City Council - Regular Meeting

When you die and you live to rest You're gonna go to the place that's best I never been a sinner. I never sinned. I got a friend in Jesus. So you know that when I die, he's going to set me up with the spirit in the sky. Oh, set me up with the spirit in the sky. that's the best

We're ready to begin. Welcome to the Lancaster City Council meeting. Is this crowd for me or is there something on the agenda? City Clerk.

City Council Member, Agency Director, Authority Members, Cassianos? Present. Mann?

Present. White? Excuse me, present.

White?

Present.

Vice Mayor, Vice Chairman Hughes-Leslie? Present. Mayor Chairman Paris?

Here.

We have a quorum.

Thank you. The invocation today is with James Gibson from Grace Chapel.

Thank you guys for having me. It changed up. I'm actually Pastor Jordan Corlew from Grace Chapel. James is on his way to the Czech Republic to do missions work over there. So I'm filling in. So let's pray. Dear Lord, again, we come here today, Lord, and I just want to take a moment, Lord, and settle our hearts, Lord, and just have a moment to give you thanks. In a world today that, again, sometimes swirls around and there's a lot of chaos, we can be so quick to blame and create more chaos rather than looking at what you are doing in our lives and to be able to breathe and say, Lord, we are thankful for the things that you have given us, Lord. So today I pray, Lord, that will be our breath, Lord. We will be thankful people, Lord. Lord, I'm thankful for the city, thankful for the things that go on around here, Lord. Lord, I pray, Lord, the council members and people that lead, Lord, will be led by you. Lord, it would be your plan and your path that goes before us, Lord. That's the only way possible, Lord, of a calm and peaceful life that we can live, Lord, is with you at the helm, Lord. So again, Lord, we give thanks, Lord, for everything that you have done with us today. I pray this in Jesus' name. Amen. Thank you, guys.

Everybody face the flag. Put your right hands up in your heart. We pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Where's Sonia? Sonia, you have a presentation?

The Parks Department has a presentation. We're celebrating Parks Make Life Better Month. And our assistant director, Victoria Reno, is going to give the presentation.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. It is my pleasure this afternoon to provide a brief overview of the incredible work being accomplished by the Parks, Arts, Recreation and Community Services Department. Each day, our team works to fulfill the mission of providing diverse, inclusive and high quality programs, safe spaces and enriching experience that strengthen our community and improve the quality of life for Lancaster residents. Our Parks and Facilities Division serves as the foundation of everything we do. They maintain more than 300 acres of athletic turf, 17 facilities totaling nearly 1.7 million square feet, and over 4,300 trees throughout our parks and facilities. Despite more than 816,000 in vandalism repairs this year, our dedicated team continues to ensure that our parks remain safe, clean, and welcoming for everyone. Our Arts and Museums Division continues to strengthen Lancaster's identity as a destination for arts and culture. As MOA celebrates 40 years of serving the community, the division continues to preserve more than 10,000 works of art and historical artifacts while presenting exhibitions, free cultural programming, public art, and community events that make arts and culture accessible to residents of all ages. The Lancaster Performing Arts Center continues to be one of the premier entertainment venues in the Antelope Valley. This past season alone, this past season alone, the theater welcomed more than 35,000 patrons through 80 performances and events generating more than 600,000 in ticket sales while continuing a 35-year tradition of bringing world-class entertainment to our community. Our recreation and sports remain at the heart of the community engagement. From our signature events and youth sports to aquatics and team leadership development, these programs brought together more than 112,000 attendees at special events, provided swim instruction to thousands of children, generated significant sports tourism, and continue to grow the award-winning programs like the Impact Youth Leadership Program. Our Community Services Division continues to support residents at every stage of life. Whether through youth intervention programs, senior wellness programs, recreation classes, or community assistance programs like our annual backpack giveaway or turkey giveaways, the division creates opportunities for connection, personal growth, and support that positively impact thousands of Lancaster families every year. But behind the scenes, our Parks Admin Division ensures that the department operates efficiently and effectively. From managing financial accounts and capital improvement projects to processing passports, administering grants, and serving thousands of visitors at City Hall, their work provides the operational foundation that allows every division to succeed. Our marketing and sponsorship division continues to tell the story of parks and connect residents with the programs and services available to them. Through more than 500 social media posts, millions of online impressions, and the production and distribution of 260,000 Outlook magazines and nearly $240,000 in sponsorship support, the team continues to expand our reach while maximizing community engagement and resources. Collectively, these accomplishments demonstrate the dedication of our employees and the City's continued investment in creating opportunities that enhance the quality of life of our residents. As we celebrate these successes, it is especially fitting that July is recognized in the State of California as Parks Make Life Better Month. This annual campaign led by the California Park and Recreation Society highlights the essential role that parks and recreation play in building healthier people, stronger communities, and a higher quality of life. Our department embodies this mission every day by maintaining beautiful parks, preserving the arts and culture, providing recreational opportunities, fostering community connections, and creating spaces where residents can live, work, and thrive. For these reasons, we respectfully ask City Council to join communities throughout California by proclaiming July as Parks Make Life Better Month in the City of Lancaster, recognizing the lasting impact that parks and recreation have on health, well-being, and the vitality of our community. Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

So do we vote on that? i will defer to we're agendized for a presentation any action would have to occur at a future agenda know that in our hearts yes thank you you guys do an amazing job i i just don't have any complaints when you have problems you fix them every year it's better what more could we ask thank you thank you

Mayor, if I may ask, we do have a proclamation. If we can take a picture with you and council. Come on up. All right. We have our team here also present. Yes, we have a big team here today. We have a big team here today.

Mayor, before you get started, just a reminder, we need to play our public announcement, especially with individuals that have the ability to join virtually. I just wanna make sure we didn't overlook.

Okay, so you gotta do the announcement now? Okay, go ahead.

The City Council encourages public participation at its meetings. However, the right of the public to address the Council must be balanced with the need to ensure that public participation does not interfere with the orderly course of public business. The City Council follows the City's Code of Conduct and Ethics and Robert's Rules of Order in the conduct of its meetings, and we respectfully request that all are reminded to abide by the following rules. As stated on the agenda for this meeting, any person who would like to address the City is requested to complete speaker registration, either online or at the kiosk located in the Council Chambers. Please be sure to identify the agenda item you would like to discuss on your speaker registration. Speaker registration must be filled out and submitted prior to the agenda item being called. You will be given an opportunity to address the Council at the time the agenda item is discussed. Individual speakers are limited to three minutes unless a different time limit is announced, and your time will begin once your name is called. If you are joining this meeting by phone, please ensure you mute any background noise. Both in-person speakers and virtual speakers must cease speaking immediately when their time has ended. Public comment on agenda items must relate to the subject matter of that item. Public comment on non-agendized items is limited to subjects within the jurisdiction of the council. Please keep in mind that state law prohibits the council from acting on items that are not on the agenda. The public's right to address the Council does not include the right to engage in a dialogue with individual Council members or staff. Please remain respectful of the forum and refrain from uttering, writing, or displaying profane or threatening statements towards the Council, any member thereof, staff, or any other person. Any person engaging in conduct that disrupts the meeting is subject to being removed from the Council meeting. If you disrupt the meeting, you will receive one warning. If you continue to disrupt the meeting, you will be escorted out of the meeting or the meeting will be recessed. Upon reconvening, if disruptions continue, the meeting room will be cleared in accordance with the provisions of the Brown Act. We ask that you now silence your cell phones. Thank you for your participation.

Thank you. As I previously posted on social media, the proposed assessment increases before us on public hearings one, two, and three will not be going forward. Consistent with that commitment, these items will not be called or open today and no action will be taken. Public hearings five, six, and seven will be continued to August 11th, 2026 at 1130. 130. Oh, 1.30, excuse me. And public hearing eight, including proposed sewer service charge increases, will be opened and then continue to August 11th, 2026, that 1.30. And Trulese, perhaps you could help me understand why I'm doing that.

Meaning continuing it. We have to have time to count all of the protest votes. So this allows the staff, and it will actually happen in this room starting tomorrow, be available to the public to watch. What time? 8.30. 8.30 in the morning, and we will count those protest votes. You're eligible to continue to submit your protest votes all the way up until that August 11th date.

Why are we continuing five, six, and seven?

to ensure that they were properly public noticed.

Be more specific.

We have to legally post in several locations and in a newspaper. The newspaper needs to still happen. But we're still not going forward. Am I clear about that? So five, six- For one, two, and three, yes. For PH one, two, and three, we are not moving those forwards. Five, six, and seven are the standard CPI increases and approval to levy those on the tax roll.

And that does not require a vote?

That does not require a vote, no.

Today. Thank you. Now I understand. OK, right. As the mayor, I control the agenda. The only way those ballots get counted and the increase takes place is if I put it on the agenda. I'm not. It's not going to see the light of day. And the reason for that, I put in the Facebook posting. I hope everybody has read it. If they haven't, I think we just need to find a better way to do this. And so those of you who are opposed to it, you won. OK? The only one I am going forward with is the sewage. I mean, we just don't want the sewers backing up, do we? It makes us very uncomfortable. But the other three, we're going to figure out a different way to fund them. I don't know what that way will be, but we will find it.

Okay?

