of the public and other politicians to force the Board of Supervisors to have a special meeting on this issue. They should be the ones who are responsible for this. Not just the taxpayers of the city of Fresno, which You know, leaves them holding the bag for unconscionable, you know, actions by this decrepit corrupt board of supervisors that have no sense at all when it comes to this kind of thing. They have done one of the dumbest things in the world.

Thank you, Robert. Is there any additional public comments either in the chamber or on Zoom with respect to the workshop, with respect to the sales tax ballot measure item that we're considering? Are any of those cards for the items? Jonas Paulos? Jonas?

I'm a little bit nervous because I'm losing my vision and my eye, my only eye. I just want to say I'm a bus rider, 41 years. The last 20, I depend on the bus because I don't drive. And I just couldn't believe what the county did. They really spit on my work. I rescue veterans. They're staying alive because they're riding the bus to go to their treatment. That's how crucial this is, this life and death situation. Even for me in the heat, I'm getting sick. That's why you guys don't see me here very much. And I just want to say thank you to the mayor and everybody in the steering committee, all the hard work. I followed it. So I'm a supporter of it. I don't want to see no veteran die anymore under my watch because they can't catch the bus because of somebody's negligence or selfishness. These people go through a lot. Thank you, Council Member Richardson, for serving. I don't know how that is, but I tell you, my heart goes out to any veteran that served this nation. The best we can do is be there for them. So I'm in support of this measure and hopefully it passes so nothing gets disrupted. Thank you.

Thank you. Next card I have is Nadeep Singh.

Good afternoon, city council members. After especially listening to Sam, the last resident, I'm absolutely in support in terms of whatever stopgap needs to be done in terms of this particular funding. I do ask you to make sure to include certain forms of guardrails that have already been brought up. We have seen council members attempt to use and abuse Measure P money in the past. We want to make sure that this money is going to exactly where it needs to go and who it needs to go to. I do ask the council members to really ask themselves and reflect with integrity. Yes, the board passed a resolution, but did you yourself actually champion this? Or did you work actively behind the scenes to discourage it? And for my residents of Fresno, I think there is a conversation for us to have to make sure that all elected officials They should fear the voters. We should not have electeds that, in some ways, do not fear voters at all. And I think there's a conversation for us to all be having about recalling Gary Bredefield.

Thank you. So any additional speakers with respect to the sales tax ballot measure proposal, either on Zoom or in person? Come on down.

Hi Council, my name is Joseph Rodriguez and back again. Just one thing I'm not going to take all the three minutes. I just I kept reading this over and over again and it's saying the use of tax revenue to be reviewed and reported. on by citizens and for me those words stuck out because it's like reviewed and reported but who gets to make the decision of where these funds go like officially is it the council is it the city manager like who's gonna oh we got the money let's do this with it is it the people like who's going to get to decide oh we passed it cool we passed it oh we have the money oh great where'd it go I just want it to be a thing where we have the ability to review and report who's deciding. That's what I was just hoping to have more clear in terms of making amendments to it. It seems like it would help a lot of people, and I just want to make sure it actually does help a lot of people and it's not just promised and reported on. Thank you.

I don't have any more cards or see anyone else on Zoom. Any additional public comment on this item?

Hello again. My name is Diego Rivera, longtime resident, lifetime resident of Fresno. Basically, I've... I've ridden public transportation throughout my 41 years here in Fresno. I just say hearing a lot of this stuff is very interesting to me because it shows how policies created actually create crime. When you start to restrict people, I see people getting stuck. You said the west side of Fresno, different places, and they're not able to commute and use this transportation. I've also heard city council members saying, well, where do we pull the money from? Does it come from the police budget? Where does the money go? As my fellow resident has mentioned, where does the money go? Because we've done this and we've tracked it before. We've used Fresno Land's journalism, independent journalism. We've tracked and traced the money, and the money's there. It gets granted. It comes in, and then it's gone. It is gone. And we see how the police department, Fresno Police Department, has the highest budget every year, the fiscal budget every year. All these different toys and everything that you guys are allowed to equip yourself with, that goes into punishment and not prevention. So these policies are being made to create crime and then also implement consequences. And so it's very interesting. Also, I want to say these resources were not created by you guys. Nobody creates these resources. They were not given to us. They have been taken from us. You guys do not create water. You guys do not create apples and oranges. And I just want to say every move that is made that you guys make is on our tax dollar right now in your guys' roles and positions. And like I said, it's very interesting how other cities can model very creative and very intelligently. Like I said, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how we can figure these things out. I've seen cities here in California that actually activate their buses at night for housing. And starting at 11 p.m., homeless people are allowed to ride the bus here in California after 11 p.m. And that might be in Silicon Valley or somewhere in the Bay Area, but I watched a movie. I go to Fresno State. My professor showed us this movie on homelessness and all these other ways that we can articulate creatively, creatively come to conclusions when you actually put your heart into it. Because oppression is full circle. This inch that people think that they have this privilege hindering hate and oppression is hindrance. So it comes around full circle. Mathematics is created by the universe. We derive mathematics from the universe. So 360 degrees is mathematically it comes back. Karmic energy comes back. So suppression will return. Oppression will return.