Does anybody have any specific questions about that? Yes, sir.

say that they're not going forward, does that mean they're just not going forward today or not going forward period in the future until a different way is found?

As long as this heart is beating, it will not go forward.

For purposes of those participating remotely, the question that was asked was whether the item was not going forward today or not at all, and the mayor made his response.

As long as I'm mayor, it's not going forward.

Remember, this is our first time broadcasting remotely with people participating remotely per the new state law, so we do want to make sure that everybody who speaks is signed up and registered. There's kiosks in the back, and there's a QR code if you'd like to register to speak. And there are folks in the back available to assist you, I think still, with signing up to speak. And also, I don't remember the other thing I was going to say, so I will stop now and say it if I remember.

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Mayor, we need questions to be on the mic. Yeah. The public can't hear if they're not on the mic.

I'm sorry, can you come and use the microphone please?

Is that better? Yes. Okay, good. Did I hear correctly that you had said that you're moving the sewage forward?

Yes, I am moving the sewage forward.

Okay. Did we not vote on that and how did that vote go?

That we find out on August 11th. Is that right?

Okay. How can you move it forward if it's not counted yet?

That's why I'm moving it forward. It's not counted.

You're moving it forward to the future, not forward as a pass. That was my question. Okay. Thank you for clarifying. I appreciate that.

Of course.

Thank you.

Okay. Any questions about the procedure? Nothing else? I mean, you get to do that on the speaker cards. Yes, ma'am.

Fran, do you need to get signed up to speak? No, there was no cards. There's no cards because we're not doing cards anymore. I'll grab the iPad and help you sign up.

Thank you for listening to me. I'm sorry I'm late. I was at another meeting. Same thing, one for the homeless and the whole bit.

Graham, what's your question?

Okay, real quick, I'm sorry. From what I understand when I walk in, the maintenance, Fee is not going to be viable. We're not going to be taxed on that.

For now, that's dead. And if it ever comes back again, it would be another vote.

And the sewer system is going to be taxed. Or is that the one that's on the wait list?

The sewage assessment will be counted. We don't know what the results will be.

Oh, you haven't got that result yet. So if the results are approved for it, then we're going to get taxed.

It will go up. it will be increased. If the vote is not to do it, it won't.

I don't quite understand that situation because aren't we paying those taxes already on our property taxes?

I'm sure you are. I'm sure you are. I know everybody wants to get out the reason they're here, but that's not what I'm asking you about now. What I want to make certain is everybody understands the procedure going forward. I'll be happy to listen to your comments about anything else later. Have I answered your questions about the procedure?

Yes, just for the time being, yes. Thank you for that. Thank you very much.

It was a nice try slipping that in.

Okay, another question.

Yes, sir.

We have a procedural question over here, Mr. Mayor.

I just wanted to understand, as far as the vote tabulation, when it is, it sounded confusing. I mean, it read confusing. For it to be rebuked or opposed, what has to happen? Because it sounded like it needed to have, If I said oppose, that it only would be opposed if 51% of the people actually said oppose, right? That is correct. Okay. So to me, that sounds like it's set up for it to automatically win because what happens if the voter turnout doesn't do it and then— four people says agree, 30% say opposed, you don't meet the 51%.

That is the question you get to ask the speaker cards. I thought that was a procedural question. I just want people to understand the procedure. The procedure is this. On August 11th, we will count the ballots for the sewers. And that's all. Those are the only ballots we're gonna count. And then we will announce the results at that time. As to what we do with that, that is something we can talk about later. Okay? And I'm aware of your concerns. I've read your letter. It was pretty thorough.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Hi, how are you? So I did ask about, so now it's just the sewer, but on all of them, if we were going to be able to be there the public could be there to count with you and they said yes. When I went to go turn them in, it was a box that was not locked, not taped or anything. The lady actually lifted it up. I could see everybody's ballots and then dropped it in and said, these are counted every night. So which one is it? Was it going to get counted today? Or is it getting counted every night? And then what? Then what do you do with them?

My understanding is we're going to count them on August 11. And what I mean by that is the actual vote. Did you vote yes? Did you vote no? Those will be counted. Is she accurate that we're actually counting them?

Somebody could explain. Yeah, I'll explain that to you, Mayor. So what you're seeing is the sorting of them. They were being sorted in the city clerk's office by color. Those are locked away every night in a secured location, but they cannot be open until we officially take action at a council meeting and then and they direct us to open and count the vote. So that is only happening on the sewer district. It happens starting tomorrow in this room at 8.30 in the morning.

Okay, what color was that? Do you remember?

It was the white one, I believe. No, there's yellow, blue, green, or pink.

Yeah, okay. The other question would be, I like what Mr. Callaway said two weeks ago, well, does the city own more property than we the people, 190,000 or whatever, how many there are? Because then that would count us out, right?

Who's going to say- I certainly wish we did, but I'm confident we don't.

Okay. Mr. Mayor, we're delving into the actual topic. This is not procedural. Okay. Well, I have to know something.

There's 190 of us.

Right, but it needs to happen during the public hearing. Okay. When is that? That's today. Like later on the agenda.

Okay. You're signed up, Michele. Thank you.

All right. So we should be at a place now that everybody understands how we're going forward, right? Good. Let's go forward. Can I say something real quick? Of course.

I'd like to thank each and every one of you for coming out and participating in civic civic engagement. By you participating, it shows that you care. And we want you to come out and participate each and every time just like this. For those of you understand when you fight, we win. So please make sure you come out and participate in civic engagement. This is a big piece of my platform. So I really want you to come out and participate. This is what we need here in Lancaster. We need your input. That's why I voted yes to give it back to you. And this is what we get. Thank you. Thank you.

Let's move on. The consent calendar. Anything to be removed.

There's nothing to be removed, but we do have several speakers for the consent calendar. I've given those numbers that need to be removed or called out to Vice Mayor. But before we start, I do need to clarify something for everyone. that if you have signed up for consent calendar items, you are still only allotted for consent calendar items only three minutes total. So if you signed up for three, four, and five, you get a total of three minutes to talk on those items together. The only one that you have three minutes total for are public hearing and everything else. But for the consent calendar, if you signed up to speak for more than one item, you have three minutes total to get your point across. Thank you.

So Mayor.

Yep. Mayor, I would like to pull CC5 and CC6. And then, Mayor, we have speaker cards for items three, four, five, and seven.

Okay, so is there a motion to approve the consent calendar with CC1, CC2, CC 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12.

I make a motion to approve the consent calendar as comprised, removing items 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, Mayor.

Is there a second?

I'll second that motion. Let's vote.

And it passes unanimously.

OK, CC3.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. This item approves the second reading of the first amendment to the Avanti South Development Agreement, extending the agreement by seven years for a total of 27 years. This extension provides a developer with additional time to complete the project while keeping all the original public benefits and developer obligations in place. The amendment also updates the construction milestones requiring construction to begin by December 31st of 2032. and at least 300 housing units need to be completed by December 31st of 2034. If these milestones are not met, the agreement will automatically expire. This is the only extension that is being granted and any future requests would require a new development agreement. There is no fiscal impact to the city and the ordinance was unanimously introduced by the council on June 23rd.

Sure. Good idea. Okay. CC4.

Mayor and Council, Track Map 62485 is a subdivision for 39 single-family residential lots located on the southwest corner of 30th Street East and Nugent Street. Tentative Track Map 62485 was approved by the Planning Commission on January 24th, 2022. An extension for the tentative track map was granted with a new expiration date of January 24th, 2027. Undertaking agreements, bonds, and monumentation security have been submitted to guarantee installation of public improvements and monuments. The final track map is in substantial conformance with the approved tentative track map and is ready for council approval.

Thank you. CC6? Oh, 5. Yeah.

And do you have the? Do you have the table? Okay, perfect. Solid waste handling fees were added to the tax rolls in fiscal year 23 pursuant to section 5473 of the Health and Safety Code. In fiscal year 25, an automatic annual inflationary increase of 3.5% was approved for fiscal years 25 through fiscal year 29. As you can see in the summary table for a single family residence, the annual 3.5% increase for fiscal year 27 is equal to an additional $1.46 per month. And for seniors, it is an additional $1.13 per month. In total, a single family residence will go from $42.79 to $44.29 per month, and for seniors will go from $33.52 to $34.69 per month.

We're gonna go ahead and take the comment cards for these actions, either three, four, and five. So first we have Rich Grunberg. Rich Grunberg, you asked to comment on items three, four, and five. As our city clerk had mentioned, you get three minutes total. Welcome, sir.

Unless you're enrapturing and then we'll give you more time. Unless I'm what? Unless you're enrapturing with your speaking and we'll give you more time.

Don't worry, you don't need to take a picture with me. Don't worry. I guess I'm ready. Mayor, city council members, consent calendar five, request the city council open the notice public hearing, receive public testimony, and determine to continue the hearing until August 11th. The reason why I'm requesting it be done on August 11th is we should not vote on CC5 for the two separate issues. If you vote yes on CC5, then the 3.5 should come out of Lancaster fiscal year budget and not an increase out of property tax. If you want additional taxes, you should have sent out the ballot like the rest of the ballots for the increase to go on property tax. Just like the rest of the four ballots we sent out all showed on the annual property tax statements, we should have the right to vote.

I don't think I have it with me. It must be the other one.

Measure E placed approximately $90 more on property tax. This waste will be 3.5% annually added and the four ballots that we know we're not going to go on any further were accumulated to $500 approximately. My recommendation is to take the funds out of the Lancaster fiscal year budget without raising property tax or send out another ballot because we should be voting on this. Excuse me.

crowd only close my ears I'm actually listening to him I think he has something interesting to say that perhaps we should act on but when it becomes people yelling things from the audience I mean reverse rolls with me for a minute how would you react so let's keep this civil and let's see what people have to say Okay, go on.

I'm sorry to interrupt you.

My recommendation is to take the funding out of the Lancaster fiscal year budget without raising property tax or send it out another ballot so we can vote on it or remove it from the tax roll and go back to paying it ourselves. We should not be voting on CC5 when we should have the right to vote on the ballots by mail.

Thank you. The one point I can address is the reason we moved it to the property taxes instead of paying it by the month is because of the freeloaders. Right, I know why. People who weren't paying their trash bill and were throwing their garbage out of the desert.

But I'm not saying remove it from the tax reform. I'm saying if we are going to do it, let's put it up for a vote. You can leave it on a tax roll or whatever until you put out a vote saying, no, we should not increase the 3.5. I understand what you're saying. Can you respond to that?

We did. The vote was taken in 2023. So we did go through this same process that's happening to the other districts now, to the sewer today, later. That happened in the summer of 2023.

So is this a scheduled increase?

This is the contractually agreed upon scheduled increase that was voted on by the voters, yes. It was a hearing conducted similar to the sewer hearing that's being conducted later today.

Okay, thank you. That's the reason for it.

Everything could change another vote or whatever for it.

First of all, I also have another job. I'm a lawyer. I know. I don't know how we could do it without breaching the contract.

Correct. Another vote come August, August 11th?

When does it come up for a vote again?

The current contract goes through 2030.

Yes. Well, you can deal with that.

Thank you for your comments, sir. Just to save time, could we please welcome Jesse Williams? Jesse Williams, who would like to comment on items three, four, and five as well?

So this question, moving on.

Jesse Williams.

Move on.

Okay. Now we have Garth E. who would like to comment on CC5. Do you have a question?

Yeah. Go ahead. Hold on one second.

Yeah. Sirleafs and council attorney, are we able to put this into obedience? The sewer taxes?

The sewer taxes? We're not on that yet, but when we get there, that is a topic that you can discuss during the public hearing. Thank you.

Yes, sir. I was not 100% prepared to discuss this today until I saw it on the agenda. The vote in 23, 22, whenever it happened, I don't believe was a fair vote. I would venture to say that the majority of the ballots returned was a no vote. I don't know that. There's no way for me to know that. But what I do know is that there was promises made that by having every SFR residents on for having them on the tax roll that it would create greater revenue for waste management and that the rates could be reduced because there were no more freeloaders. Everybody was paying in. Instead, what has happened is every single year it's been increased, including this 3.5% coming up now. To me, that is disingenuous of the original promotion of this assessment. I asked the council, where are those promised savings and why are we every single year getting hit with 3.5%? Actually, the contract reads that it's up to 4% that those are discretionary increases, not contractual. Lastly, the cost of living, the cost of living- I'll give you more time.

Let's do them one at a time. I think those are good questions. Could you respond to that?

I don't believe three years ago that that was actually what was discussed. At that time, there were new laws that we were trying to comply with, one of them being Senate Bill 1383 that the state was passed in regards to recycling organic materials, which actually drove the cost up more than it had been prior to that. And with continued state regulations and increases, it does continue to drive the cost up. waste management services up, and that is where we came up with the formula 3.5%.

But he has a point.

If everybody's now paying the bill,

There should be an excess.

They're paying for the service that they're getting at their house that they weren't once getting. They were only servicing the houses that were paying. It's not like they were still giving those individuals that service. If they didn't pay for the bill, they weren't getting the trash service.

That's correct. Do you follow that? Yes, however, there's significant revenue increase coming from those additional residences that weren't paying the bill. Overall, the revenue that waste management has generated from this has been significant and it should by far and away outweigh any increases that should come along through the life of the contract or at least through a good majority of the contract.

It makes a point. What's the response to that?

We went through a pretty comprehensive analysis of their rate and they calculated that and that's, you know, this $41 or $42 a month is what it takes for them to adequately be able to fund the pickup of the waste and comply with all of state law.

How does those rates compare to other cities?

We're about identical to the city of Palmdale. And if you look at us and take a bigger view, we're cheaper than probably 75% of the jurisdictions in LA County.

So Mayor, may I sit?

Remember the rules, folks. I can move this to the next meeting, and we can have waste management here with the numbers.

I think that that would be appropriate if we could do that.

Okay. I mean, you make very good points. I'd like to know the answer myself.

Mr. Mayor, if we do that, we will miss the deadline to place it on the tax rolls. We cannot do that.

May I suggest that at least this year the city picks up the additional 3.5% versus the taxpayers?

I never write a check if I don't know the amount.

I would like to do the same thing except I can't.

Mayor, may I share? So I distinctly remember the vote. And one of our biggest problems that we shared with everybody, and it's unfortunate that you weren't there, is the amount of trash that the city picks up. So when you say, let's pass that along to the city. They may not be prepared today to be able to share with you that our cost of going into the desert and picking up trash, repeatedly we've shared with it that we're in the multiple tons. Again, three years ago we discussed this in great, I think it was three years ago, we discussed this in great detail. It's a contractual obligation. I think what we need to do is keep that obligation. The city manager just shared with you, and we are, I know that everybody's frustrated. I got it. I could share with you lots of detail. But again, we're probably the low-priced leader out of all the cities in Southern California, primarily in the county of Los Angeles. And I know, I get it. I'm a taxpayer too, I get it. I've been working, I'm 73. So probably working a little bit longer than you. So I get the frustration. But our issues are with the state of California. Everybody's here tonight. And I just got finished sharing this two, three meetings ago. Our frustration is not with the city. It's misplaced. It's with the county and with the state. They continue to mandate all these crazy requirements and so then you go out contractually and thank God we were able to negotiate a 10-year contract because I'm telling you there are cities that are getting clobbered. with huge rate increases because they didn't foresee it. They didn't have enough intelligence because they went two years, they went three years. And then now those homeowners in those cities are being faced with not 3.5%, they're getting clocked with 10 and 15%. So I get your frustration, but we also have to be fiscally responsible. And the last thing we wanna be is not compliant with a contract that you sign. And perhaps maybe that the audience that's here this afternoon Maybe if like Cedric has already said, we would really appreciate you in the future coming out and participating. Because then we're all maybe on the same team, so to speak, when we get ready to make decisions so that everybody understands.

Councilman Mann, I don't want to debate you on this, but- Wait a minute, wait a minute. I'm allowing this thing to break the rules and I really shouldn't do that. I'm sorry, Rex.

So I have a comment and I understand that why it was decided to put it in 2023, but we are struggling right now. And my recommendation will be, can we ask waste management? We ask everybody in each household, manage your budget. Manage the money that comes into your home. So we have to cut certain things, right? I cut my cable many years ago. I cut certain things. Now I'm getting my nails done every four weeks instead of three weeks, right? So we are learning- We noticed that.

You noticed that?

So I think the ask is, can we tell waste management to manage what they have with the budget they have? And then what happens if we decide not to move forward or we break the contract? What happens with that? What's the process in regards to that?

Is that breach of contract? Yeah.

If we breach our contract, we will be in breach and face all of the liabilities associated with that that I would rather not discuss in open session with you. And if we do not approve the item today, we will miss the deadline for placing it on the tax roll.

May I ask another question? Of course.

Has this rate increase- I actually love intelligent questions.

Thank you. Has this increase been negotiated with waste management? As Councilmember Rosseo Castellanos mentioned, everybody has to live within their budget. At my work, I have to live within my budget. I have a budget for my personnel, for my people and my jobs. Why can't or where has this council negotiated the rate increase with waste management and held their feet to the fire?

I can envision that we could get some workshop going together with them and bring them in and just the public relations pressure could maybe have an impact. I understand the timing. I need some additional information. How much a month are we increasing it? PER RESIDENCE?

YES. PER HOUSEHOLD. PER HOUSEHOLD FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLD IS GOING $4279 TO $4429. SO A LITTLE LESS THAN $2. HOW MANY HOUSEHOLDS ARE THERE? THERE'S ABOUT 44,000-ISH HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CITY OF LANCASTER. And for the senior discount, it is $38,000.

So that's $88,000 a month times 12 is what? You're about $650,000 for the year.

$650,000 for the year, yes.

What I would suggest we do is, I mean, we don't have to pay at all. Maybe we pay a part of it. All right? Let's split it. And let's have that discussion within two weeks. But let's make that an open workshop. And let's have waste management there. Maybe we can get them to contribute. and let's cut a deal as the president likes to say. Absolutely.

I will remind you that the senior discount was exactly that. We heard the public the last time and the senior discount was in response to exactly what you're saying. So is it not going up on seniors? No, the senior goes up still the same percentage, but you look, it's about a $10 a month discount that they get.