Thank you. Thanks, Speaker.

Good afternoon, Council. Arianna Martinez-Lott again. I was actually one of the big supporters of the Better Roads, Safe Streets initiative. Actually, my kids and I would go and knock on our neighbors' doors and gather signatures for it. And we attended a lot of the meetings following the leadership of so many champions that helped ensure that this measure was the greatest representation of the needs of our communities. And so ultimately, that's why I stand here today, thanking you all for trying to fill this gap, but also recognizing that one of the biggest lessons that I learned while working at Councilmember Arias's office is that the devil is always in the details. So ultimately, we are asking voters to pass a tax that we have no guarantee that it's actually going to go towards protecting the investment in fixing our roads and our sidewalks. And for the last 15 years, I have been working with other moms across South Fresno that one of their biggest issues was their kids not being able to walk to school safely. So we want to see these tax dollars continue, but we want to make sure that they are going to the right place where we need it the most. And so essentially what's in the proposal is that this tax is a general tax whose proceeds shall be deposited into the city's general fund and expended for any lawful purposes under the city. Which we could very much see a situation like we do right now. where this tax dollar gets distributed amongst the entire general fund and continues to deteriorate our roads and streets much like we see right now. So we ask you all to put provisions in this ballot that is going to specify how we are going to use these dollars and for what purposes. Thank you.

Any additional public comments? Come on down.

My name's Krista. And I would like to say that if there's an issue with filling the gap, you can easily fill it by canceling the flock contracts in Fresno. Thank you.

Any additional public comment? On Zoom or in person? Don't be shy.

Good afternoon, my name is Terri Houshall. I stand before you today as a voter from Fresno County. First and foremost, I would like to express my appreciation to the Fresno City Council and the Mayor for their prompt action aimed at mitigating potential loss of Measure C funding. Numerous projects are currently in progress that could face delays if this funding is halted. There are jobs at stake that serve the residents of Fresno, including our bus drivers, mechanics, and streets maintenance crews. It is my understanding that the Better Roads, Safe Streets initiative has successfully gathered the necessary signatures to advance to the November ballot. However, three members of the County Board of Supervisors, Nathan Maxis, Gary Bredefeld, and Buddy Mendez have determined that citizens will not have their voices heard at the ballot box and effectively have excluded them from participating in the democratic process as intended. By making the initiative dependent on the outcome of a study that is unlikely to be completed in time, the Board of Supervisors has effectively deprived me of my right to vote on this initiative. The measure should have proceeded to the November general election, allowing citizens the opportunity to campaign for or against it. This political gaming by the Board of Supervisors has suppressed voter rights. Once again, I express my gratitude to the Fresno City Council for their swift action and for upholding the voter's right to be heard. I endorse the administration's decision to include this measure in the November ballot. Removing my voter hat, I am now putting my union representative hat on. If you would like any support from our union, please by all means reach out. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further public comment? Sales tax? Appellate measure item? Come on down.

Hi, my name is Mandy, and I'm definitely for us having funding for our critical needs that we have here in Fresno. At the same time, I do have concerns about it being a general fund situation, and from what I comprehend, the reason that That was a strategic reason to not have provisions for how the funds were going to be allocated, because for the general fund provision, only 50% of voters are needed, and then two-thirds are needed for something with provisions. That's my understanding. But I would like to see more transparency with how the funds are spent and used. And even if that means possibly putting it onto the ballot with less of a chance of it going through, I don't know, but especially when there have been budget meetings that are going on behind closed doors. I'm seeing headlines that for years there have been a lot of budget meetings going on behind closed doors, so there's not a lot of confidence in some of the things, especially when the flock cameras were mentioned. There's also, we haven't had the presentation yet, but I know that there is a presentation on the agenda today for using AI for doing code enforcement so basically I don't know if we're going to actually see this presentation but from what I can see on the document it's going to be for vehicles that can go and basically do ticketing automatically and so I do have a concern that the that the funds from this would be used for that or for other things that go on behind closed doors that aren't disclosed to us

Next speaker. Thank you.