I see, okay. At what age does the senior discount kick in? I still want to go through the process. I want waste management here. I want to see if we can cut the deal. No, we're going to vote on it now. This would be a reduction after the fact. I get we have to vote on it now. I don't know that that's fair. I mean, she's totally unprepared. Why don't we just have a meeting later or earlier at the next scheduled city council meeting. We have police management in the room, and let's see if we can come to an accommodation. Does that work? Thank you. Thank you. Any other speaker?

Yes. If we could get the presentation for .

Who is it? Oh, we need the presentation for CC7, and then we have the speaker.

And, Vice Mayor, while she's coming up, we do have one other person that signed up for CC3. That's Michelle Lee.

Oh, okay. Seven, please. The presentation for seven.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council. My name is Christine Malta. I'm the manager of the Lancaster Police Department Core Division. Before you is a request to consider adaptation of a resolution authorizing the police department to apply for the CHP Cannabis Tax Fund Grant. and accept the approval of any award. It's also to accept the award in the amount of $447,661, appropriate that to the expenditure count at the police department and authorize the city manager to sign all contracts, agreements, memorandums of understanding in order to expend the funds for the grants.

Good job. Thank you. Thank you.

We welcome Arthur Galloway to speak on CC7.

The only thing I wanted to know is what percentages of the almost half million goes to those three points. There was the first point of education, the second point of education, and then the third point was DUI checkpoints. And I wanted to know is what was the percentages doled out. I'm not saying I'm opposed to it. I just want to, that information was not included.

I don't have the exact breakdown today, but it's roughly about 65% to enforcement and 35% to education. We'll do seven DUI checkpoints, 12 saturation patrols, 10 youth engagement events, seven community events, four collaborative workshops, Then we also partner with our dispensaries. We go out there about 24 times a year to work with our dispensaries to do point of sale education. The bulk of the work will be paying the salaries for enforcement, but there's a huge education component that goes with that. There's just not as much staff time devoted to that.

Arthur, you can come on back. I can't do it this way, you know that.

I didn't know what it was, but I would just say that just to say out loud, I don't understand why enforcement is being used with that grant. It should be more levied towards the community education and all those things than actually DUI checkpoints because you're already getting paid to do DUI checkpoints. That would be my only thing. Okay. Thank you.

So we're going to welcome Michele up to comment on CC3.

Wait a minute, didn't she slip that question?

I really don't understand procedure at all. Please forgive me. Okay. I say the same thing the other guys said, the budget should already be there, should already be in there. I happen to know that the state and the county allocate money to you guys for whatever freeloaders that dump their junk in the desert because my girlfriend and I went out there and we couldn't stand it anymore. Now, this was years ago, probably 10 or 12 years ago. When we went straight to the office when you could go in and they didn't block you now from going in, they happened to mention that. The more people that call in, the more money we can get from the state or the county. That's one. Hold on.

Is that true? I'm going to get a phone bank going.

I am not aware of any such program. Okay.

Well, that was told to me by your own office. I don't know who is working there. I don't know if they're still working there. I just remember these things because then I start fighting to get people involved to start calling so we can get that money allocated to us. Again, why should we pay for the freeloaders that keep throwing more and more junk in the desert.

Nobody liked my solutions.

Thank you, Michelle. You're talking about money-wise, it is not two or three percent. this is gonna undermine Prop 13, right? We already, on our tax bill, have the sanitation department, $487.88. We already have refuse, another 513.48. We already pay it. It's like over $1,000 plus the 113 or 120 that we pay every three months to dump trash, right? So anyways, just, it kind of bugs me that I,

Okay, but we are going to deal with that in the next two weeks. I know.

I just have to kind of like in case I don't get it in. I get nervous up here. I know.

I get it.

All right. Thank you.

You're not wrong. It's just a problem we don't know how to solve.

Right. Okay.

Gotcha. All right. All right. Thank you. Do I have a motion?

Yes. I move to approve Consent Items 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

Do I have a second?

I'll second that motion. Let's vote.

It's unanimous. Make certain we have that meeting. It's not optional. Make sure waste management knows that. Thank you. All right, moving on. So we're at public hearing four, is that it?

Right. As you announced earlier, I understand it to be your intent, Mr. Mayor, not to open PH 1, 2, or 3.

That's why I skipped them.

Which is why we would now be at PH 4.

Okay. The public hearing is now open. Do we have speaker cards?

Yes, we do. We have one in person and one remote.

Okay, so Kendall?

That's fun. I don't know why you have something different than me.

You thought you were going to get out of this, didn't you, Kendall?

Happy to present.

Thank you.

Mayor Paris, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council, my name is Kendall Brekke, Planning Manager for the City of Lancaster. The item before you is a zone text amendment including typical annual updates and revisions to our zoning code, and revisions essential to the MART compliance program, which I'll discuss first. I'll start with some background on the item. City Council adopted a tobacco moratorium late last year following a citywide enforcement operation focused on smoke shops. LPD gave a presentation at City Council on October 28th, which outlined the variety of dangerous and unlicensed products being sold at smoke shops in our area. You can see a few images from that presentation on the left. The moratorium on tobacco is still in effect and is currently set to expire on October 1st of this year. As a result of the tobacco moratorium, staff were asked to evaluate citywide safety concerns and establish new regulations. LPDN leadership identified four business types with a high instance of illegal and unpermitted activity, massage, alcohol, recycling, and tobacco, now collectively referred to as MART, M-A-R-T. In addition to existing LPD concerns with alcohol and tobacco, several massage establishments have required intervention from code enforcement, and unpermitted recycling facilities have often been found to cause traffic and waste hazards throughout the community. In order to address these MART businesses, again, massage, alcohol, recycling, and tobacco, a compliance program is being proposed. In March, the city council already adopted initial code updates related to business licensing, which are now in effect. So that item is represented in green on the timeline. The result of these revisions is that at the time of a MART business license renewal, the city can now require them to provide proof that they have been granted a planning approval. Today's proposal in yellow would effectively set a timeline for MART businesses that have already been in operation to obtain those same required planning approvals if they don't already have one. The majority of those applications will be minor use permits or MUPs. Minor use permits require a public notice to go out to neighboring property owners and tenants, but do not require a public hearing for approval, so they're somewhat more minor than a conditional use permit. The minor use permit is a one-time review and would not be required annually like a business license. So this is essentially a snapshot opportunity for oversight and enforcement, allowing the city to apply conditions of approval and ensure safe and neighborly operation of these businesses. The next steps are shown in blue, which is essentially implementation of the Mart compliance program. Under today's updates, compliance with new requirements would be achieved on a gradual basis as each business's existing business license expires. At the time of a given business license expiration over the next year, the business would be given a one year license extension to allow adequate time for minor use permit application and processing. Staff do expect to receive a significant number of minor use permit applications for these uses. A full summary is included in the agenda packet, but I'll briefly summarize the proposed requirements for each mart use. For massage, requirements remain largely the same as there are already detailed licensing and operational requirements in place. Massage businesses would primarily need to obtain the new minor use permit approval from the city. For alcohol, this program is noted to only apply to bars and liquor stores and thus do not apply to restaurants or grocery stores, for example. This allows us to focus our efforts on addressing the specific issues related to bars and liquor stores that have been identified by both LPD and the public. For recycling, we added clear development standards including location restrictions, height limits, setbacks, and architectural requirements. And for tobacco, we clearly defined which tobacco shops this program would address. It's the shops with 8% or more of their floor area dedicated to tobacco or tobacco products. So not 7-Elevens or grocery stores, but rather true smoke shops throughout the community. I should note at this time that these new standards would replace the tobacco moratorium at the time they go into effect, giving these businesses a new path forward. I'll mention as well, some of the Mart uses are required to locate a minimum distance away from sensitive uses like homes and daycares. This requirement would remain in place, but in the event that a given Mart business was already existing and has operated in good standing, a distance waiver can be considered as part of their approval. Collectively, these changes strengthen and clarify standards related to Mart uses, setting clear expectations and giving these businesses a reliable path forward while prioritizing the safety and well-being of our residents. A lot of the Mart compliance program was conceived based on feedback from the public and leadership and the experience of LPD. I'll give a quick summary. In May, staff mailed letters and flyers to all known Mart business owners and locations. The flyer explained the new program and pending requirements and advertised an upcoming Mart open house. The open house was also advertised on the city's social media pages and was open to the public in the LPAC lobby during the farmer's market on June 4th. We had approximately 50 attendees including members of the planning commission. The event was very productive and I think we were able to provide a much clearer expectation for the businesses affected by these changes. This also allowed us to identify several ways to improve the process and regulations. The number one piece of feedback we received was concerned with the cost of the minor use permit. So staff are currently pursuing options to reduce that application cost. We expect to bring that proposal to the next council meeting. MART covers the majority of the code updates currently before you, but zooming out a little, this proposal is happening as part of the normal cleanups and updates to our code that we try to bring forward on a regular basis. The non-MART related updates on this year's list are outlined in the staff report and include minor items, mostly clarification in the wording of our floor area ratio definition, removal of outdated references, updating the mailing procedures, and clarification on sign requirements. In conclusion, staff recommend that the City Council introduce the ordinance for this item, Zone Text Amendment number 2602. I'm available if you have any questions.

I'm wondering why we grouped them all together.

We've had that question from the public as well. It's really just for simplicity in implementing the standards. In the call out where I mentioned the different standards for each use, the standards, the requirements are different across them, but the way they're combined is that they all would have to essentially get this retroactive planning approval and be subject to current conditions. That's the reason for grouping them together, just for simplicity of having that conversation.

Any questions?

Not a question, Mayor, but a comment. Very much needed, and I thank the team and the community, again, who came out and gave us this feedback, calling for this. But I also want to laud the team, the city staff, for acknowledging that these are business owners, so finding ways, proposing different ways to ensure that We can cut costs to our local business owners. Kudos to you guys. But I do not want that to underscore the fact that we have to get this under control. Our community, they cried out for it. A mother myself, I'm calling for it. So thank you to the team for looking at it from all different aspects.

Thank you. Any speakers?

Yes, Mayor. We have Carlo Shahadi.

Good afternoon. My name is Carlos Shahady and I lived in Lancaster my entire life for 36 years. I own several tobacco stores here in Lancaster and I have operated my businesses for several years. I would like to begin by thanking the city council, city staff and the planning department for the entire For the time and effort they have dedicated to this process. I especially want to thank everyone who spoke with business owners through workshops and by phone. I want to give a special thank you to Kendall for always answering our questions with professionalism, patience and thoughtful detail. I'm here today because I would like to briefly address the proposed MART program and the conditional use permit along with the minor. I want to be clear that I understand the City's objective to identify businesses that violate the law and hold them accountable. I respect that goal. I am here today to request that if this program is implemented, responsible law-abiding businesses are not unfairly burdened or viewed as bad actors simply because we operate in this industry. Each business should be judged on its own compliance and conduct. Licensed tobacco retailers play a vital role in our community in providing legal regulated products through businesses that are subject to strict oversight and licensing by our city and state. This allows consumers to purchase from legitimate businesses rather than unregulated sources where products may be unsafe or counterfeit. I fully support holding businesses that break the law accountable. I simply ask that enforcement remain focused on those who violate the rules, while businesses that constantly comply with the law are recognized for doing the right thing. Thank you for your time, for considering my comments, and for your continued service to the City of Lancaster.

Thank you. That's it.

That's it.

So why don't we just have a rule that if it hurts children, we don't allow it? Wouldn't that be easier?

Likely void for vagueness, but sure.

You have to close the public hearing.

I'll close the public hearing.

The mayor closed the public hearing.

Any comments? Thank you. Is there a motion?

I put my name to speak at the end of many issues. I forgot how they worded it. I wasn't aware of it, and I would just like to make a quick comment.

Come on up.

Come on up. Slower than you think.

Mr. Mayor, I believe he's on non-agendized.

I'm sorry. Oh, you're on the non-agendized? We're not there yet. Okay, you're coming up later.

We'll be calling you later. One sentence.

Okay. Go ahead.

Please make a serious attempt to do something about the freeloaders so we don't have to pay all the time. Everything evolves around where you're going to get the money from, and the freeloaders freeload. I'm tired of paying. Thank you.

I totally agree with you.

Mayor, with that, I make a motion to introduce ordinance number 1153. Is there a second?

I'll second that motion. Let's vote.

And it passes unanimously. Am I opening PH5? Okay, PH5 is now open. The public hearing is now open. I got to say the magic words.

Today we are opening the public hearing on PH5 and requesting the City Council adopt Resolution 2654 continuing this matter to Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 at 1.30 PM in these council chambers and directing publication of the resolution of intention. This is an additional procedural item to provide further notice and opportunity for public comment.

Thank you. Any speaker cards?

No speaker cards.

Okay, let's close the public hearing. Is there a motion?

Mayor, I would like to open the public hearing on FY26-27 annual assets.

Can we get a motion on PH5?

Yeah, we need it.

Did I skip one? PH5.

That's what I'm doing. Oh, we already opened the public hearing. Okay. Yeah, and he closed it. Yep. And he asked for a motion.

Excuse me, on PH5, it looks like we did have some in-person speakers on that one.

We had in-person speakers?

Yes, for PH5. We do.

We do have a speaker?

Yes, we do. We have a total of four speakers. Do you have them? I do not have those names. I do.

I don't know why you don't have them, but I do, so I will read them. Helen Acosta.

I'll make it short.

I'm Helen Acosta. Good afternoon. I'm against all three assessments that you were going to, but since you've already canceled two of them, I just want to say that it's really causing a lot of problems for us seniors because we're on a budget and a very tight budget. And so it makes us very hard to own a house. Although the house might be already paid for, But the taxes are really high for us. And I live in an HOA. On top of that, I pay for that. And we don't use lighting. We pay for that in our streets. We put the pavement in there and do all of the improvements that we need. That's why we pay the HOA dues. So please. think really hard how you can help not put this tax on us. Thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Cheryl Boswell.

We'll call them.

I got it now. You got it now? Thank you.

I'm sorry. I'm just trying to help move things along.

I appreciate it.

Hello, Mayor, Vice Mayor and council members. My name is Cheryl Boswell. I am actually addressing this assessment for an increase on the lighting. I'm here to support for seniors and retired people. And like the lady said ahead of me that we are on fixed income and I pay my taxes. my property taxes and I would like you guys to rethink increasing it because it's really hard, especially living in the state of California. I have been in Lancaster since 89. I call this place my home. But the increases on taxes is very hard to be able to put in your budget. I go without so that I can live in a home so I don't have to rent. Like other people are saying about the freeloaders, we keep paying for these freeloaders. Somehow, LA County does not understand that we cannot keep having these increases in our sales taxes. We in Lancaster and Palmdale pay the highest sales tax in the state of California in the world. It's just unbelievable. I can't believe that people don't understand when they vote for increasing taxes that affects homeowners, property, people that rent things. Well, we don't have to pay it. Yes, you do because the owner that owns your apartments are going to raise your rent. So I'm just asking you to please, please, please think of the people in the Antelope Valley, in Lancaster, and somehow, someway come up because with you guys putting it in another budget that we don't have to incur. Thank you so very much.

Miguel Coronado.

Today is about accountability. The people of Lancaster have had enough of being treated like an endless source of revenue. We are paying, as the young lady said, 11.25% in sales tax. You did that. We're funding hundreds of millions of dollars in city spending. We're paying more than 90 million for the RxPara Center, 85 million for the Marvin E. Chris Aquatic Center, by the way, he was raided by the FBI, and nearly 60 million for two police forces. We support public safety. We support investing in our community. What we don't support is taxpayers continuously being asked to pay more while City Hall continues to spend more. If I'm wrong about these numbers, correct the record. Today, the city of Lancaster will most likely approve spending of another, listen to this folks, $252,466.05 of taxpayer money on the Lancaster Outlook Magazine, a publication that many residents throw directly into the trash. More than a quarter of a million dollars for a magazine that people do not read and throw away. And by the way, we get taxed to throw away that magazine too. Taxpayers deserve better. Enough is enough. Let me be clear. These assessments were not defeated. They were suspended because the people of Lancaster rose up and demanded accountability. They were not suspended because anyone on the dais was listening. They don't listen to us. They were suspended because residents became informed, organized, and refused to remain silent. Had the people remained silent, these assessments would have moved forward. The most expensive assessment sewage remains. This fight is not over. It's far and only begun. The people of Lancaster must remember who voted for these assessments, Cedric White, Leslie Hughes, and Ken Mann. Remember those names. Remember their votes. Remember when residents said no, they said yes. This movement has exposed something much bigger than an assessment. It has exposed a disconnect between the city and the people it serves. We must do better. We must pay attention. We must ask questions. We must participate. We cannot wait until election day to become engaged. Democracy requires more from all of us. Next is the Antelope Valley Union High School District, led by Charles Hughes. I can't wait for that. And it's Dr. Miguel Coronado, by the way. Dr. Miguel Coronado. Don't- Okay, thank you.

You're off topic now.

Yeah, thank you. And the rules, you have to follow the rules. Thanks, Raymond. Thank you. Thanks, Raymond.

You know, I know it sounds good, but half of his figures are make-believe.

He just makes them up, you know?

I mean, hey, hey. Okay, fine, you don't want us to talk? We'll take a break, thank you. Let's go. City Attorney, where were we?

We were still in PH5, Mr. Mayor, and as a reminder, we are not closing this public hearing. This public hearing remains open and will remain open until August the 11th.

Okay. We had one more comment. Ms. Shelley, for PH... Michele for PH5.

All right.

Hello again. Okay, well, I really, you heard everything I had to say kind of almost in the same thing. But what I did forget to maybe mention was somebody was saying that it's only gone up like 3 point something percent. But truthfully, that's not true. It went up 100%. because the bill is $78. It's going up to $164.70. Just so you know, I got it all sitting right here, what you sent me and what my taxes say. So it's double, it's 100%, not 3%. And it's going to undermine Proposition 13. Again, I will say that we've already got property taxes right here. So why kind of like call it a fee or something else, okay? Let's look into that. Okay, thank you.

Mr. Mayor, the- I'm sorry. Yep.

This item is the annual assessment. This is not the increase. PH5 is the annual assessment, our regular assessment, and the action that you'll be asked to take on August the 11th is to place it on the tax rolls. But today, you're being asked to adopt Resolution 26-54, continuing this public hearing to Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 at 1.30 p.m., and direct publication of the resolution of intention.