Good evening, council members. Good evening, community members. I think everyone is very astounded by, I guess, the audacity to put four ballot measures super last minute. That's a whole different conversation. Huge waste of taxpayer money, $600,000. Imagine all the things that could go into deliberately. I just want to say if there's one measure I do support out of all four of these, it is a temporary better roads, safe street measure implemented by the city with guardrails to ensure that it ends as soon as the other one is implemented. And that this could also be a good way to earn the trust back of your community members by phrasing it in a way that it limits fundings to the same things that are better roads, safe streets would be limited to funding. And putting guardrails that it doesn't extend outside of that timeline before better roads, safe streets is implemented. You have a real opportunity to regain trust. I say please do not allow the other three. Why would you want your term limits to be extended? That's crazy. That's a crazy overreach of power. Who votes for that?

We're not on that topic right now. We're on the topic of sales tax measure. Sorry, yeah.

So if there's one measure that has any sort of integrity to it, dignity to it, it's the one that serves your community members, your residents. So please do it that way. Thank you.

Any further public comment, sales tax measure proposal?

Thank you. Good afternoon, Sandra Celedon with Fresno Building Health and Communities. I want to add a couple of things for the record, and I want to be clear that I stand in opposition to this general tax. One, let's talk about why we're really here, the pareas. Henry Perea has led opposition to the renewal of Measure C from the start. Why? Because he doesn't want residents to actually dictate how their dollars are spent. From the beginning, we know that he has been in opposition to community members actually having a say in how their tax dollars are spent. And he has worked since 2022 to ensure that nobody in this community besides him, his family, developers that he's aligned with, actually have a say in how Measure C or the next renewal effort of Measure C is written and renewed. And since he wasn't able to achieve his agenda, he has stood in opposition of the more, not just the 32,000 individuals that signed the petition, but the thousands of taxpayers that engaged since 2022 in the process to actually write out their priorities, which have been clear. People want their roads fixed. They want their children to be able to get to school safe. They want seniors to have access to public transportation to be able to get to and from their doctor's appointments. And they want to live in a community that affords them the opportunity to thrive. They're tired of having to spend money on exorbitant gas prices. They're tired of living in a community that pollutes their lungs. That is the reason that we're here today. And why do I stand against general taxes? Just look at how we spend the general fund. Over half of the dollars are allocated to the police department. So there are no guarantees that this money will actually be allocated to what you're saying that it will. We've already seen attempts by members of this body to take what is a very specific tax, Measure P, and spend it for what you want in your special pet projects. Taxpayers would be foolish to believe that you will honor your word because you have none. So the only way forward is to have a specific tax on the ballot that actually guarantees and has guardrails in place to ensure that no politician will spend tax dollars any other way but in the ways that taxpayers want. They want their roads fixed. They don't want your hands in their pockets. A general tax is not the way to move forward. It doesn't actually protect workers because we know that the moment that you're up for re-election, you will bow down to the police. Thank you.