But it's still double. It's still, that's double.

I believe you're looking at the increase, not the annual assessment. What we are talking about in PH5 is the annual assessment. Okay. The increase about which so much concern has been raised was a different item on the agenda with regard to, let me make sure which one it was. This is the lighting and maintenance district. So that was PH number- Lighting, sewer, maintenance, and-

There's four of them. PH2, which the mayor is not going to call or open.

It was not opened. It is not being pursued. That increase that you're looking at would have been PH2, which we are not proceeding on. The mayor skipped it.

That's the one that charges three extra dollars every year, that one?

I don't know what you're asking me, ma'am. I'm so sorry.

I got our property tax bill right here. If it's that annual- I can speak with you afterwards and help clear it up for you. Okay, because $3 every year is not $78. You won.

Correct. Okay. I probably should have let everybody fight and then let you win. It would have been easier.

The public hearing will remain open and call for a motion.

And call for what?

A motion.

Okay. Public hearing stays open. Is there a motion?

Mayor, I move to adopt resolution number 26-54, continuing this public hearing to Tuesday, August 11th at 1.30 p.m. in the council chambers and directing publication of the resolution of intention.

Thank you. I'll second that motion. Let's vote.

Thank you.

The motion passes four to one with Councilmember Castellanos voting no.

Trolley, are we raising anything?

Not today. All we're doing is continuing those items to the 11th. However, on the 11th, We will take action on those to do the CPI increases and levy the fees on the tax roll. CPI this year was calculated at 2.9% for the region. That's what those districts are being proposed to go up this year.

And what's that based on?

The Los Angeles County area.

Yeah. Consumer pricing index. Do we need to raise it?

The cost of us maintaining these services drainage maintenance, lighting, and landscaping have gone up even more than the 2.9%. So to answer your question, yes, unless we redirect our priorities and cut some other programming to afford said increases.

Okay. You know, it occurs to me while we're doing this most of the issues not all of them but most of the issues have to do with seniors on fixed income am i right and perhaps we should be addressing that you know how do we fix that across the board or how do we mitigate that across the board you know because i i i think we're going into more difficult economic times for the next two years. I think it'll get much better after that, but for the next two years I think it's going to get worse. How do we ease the burden on seniors and what is the best way to do that? Any suggestions? That's a different issue that I'll be glad to talk to you later about. What I want to talk about now is what should we be doing to figure out a way to ease the burden on seniors?

Yes, ma'am. Mr. Mayor, remember, please, we need people to speak into a mic, and we do have a registration system, and we're going to not be able to have the remote participants be able to hear, and that is a mandate under state law.

Well, would it be okay if she comes to the mic?

You're the mayor, sir. Huh? You're the mayor, sir.

you.

Thank you very much, Mayor. I appreciate you taking me even though I didn't register. You mentioned with waste management seniors get a discount. Why can't we do that with all the others? Why can't the seniors get a discount on lighting, sewage, landscaping? Why can't we instill a discount there for anybody over, I don't know, 62? I don't know the answer to that.

Maybe the city attorney could tell us.

Just a thought.

So at the last meeting, we were actually directed to look into programs like that. Staff has done that and when we hear the public hearing today on the sewer, they will actually brief you on a proposal to do exactly that.

So it's not off the table. I'm getting the sense that there's a lot of folks here who would like to be more involved in that process rather than just the recipient of the decision. Am I right?

Yes.

Okay. So how do we get a representative sample of the seniors, other than me and Ken, of course?

I'm not really sure. I guess you could open up a forum and have individuals come, maybe send out a meeting where you're going to say what representatives to represent the senior community, somebody from each area maybe, get four or five people that might represent them.

What I frequently see is we end up seeing the same faces, and that means we don't have fresh ideas. Like you're definitely on the list now. You know that. Marissa, is there some way that we can figure out, you know, I find working with seven people to be most productive. If we need to go more, we can go more, but I don't think it's all that productive. And let's just figure out a way to make life easier for seniors.

That would be wonderful.

Okay, good, good.

Because I think that's something that's doable.

We have wonderful programs here, and I don't want to see too much being taken away from them, The seniors are the ones who end up in the long run paying it, and we can't all afford to just leave Lancaster. We've been here a long time. We'd like to stay if we can.

Me too, but they accuse me of not.

Well, thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Okay.

Okay, so we're going to be in touch with you, and anyone else who would like to do that, talk to... Who should they talk to?

Larissa?

Marissa?

So Mayor, question. So is there any way we could look into our hardworking families? I'm all for the seniors. I really want to make life easy for everybody, especially the seniors. But we have single moms. We have hardworking families that's that's trying to make it and can't make ends meet? And is there any way that we could help subsidize anything? Well, their bills also, because I know the seniors are having a hard time, but the citizens, as far as the single moms, the hardworking families, and people who have bills to pay, shoes to purchase, food to put on the table, just everyday means, they need help also.

I don't disagree with you, and you know where my heart is on that. What I find, though, is when we try to fix every problem in one pot, all we have is a stew nobody wants to eat. I WANT TO SECOND THAT.

IT WASN'T FIX THAT PROBLEM. JUST LOOK AT IT. TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.

I THINK WORKING MOTHERS THAT CAN'T AFFORD CHILD CARE IS ONE OF THE MOST PRESSING NEEDS WE HAVE. BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, LET'S CATEGORIZE IT AND DEAL WITH IT IN COLUMNS. AND, YEAH, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. WE SHOULD DEAL WITH THAT.

YES, SIR. THANK YOU FOR HEARING.

Mayor, could I maybe propose that you propose to the staff or direct the staff, let's categorize these different groups and have them form different working groups or committees that could help meet with you and advise on these different areas?

What does staff think? That work, George? Larissa? Trulese? Yep. Okay, have that seven days and up time.

I agree with what the mayor says. Please, again, Cedric said it earlier, please be engaged. If you meet these different categories, let's solve problems before they become a big problem. You have the mayor's ear, so come, engage him. Don't limit yourself to three minutes. Come to these working groups with him and share what you're experiencing because we're all experiencing something a little bit differently, but let him make those informed decisions while working with you.

We should keep the group that wants to lynch the mayor.

I'll lead that group.

Well, we're here to serve you and we want to make the city a better city for everyone to live in. So please come out, let us hear your voice, let the mayor hear your voice so we can better act in the direction that we need to act on.

Thank you. Okay, moving on to PH6. Alison?

Yeah, sorry.

As with PH5, we're asking you to open the public hearing on the fiscal year 26-27 annual assessment for Lancaster Landscape Maintenance District number one and Foxfield Industrial Corridor Landscape Maintenance District. Receive testimony and adopt resolution 26-55, continuing the public hearing to Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 at 1.30 p.m. and directing publication of the resolution of intention. It will be on August 11th that we'll be asking you to take action on this item to levy the annual assessment for these districts.

Any speaker cards?

Yes, Mayor. There's speaker cards. There's one, two, three, four. There's four speaker cards. I believe all of them also spoke on PH5. First one is Helen. Helen Acosta, would you like to come up and speak on PH6 again? Helen left, okay, moving on to Ms. Cheryl. Cheryl. And again, this is PH6.

Hi, I'm Cheryl Boswell. I'm here to speak on, as I said for the earlier assessment one, for this one too, for the seniors also. But I do have a question that you guys brought up about us getting together to have different meetings for like the ones where we have the hardworking families and the mothers with single mothers and with the seniors. So my question now is if we're going to have these groups, how would we be notified to be participants into the groups so that we could voice our opinions so you could understand where we stand on these proposals?

You know, I get the concern. I get the issue. What I was envisioning more of is a small working group that could actually work. So how do we accommodate the people who just want to speak to it? I will leave that up to staff to figure out a way for us to do that. But what I'm actually envisioning is a group that gets something done quickly and makes people's lives better. And that's the goal. It's not anything else. But we will figure out a way to do that. Okay.

Okay.

What you ought to do is get on the working group and work.

Okay. Yes. Also, on the assessments, we pay our taxes. It's all on our property taxes that we get every year, and it's only sent out to us at the end of year when we go to file for it. our taxes. Is there a way for us to check our property taxes throughout the year to see if we have increases? We may have increases we're not even aware of until we get the property tax bill.

That would be an education. I totally get it because I don't understand it either. I just give it to my wife and say, tell me what to do. She's very good at that, by the way.

I have to do it all, so I need to know.

This is not just any fees that the city levies, but any fees that are levied on the tax roll, they're only allowed per county guidelines to go on there one time per year. So we all have to have our information into the county the first week of August.

Let's do this. Let's do a video. Put it on the website that explains the tax bill. How's that? Would that work? And what to look for to make sure it's accurate.

Yes, because my one question I do have, Mayor, is that also everybody that's paying the assessments, the increases will be according to the property you own. Your property may be a larger parcel than somebody else's and your area may be a different area. I got all four of them. It's going to be a different price for each individual. It's not a state. a stated price of like $50 or whatever. It goes accordingly to where you live and your parcel.

I think that's accurate.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Miguel Coronado for PH6.

I'm good. I'm good.

Okay. Michele B for PH6. This is the Landscape Maintenance District.

Annual levy.

Annual levy.

Hi. I'm actually thinking because of the last thing was the annual assessment, right? This is for the landscaping. Yes, landscaping. Okay. I don't know what to do there. I think everything should be on a drip, but that's just me. I'm with Cheryl. We don't do Facebook, so we don't get the agenda until we get here today. I have to try to guess at what I'm going to say sometimes, unless I come to the meeting before. And so I don't think I, you know, I think I'm, what I have to say is more of a general, in the general section. Because I'm going to say you talk too low. I can't really hear back there, just so you know.

Okay. Thank you, ma'am.

You bring up an interesting point. Do you get the, you know, the newsletter we send out by email? Do you get that? Sign up, why don't you sign up for that and let's send the agenda out.

Right, well and the agenda is always on the website. Yeah. With all of the staff reports and all the supporting documents.

No, I mean we're sending out the email anyway. Sure. Why don't we just send it as an attachment? Yeah.

It would have to be a link.

Right, okay. Cuz it's way too big.

Once links are blue, you just press on it.

Okay, I'm okay with that.

Okay, good, you're welcome.

No further comments.

Okay, is there a motion? Oh, I gotta leave the public hearing open. And now is there a motion?

Yes, Mayor, I make a motion to adopt resolution number 26-55, continue the public hearing to Tuesday, August 11th at 1.30 p.m. in the council chambers and directing publication of the resolution of intention.

I second that motion. And there's a second, let's vote.

There's still a no, but I asked the question.

She wanted me to clarify something.

Okay. The item passed is four to one with Council Member Castellanos voting no.

Thank you. Moving on to seven, new business item seven. I'll open the public hearing.

Same thing. Council is being asked to open the public hearing on the fiscal year 26-27 annual assessment for the Lancaster Drainage Benefit District annual levy. Receive testimony, adopt resolution 26-56, continuing the public hearing to Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 at 1.30 p.m., directing publication of notice at the August 11th meeting. You will be asked to approve the annual levy.

Thank you.

Yes, Mayor, we do have speakers. I believe we agreed that Helen has departed. Lindy Williams.

Lindy, how are you?

Well, how are you?

I'm doing well. I always appreciate your comments.

Well, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

You have a different perspective.

Well, I try. I try. Afternoon, everybody. Hey, so just a little bit all over the place, but reminder, 93534, the area code that I live in, we have the most disabled, a large population of seniors. I think our median income is like $27,000 a year. So we're kind of broke. So Cedric, like you said, if we could get a little bit of everybody and I'll show up, I promise. With that being said, as we're doing some of the things with whether it be waste management and we do have to do the recycle, are we... Getting any of that to turn into mulch remember walled fill right? We have the section off of oh By the alfalfa spots right where they had the mulch because I got hit with a bark beetle and we got big piles of dirt and sticks and let's put something together and Use what we have please, because I'm thinking it can give people a little bit of work. Along with that, you can turn it into decomposed granite. You get leftover bells of alfalfa, hay. Literally, it's poop and hay. You mix it together. It comes out almost like decomposed granite, and it's cheap.

Yeah? I'm unclear.

So, um, I know cause it's a little bit all over the place. No, but, um, as far as like with the landscape, because, uh, something on drainage now. Oh, that's right. That's right. Yes. But just in general, just some of the stuff that can be done. We have, we have a lot of smart people here and we can get together and do things to improve and save everybody a buck. Yeah.

I totally agree with you. The reason we dumped is California workers' compensation laws. If we ask anybody to do anything for the city, we're subject to that. The thing about freeloaders is they tend to freeload every opportunity. And I don't know how to fix that without the state fixing the workers' comp laws. But if they fix them, we could put everybody to work.

Well, maybe we can just give ideas, and then they can.

I see Charlie Hughes was here. When he gets in the assembly, maybe he could help us out with that. Thank you. Thank you.

Cheryl, would you like to speak on PH7 drainage?

Cheryl, you're starting to like that mic, aren't you?

Well, actually this one is dear to my heart because of where I live. Every time we have rain, a large amount of rain, Where I live, I have only one access to get out of my area because it floods. So I'm like, you know what, I'm paying taxes and I'm already getting flooded to where I can't only go- Where are your cross streets? The cross streets is between Challenger Way and Fifth Street East between K and J9.

That's in the residential rural part?

Yes, it's a residential area on the east side. If you go down Division to go up to J8 to go to J9, that whole street's flooded. I used to live there.

I know where you are.

Then if you go down K to go to 5th Street East to go to J9, that street is flooded.

Is it paved? Yes, they're all paved and they're flooded. Could we get engineering out there and see if it can be remedied?

So the only way I can get out of my house is to go from J9 over to Roden and then from Roden at J8 to Challenger because it's just horrible. I feel sad for the people that live there because I don't know how they get in and out of the houses, sorry. So anyways, that's a big, big concern. So I wanted to address this. So thank you.

We can and we will, I will say we have a list of projects that is extensive, which is one of the reasons we had an engineer's report done on this district to reevaluate the fees so that we could appropriately ensure that we were protecting the public and taking care of all the drainage.

Thank you.

We'll look at it.

Thank you very much.

OK, if it's doable, we'll do it.

Thank you. Ms. Shelley to speak on PH7 drainage, annual assessment.

OK.

Miguel Coronado, PH7. Okay. That closes out your comments. Good.

So is there a motion?

Keep it open.

Is there any questions?

Yes. Are you going to?

Oh, the public hearing will remain open.

And then you ask for a motion, Mayor. I move to adopt Resolution 25-56, continuing the public hearing to Tuesday, August 11th at 1.30 p.m. in Council Chambers and directing publication of the resolution of intention.

So there's a second. Second. Let's vote.

And it's four to one.

Council Member Castellanos voting now.

Page eight.

Thank you. Where are we now?

Page eight.

Eight? Bottom of nine, yeah. Page eight. We'll open the public, am I opening this hearing?

Yes, you are opening the public hearing on the fiscal year 26-27 sewer service charges and the annual report filed under health and safety code section 5473 and then separately notice proposed increases to the sewer service charges and it would be appropriate to now open both public hearings.

Consider them open.

Thank you, sir. And I believe we have quite a number of commenters, so it would be appropriate to have the staff report.

Let's have the staff report.

Good afternoon, Mayor Paris and members of the City Council. Before you this afternoon is the annual public hearings regarding the city's sewer service charges for fiscal year 26 and 27. This item includes two components, the annual levy of the sewer service charges for the upcoming fiscal year and the proposed Proposition 218 increase to the maximum authorized sewer service charges as detailed in the sewer service charge analysis and engineer's report. To ensure full compliance with all statutory noticing requirements and preserve the city's ability to place the fiscal year 26-27 sewer service charges on the county tax roll, staff is recommending that the council receive public testimony and continue the hearing to Tuesday, August 11th to allow the required publications to be completed and allow time for the tabulation of the protests. The public hearing will remain open during that time and written protests will continue to be accepted until the close of the continued hearing on August 11th. The tabulation of protest forms will begin tomorrow at 8.30 a.m. in the council chambers and will be open to the public for viewing. At the conclusion of today's public testimony, staff recommends adoption of the resolution continuing the public hearing to August 11th, 2026. At the direction of Mayor and Council at the last council meeting, we are evaluating the feasibility of a neighborhood stability assistance program for qualifying owner-occupied households. The program would be considered separately from the Proposition 218 assessment process, and if implemented, would be funded through non-assessment revenue sources such as the general fund. The program objectives are supporting qualifying homeowners experiencing financial hardship such as senior households, permanently disabled households, and income qualified households. We also aim to reduce barriers to long-term neighborhood stability, maintain transparency throughout the Prop 218 process, and reinforce public confidence while preserving legally required assessment funding. And that concludes my report. I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. Any questions?

Nope.

Let's call the roll.

Carla Johnson.

Keep in mind, the only thing we're voting on now is moving it to August 11, right?

OK. Carla Johnson for PH8.

We will also be tabulating those ballots we have received. But yes, today's action is to continue.

Can you start me at three again, please? Hello. First, I want to address the city's process. My paperwork states that the ballots and accompanying materials were mailed at the public's expense. The city printed and mailed ballots, notices, and all related documents. And only after spending public money and sending these materials did the mayor decide to postpone three of the four assessments. The city then allegedly mailed postcards to correct this mistake. I received only one postcard, the original notice stating that ballots were about to be mailed. I did not receive the second postcard the city says was mailed between June 24th and July 1st, announcing the postponement of three Proposition 218 assessments. This means the city's correction notice did not reach all affected property owners, which raises serious concerns about the accuracy of the mailing list and the integrity of the noticing process. All four assessments appear to not be legally defensible according to Proposition 218, legal requirements, and should never even been advanced to the point of being proposed to homeowners. The sequence, mailing ballots, changing course, the mailing correction postcards is a waste of public funds and raises serious concerns about whether all affected property owners were properly notified as required under Prop 218. This is not efficient, coordinated, or transparent governance. Now, regarding the sewer assessment that is still being heard today, the City states that the proposed sewer service charges are based on the proportional cost of providing sewer collection and conveyance services to parcels within the sewer service area. That language implies parcel-specific proportionality, which is required under Prop 218. However, the city then contradicts itself by stating that charges are apportioned using a sewage unit methodology based on estimated wastewater generation and typical wastewater flow characteristics. A sewage unit represents the typical wastewater flow of a single family residential parcel. Land uses are assigned sewage units based on estimated wastewater generation and system demand. These two statements cannot both be true. You cannot claim parcel specific proportionality while at the same time basing charges on typical and estimated wastewater use. Wastewater generation varies dramatically among households. Some homes in my area have one or two occupants, others have Large households with many people using a flat typical estimate does not reflect actual wastewater demand and does not apportion cost proportionally as Prop 218 requires. I'm running out of time. Can I be given more after everyone else? Because I'd like to finish what I have to say. Okay, thank you. I have two more pages left and I've read one.