Any further public comment on this item? Sales tax ballot proposal measure? I don't see anyone on Zoom. Don't see anyone here in the chamber. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and close public comment on this item. Thank you to my co-sponsors, Council Member Karbasi, as well as the mayor. It was great to hear from the public and what the general thought process is. Of all the ballot manager proposals that we're hearing today, this one really took some of the swiftest work But it was very straightforward. And while I think we'd love to have greater parameters and specificity within a measure like this, a general sales tax was the best we could do on such short notice, given the action by the Board of Supervisors. There's been years of conflict and controversy around what Measure C replacement would look like. There was no way we were going to come up with CONSENSUS INSIDE CITY HALL WITHIN 10, 12 DAYS BEFORE A DEADLINE TO SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY CLERK. SO UNFORTUNATELY, I MEAN, REALLY A GENERAL SALES TAX AND PRACTICALITY AND THE ONLY REAL VIABLE OPTION AT THIS POINT TO SALVAGE OUR CITY COFFERS. WE'VE HEARD OF WHAT THE NEED IS, $54 MILLION GAP TO START WITH NEXT FISCAL YEAR. THAT WILL ONLY GROW MORE AND MORE WITH INFLATION YEAR BY YEAR. Um, I, I, I've seen, I mean, it's clear there's, uh, a sense of distrust, uh, of city hall. Uh, but that's such a large gap, uh, that it can't be ignored. And the measure would raise 65 million, uh, annually. Uh, and you'd have to fill that gap. You just have to, the mayor is a co-sponsor on this item, uh, The mayor proposes the budget to the council. I'd be stunned if we got to next May and the gap was not filled and it went somewhere else. I think there would be outrage, as there should be. I don't see that happening. Again, most of us on this council... sitting here on the dais right now, won't be here a year from now to dictate what the final FY28 budget will look like. But this is really our only hope at plugging a gap that has the built-in nullifications, either at 10 years or when a countywide transportation measure does take effect. We do not want to get in the way of that. That was a very, very important provision to me. We don't want to disincentivize those efforts, but I do think that we need to pass this item as a backup stopgap. Mayor, I stepped out for a second, but I think you were all having a conversation about your ability to sign the veto slip if and when it proves necessary, depending on what last-ditch efforts there may be next week. Can you speak a little to that?

It is like the other items that we had today. It is subject to the mayor's veto. And so by the time it gets processed by the clerk and then gets over to my office, and then I have time to obviously review it, and then we'll see where we go. And again, I have 10 days to do that.

Great. Yeah. So, I mean, you know, we're in a position where this is something we need to do. It really holds the sales tax rate constant. No one in the city is going to see their sales tax increase if this is implemented. Yeah, I don't know if there's any other, my co-sponsor here comes from Carbasi, but I mean, it's a very straightforward measure. Took a lot of thought though.

Yeah, again, Mayor and everyone, I really appreciate the public comment, both on Zoom and here in-house. We do hear you. The thing about leadership is it requires us to prepare for the reality in front of us, not the reality we wish we had. And what this whole thing has taught us is we can't wait for someone else to come solve our problems. That's why we're in this mess in the first place. When I first ran to serve as a council member, I made it clear I was going to stand with workers. I was going to stand for the essential services they provide. And thinking back in the seven years I've been here, Every year we pass the balanced budget, we've not laid off one public employee, not one bus driver, not one street maintenance worker, not one laborer, not one engineer. I'm not about to start today. This is a pivotal moment. Nothing is ever perfect, but in the time we had, we were doing everything possible to make it very, very clear where we stand. Number one is our responsibility to the public that we serve and the services they depend on. but we can't provide those services without the people that provide them. And I think today you're going to see a difference on this council versus what we have in other entities. You're going to see us allow the people to make the final decision. I'm grateful to my co-sponsor, Council President Esparza. Grateful to the mayor. Again, this is a position we don't want to be in, but this is the position we inherited, and this is what we have to do to protect the people we serve. Because nobody, there shouldn't be one layoff, there shouldn't be one service that's cut because of failed politics. And we're going to be the responsible ones, and we're going to solve the problem today as best we can.

Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Council Member Krabowski. So I would absolutely ask for a vote on this today. I said at the very beginning of the meeting, so our first and last meeting of July, I'm going to hold to that. There will not be a special meeting next week. Items on this ballot are on the agenda today are going to live or die. And so I'm happy to continue to discuss, but I will make a motion to approve this item. Back up. I'm gonna go over to the list here, and I have Council Member Arias, followed by Council Member Richardson.

I have just one concern after reading this ballot item in detail. On page 16, it indicates that the transaction of the used tax rate, that it's a sense of provision. Essentially, this expires after 10 years, or after a a similar transportation initiative is passed by the Fresno County Transportation Authority or by the Fresno COG. City Attorney, there's a provision here that requires a transaction and the use tax rate is equal or two or greater than this ordinance. Is that to mean that if the county passes a tax that's half the value, of this tax or the Better Road, Safer Street tax, that this would stay in place?

That's my understanding of the legislative intent, correct.

And for the sponsor, is that your intent?

Yes.

And my second question is, There's two parts to the revenue that we would be losing. The first part is what is the tax rate that's being proposed? In this case, you're confirming that your intent is to keep the same tax rate as currently Measure C and the Better Roads, Safer Streets tax. The second part is what is the formula in that tax? how much money is going to roads, how much money is going to public transit. We know what the formula is in the Better Roads, Saver Streets proposal. We know exactly how much the city of Fresno will receive in those two categories. If the county transportation authority passes a new tax that cuts the money for local roads by half, or cuts the money allocated to public transit by half, is it your intent that this tax will remain or would that go away as well? Does that make sense?

I think, so my understanding, the measure that will go on the 28 ballot is what was signed by the members of the public. The formula is set. 65% mayor towards roads, 62, what was the percentage?

And I'm okay with that. Yes, 65, 25. That's clear because that measure is called out by name in the section C, which is the Fresno County Transportation Improvement Act.

Right, okay.

a citizen's petition.

Correct.

What I'm asking is this measure as written would sunset if an alternative county proposal is adopted. What if that alternative county proposal cuts the amount allocated to public transit by half or cuts what's allocated to local roads by half, in turn, putting that money into regional freeways.

Right, so it wouldn't be the better roads, safer streets. It would be a completely separate measure that the Board of Supervisors may pass and put on the ballot themselves. Is that what you're referring to?

That's what I'm referring to. Or there is another citizen's initiative that cuts it by half. is the intention that this would go away and therefore we would end up having a different deficit problem?

You can't predict every possible scenario. And so my interpretation, given the language that we have here, as any countywide transportation measure would be passed during the life of this would nullify it.

To be clear. So I'm sorry, because intent in the legislative discourse is what people are going to look to to interpret it legally downstream.

So our intent is not to hinder any measure C conversations or efforts. We want that. Correct. It's council shown that.

But it is your intent that if a future transportation tax is passed that cuts public transit by half of what is already baked in in the current measure C or in the better roads tax that this would sunset. Well, let me just state this.

So no double dipping. We don't want to raise the tax rate. I don't know what's going to happen in the future. I'm going to be hard pressed to support anything that cuts transit by half. I don't think this council would either, but I don't know what's going to qualify. My hope is this measure will qualify hopefully this November. And if not later, but I'm trying to reassure you, we don't know what's going to happen, but we don't want to double dip. So if something else passes, we don't want to charge taxpayers for the same thing.

Yeah, but for me, this isn't about double dipping. It's about if the COG decides or the opponents of Better Roads, Safer Streets come up with their own initiative that puts all the money to freeways, is the intent of this body that this initiative goes away and sunsets?

Are you suggesting that we remove the provision of nullifying if there's a countywide transportation measure? Correct.

I would be comfortable with that. You would be comfortable with that? I would be comfortable because at this point, the only one that's qualified is the one that's gathered the signatures. There is no other alternative before us that's qualified. So why open the door to a potential new alternative that we don't know the formula for?

So if I want to understand the question, when you say nullify that section, are you talking about nullifying the section completely or replacing it with better road safe streets?

So the section already includes better roads, safe streets on Section C. That's already clear. So that's clear. But it does have another line that allows for a future tax passed by the county to notify this measure. I don't want to open that door because the supervisors may decide tomorrow to put their own measure forward that achieves their agenda, which is to cut transit in Fresno and to fund freeways in exchange.

And that'll require two-thirds of voters to approve it, and the city is half of those voters. But it would still notify this measure.

It's a good point, Council Member. My only concern with that is if we do that, then let's say another measure C passes. That means we can keep charging what we're proposing today, and that's when I say double-dipping. I don't think we should be doing that. That's not what we want to do.

That is a high risk.

Is there a way we can... pacify your concern without doing that?

I think the easiest way is to make it clear IF BETTER ROAD SAFERS TAX, WHICH IS ALREADY ON HERE, PASSES, THIS GETS NOTIFIED, BUT I DON'T WANT TO OPEN A DOOR FOR THE SUPERVISORS TO PUT A COMPETING MEASURE ON THE BALLOT THAT DOES THE SAME THING, WHICH IS CUT PUBLIC TRANSIT IN HALF AND LOCAL ROADS BY HALF.

I'M INCLINED TO TRUST THE VOTERS. BUT THIS ISN'T ABOUT VOTERS, IT'S ABOUT SUPERVISORS. NO, BUT THE VOTERS GET TO DECIDE IF THERE IS SOME SUBPAR MEASURE THAT'S PUT FORTH IN THE FUTURE. They will decide by two-thirds margin. The last measure C couldn't get. I just, I mean, I appreciate you trying to crystal ball what the future might look like. I just have a very difficult time seeing that happen.

But, Council President, I'm not crystal balling. This is based on past experience. The supervisors have gone out of their way to undermine every city in the county throughout this process. So if our intent is that this goes away when a measure that gives the same amount of money is approved for the same purposes, and that's clear, but I don't want to open the door for the county supervisors coming up with an alternative measure.

Council Member, so I understand that the supervisors can put whatever they want on the ballot with a majority vote of their, but to Council President Esparza's point, that will still require a two-thirds vote of the electorate of which measure C could not get last time. So I understand your, I think you're asking for belts, suspenders, bailing wire, duct tape, and every other sort of mechanism. And I totally get what you're trying to say, but I think, you know, we think it's highly unlikely that that would be successful.

The city manager, the two-thirds vote is not the only option. the opponents of Better Roads, Safer Streets could gather signatures, which then would trigger a 51% clearance rate.

Who are the opponents of Better Roads, Safer Streets?

Diane Pierce.

Oh, okay.

Chuck Riojas. The people that had a press conference. Oh, okay. Kingsburg Mayor.

The Reedy Mayor. If these decisions go to the electorate, I mean, we will respect the will of the electorate, but the reason it was open-ended on countywide transportation was because I think there's a consensus, a growing consensus, that as we look ahead to March 2028 or November 2028, what if the Safer Roads measure doesn't pass then? And what if there's another bite at the apple by the community in 2030? I'm not giving up on it. I didn't want to stop it at just the March 28 measure because there may be other efforts by the community. So to double-edged sword to try and forecast that we would stop the supervisors, we'd be stopping the community as well and potentially double-taxing people.

I understand your rationale, Council President, but it's also equally a risk if a competing measure that cuts public transit, you know, the budget hit to us is equally as significant. So again, that's my clarifying question to the authors. I'll take my pause and hear from my other colleagues, but I wanted you to understand my concern that it's not just about the tax rate, it's also about the formula that we currently know exactly how much is gonna benefit us. If that formula changes, then the devastation will be equally as impacted. This is a good point.

Look, you're not wrong, but like I said, we have to deal with the reality in front of us, not the reality we wish we had. And there are a lot of things that can happen. I agree with the council president. The likelihood of passing a two-thirds tax that is different probably not gonna happen and we didn't have a competing measure now, so I'm not sure how they're gonna be able to get signatures for another one. There's just, oh, sorry.

Yeah, I mean, and look, the voters of the city choose to pass this tax. I mean, they're going to see what the service impact is in a very positive way. And I think additional measure that is subpar is gonna be a very hard sell to one half of the voters in this county. So, I mean, I think this problem takes care of itself, in my opinion, a potential problem. Council Member Richardson, followed by Council Member Perea. Council Member Arias, were you done?

Yeah, thank you. Okay. A little bit of fact-checking here, because I think there was some confusion, especially based on the fact that most of the speakers came up saying they were in favor of this, and if I'm not mistaken, One speaker came up who said they weren't in favor of this and everyone clapped for her. So we got some stuff to sort out for me. Also, there's no automatic ticketing going on for code enforcement. That was also incorrect. I brought that item. City attorney, with this measure that we're voting today, not on the measure, but to send the measure to voters, which we talked about with the last item as well, if we were to institute any sort of guardrails, any sort of rules for the expenditure, because it's a general tax, because it goes, or a sales tax, because it goes to the general fund, if we were to try to put any guardrails or requirements or restrictions on that, would it then still just require the 50% plus one to tax, or would it go up to a two-thirds approval to pass?

It would change to a two-thirds approval if you earmark any funds.

Got it. So anything earmarked in there, any more specificity would require that it's going to have to pass by two thirds. That's correct. Okay. I can't speak for the whole city. I only represent a seventh of it, but I'll tell you right now, we just heard from the city manager's office that even measure C, which was widely regarded as very successful and positive, and now we're trying to obviously make up for its absence, wasn't able to pass with two thirds. So if the goal is to add something to this bill, to this ballot measure that would push the requirement to pass it to two thirds to get something done, I hear ya, it's probably not gonna happen. It's probably gonna fail and we're then letting perfect be the enemy of progress. If this is a step in the right direction to fill the gap, not a big tax guy. Ask anybody up here. However, there's a reason I was out there with the Better Roads, Safer Streets telling them that this is something we need as the county. And that reason is because if any of you are still under the impression that Sacramento prioritizes the Central Valley when it comes to resources and fixing our roads, I got some beachfront property in Topeka, Kansas I'd love to sell you. It doesn't happen. So if the county isn't going to prioritize it, we can't prioritize ourselves as a county, now we're getting smaller. So if this means we have to do it as a city, I am not in principle opposed to this, especially if it maintains the tax rate. Council President is over there. Might answer a question real quick. You're the economist, I'm not. Can you, because we had some questions from Council Member Arias, and I think someone else said the devil's in the details. Can you explain what Section 7 Tax 1607, it's on page 5, it's a second paragraph down, it says use tax rate. Can you explain what that means to me? Because when I look at it, I don't see half a cent, I see, or half a percent, I see half a percent and then a percent.

Yeah, I think we corrected that in the changes to the agenda.

Yeah, there was a typo in that provision.

It is a half percent general sales tax. Okay, because I have the updated ordinance here for display, and it still says it. So is there a newer version of this ordinance that I'm not seeing that I don't have access to? It was put on the record this morning.

Yeah, it was read into the record this morning as an error. Okay, is it not available to us? Is that whole paragraph is an error?

No, just that percentage. And I can cross it out for you.

I'm sorry, what paragraph are you referring to?

It's 7-tax-1607, use tax rate.

It's on page 5 of 18. It's the first full paragraph.

Can you see the agenda here? Okay, hold on a minute. Ruthie, I think we're going to need you. Got it. Okay, yes. Ruthie, this is about the excise tax language, the use tax rate. I think we can clarify that for you. We've had conversations with the CDFTA. Okay.

And I, Ruthie, to save you time, I appreciate it. What he just presented to me, I see that it was corrected on the record. So that right there was giving me heartburn last night reading through this. I am comfortable with it now, knowing that it's not an extra percent snuck in there. So thank you. Very well. I'm not going to make you stand up here and explain it all. Okay. This comes back to the original quandary that I had earlier when it talks about ballot measures. I can either vote to kill something here on the dais before it goes out to the democratic process, or let it go out and see what the voters think. Got a pretty good idea. I know how District 6 is going to fall on it. I don't think it's two-thirds, but I think it'd probably pass with a 50% plus one. No one wanted me to let this go to the voters on the last item, but now we do, I believe. Bernard, can we put the ballot language up, the exact language that's going to be seen on the ballot, please? While we're doing that, other question I had is, so we talked about how this has to be a general fund sales tax. The money has to go there by mandate that we don't have the option by state law to change it otherwise or else it's not going to pass, period. But with that, I know that we've included things for public safety. That's great. Love our public safety and our first responders. The issue is, or my concern, I wouldn't say it's an issue with this, it's just my concern. When it came to ARPA money, the COVID money, we knew that was temporary money that wasn't going to last forever. So if we take that money on with this, my expectation is that there's probably a county bill that will get passed at some point which will replace our need to self-fund our own transportation. Once that happens and this bill sunsets and immediately is terminated... What happens to the public, is that public safety money, is the intent of it, because I know this is general fund money. We can't guarantee where it's going to go. But if we use it to hire a bunch of cops and firefighters, and then it goes away, are we then on the hook to use less general fund money to pay for something that really was an ongoing cost that we were using temporary funds to fund? That's, it's just, I don't need an answer right now. It's just a concern.

That is a possibility. I mean, I won't be here, but you and the mayor, Council Member Vang, and Council Vice President will be here for sure. And take it one day at a time, one step at a time. It's just a leap we have to take today to save our budget.

And the money can also be spent on one-time programs like shoring up eviction protection program, other things like that too, so that that won't happen.

We generally are very cautious during the budgeting process to not fund staff with short-term revenues. And so we fund staffing levels with the ongoing revenue source, and we look to shorter-term funding sources to fund equipment, technology, things that are more one-time in nature. that sort of best practicing and budget.

Okay. Let me stay away from the COVID money and the safer grants.

I can give you an example during American rescue funds. We, we purchased a lot of fire equipment. We funded fire training academies. We funded police vehicles, but we did not put any of those funds into personnel. And, and, and I do want to just state publicly, cause I heard a lot of, you know, how those funds may be used. But I think, the wording in this is to maintain essential services. And the first thing we want to make sure that we're doing is not losing our services today, maintaining public services and not losing employees. And that's going to be the priority for this measure, at least in the mayoral budget.

Bernard, can we get the ballot language put up on the display, please?

I think it's page four of nine, Bernard.

I brought the office this specific text and picture and everything to expect to display it yesterday.

Oh.