Give her three more minutes.

Furthermore, my area includes high demand institutional and commercial users such as colleges, senior facilities, apartment complexes, fast food restaurants, churches, and schools. These properties generate far more wastewater and place far greater demand on the sewage system. than single-family parcels, yet they are not included in this assessment. Homeowners are being asked to fund system needs created by properties that are not participating in the cost. The city's methodology also relies on unreliable data, estimates, and typical values rather than parcel-specific measurements. This introduces several well-known research methodology flaws. First, it commits an ecological fallacy, applying group-level averages, which are typical wastewater flow, to individual parcels whose actual usage varies widely. Second, it creates misclassification bias, placing all single-family parcels into the same category, despite substantial differences in household size and wastewater demand. Third, it results in non-proportional cost allocation, assigning costs that do not match actual system usage, which directly contradicts the City's claim that charges are based on the proportional cost of providing sewer services to each parcel. Fourth, it reflects model specification error, using the wrong variables and excluding critical high-demand institutional and commercial commercial users, such as colleges, senior facilities, apartment complexes, fast food restaurants, churches, and schools. Finally, the reliance on estimated and typical wastewater generation produces low reliability measures, meaning the data cannot consistently or accurately represent real wastewater demand. These methodological flaws make the proposed more than double sewer fee, in my case, neither fair nor legally justified under Prop 218. If the city intends to increase sewer fees, it must provide parcel-specific wastewater data, parcel-specific system demand, parcel-specific proportionality, and a legally compliant explanation of why only homeowners are being assessed while high-demand institutional and commercial users are not. Until then, this methodology is neither fair nor legally justified. Finally, I want to address ballot handling and chain of custody. I have two more paragraphs. The mailer stated that ballots could be hand-delivered to the city clerk. However, when I attempted to do so, the city hall receptionist, not the city clerk, collected hand-delivered ballots and placed them into an open box under a front desk counter. This is not a secure professional chain of custody procedure and it does not correspond to the instructions provided to voters. A Prop 218 ballot is a legal instrument. It should not be handled casually nor stored in an unsecured container. Last paragraph. Given the confusion around ballot handling, I would like to suggest that the City consider purchasing a secure government grade ballot box for future Prop 218 processes. According to the 2020 census, Lancaster has roughly 32,000 homeowner households. Commercial ballot boxes cost between $2,200 and $8,000 a piece, which comes out to about seven to 25 cents per homeowner. This would be a small practical investment that actually provides a special benefit to the residents participating in these assessments. A secure, legally, defensible way to deposit ballots directly and with confidence. Thank you.

You know, the one thing I would like to clarify, and Trulese, if you could help me on this, is we have a sanitation district, but we also have a sewer fee, right? And I got the feeling in listening to her that these two are being conflated, are they?

Yes, we have two different separate entities that maintain sewers in the city of Lancaster. So the first is the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. That is a special district that maintains and operates both the treatment facility that's out there on Avenue D and the freeway. They also maintain what are called the sewer trunk lines. So they're the main sewer lines that run down through the city. And there's actually a map that you can find at the sanitation district website. We maintain all of the sewer main lines that feed into that district. So we convey the sewer from their house or business directly to that trunk line. That trunk line takes the sewer for treatment out of the treatment facility. So there are two entities, but both infrastructures need to be maintained, and that's why there's a fee for both of that service that you're getting as a resident or a business owner in Lancaster.

So how are they assessing this increase?

How is whom assessing the increase? How are we? Ours is what's based on an equivalent dwelling unit, and if you want a more complete explanation, we actually have the consultant here that generated that engineering study to calculate the fee.

Make it good.

Hi, my name is Chris Thomas with Harrison Associates. We calculate your annual assessments which is on the agenda today as well as the proposed 218 increases. I'll start with this to say that the proposed sewer increases are based on a cost analysis of the city's true costs of transporting the sewer sewage waste to the LA County treatment plants. The city does not treat the sewage, they transport it. However, that process is still very costly. There are lift stations, there are pipes, there are a variety of facilities that must be maintained. The question that's probably out there with all the residents is why the increase? One of the largest reasons for that is the capital replacement or future replacement of these systems. The existing $78 fee is woefully inadequate to replace it. Just like in a car, you eventually have to replace your battery, your alternator, maybe your transmission or the car will stop working. Your sewage system that the city's responsible for needs the same thing. All your pipes degrade over time, your lift station pumps break. Those kind of things have to be replaced. Rather than waiting 10 years from now and the city coming up with a bill saying we need $20 million to do this, we try and spread it over time. Therefore, we make the assessment to cover the cost of currently transporting that sewage as well as eventual replacement. I worked with the engineer who is an engineer. I'm sorry, go ahead.

How is it computed per homeowner?

Okay. Per homeowner, what they do is they calculate what's called an equivalent dwelling unit. They figure out what a typical home will use and what the cost is to transport that for a typical home. Let's say that number is $100. If you have an apartment, from the LA County Sanitation District says, well, an apartment may use 80% of what a typical home uses. Therefore, an apartment's tax is about 80% of an equivalent dwelling unit. The same thing goes for maybe a large home that's not a typical single family. All those things are taken into effect for the actual usage. It would be egregiously expensive to calculate each house's usage on this property tax level. if the residents would like to do this and not use the edu you would have to go through the old system of the water bill system so this is actually more cost effective for the typical resident to do this system okay

You're an independent company?

Yes, we're an independent consulting company that we work for the city just during this process and then we go away. The city doesn't have to incur a full year's salary for us to do it. It's more cost effective for the city to use a consultant to do this, yes.

Thank you. Any questions?

We have more.

I'm sure we do.

Christine Bender. Christine Bender.

Hi, I'm Christine Bender. I'm new to this whole process. I've never been to one of these meetings before. I wrote a letter, and it applies to all four of the assessments, but they assigned me to this one. My letter says, it should have been clear for the past 15 to 30 years, which is cited in all the documentation that accompanied our ballots, that the condition of the city managed assessment based services have needed and will need maintenance improvements from time to time. These matters should have been and going forward should be anticipated to be ongoing needs and one that will only cost more as time goes on given that the average inflation in the US has been about 3% for the last century. It would seem that the citizens of our community have a legal basis to sue officials for neglect and violation of your managerial duties and fiduciary responsibilities in these matters, since these have been neglected for so long. Perhaps your errors and omissions insurance should be examined and tapped to cover these assessments. If that is not an option, I would like to learn why. While I agree that the need to work on these measures after 15 to 30 years of neglect and deferment should probably be promptly undertaken, the way that these proposals were brought forward and presented to us and the explanations that were given are insufficient to justify the sudden increases in our assessments and the additions to the assessment methodologies. I strongly suggest that you come up with a better presentation of why the maintenance and improvements were not timely addressed in the past 15 to 30 years. as cited in your documents, since it is the fiduciary responsibility of the local government to keep abreast of these matters. We didn't want to burden the homeowners with the cost is not a legitimate excuse, obviously. Yet this was cited to me when I went to one of the meetings about these assessments. For each of these assessments, I would hope to see a full explanation of both the current needs and the expenses anticipated on both the short-term catch-up activities and the long-term improvement plans as well as the list of priorities and timelines for completion. I would also hope to see an outline of the alternatives considered and the analysis of the pros and cons, as well as the justification for any recommendations that are selected and presented to us. Thank you. And rather than- Thank you.

Your time's up. Thank you.

I have two more sentences. Up next, we have M. DeLarso. M. DeLarso on PH8.

Member Lindbergh elections. Member Lindbergh elections.

You know, when somebody comes up and tells me they want to sue me because I'm trying to do the best I can for the city, no, I really don't want to listen to them. If you want to come up and help work a problem out, if you want to help improve the city, then I'm all ears and you will have 100% of my efforts. But, you know, I'm done with it, folks. I am done with people threatening to sue me, threatening to kill me, threatening to beat me up, because I'm trying to do the very best I can, working as hard as I can. So if you want to come up and threaten me, fine. Understand I'm not listening to you. If you wanna actually do something creative and productive, I would give you the shirt off my back to do it. Am I clear? Thank you.

Go ahead. M. Delarso. M. Delarso.

Okay.

Helen has departed Garth. Garth E. for PH 8.

Mayor and council members, as America marks its 25th anniversary, it's worth remembering that this country was founded by people who finally decided that they had endured enough taxation without meaningful representation. Lancaster may not have a harbor, but property owners can still vote no and send these assessments to the bottom of the harbor. I strongly oppose any Proposition 218 increase. The city should not ask property owners for more money until it fully explains the increases already contained in its own budget. Citywide expenditures jumped from approximately 280.8 million in fiscal year 25 to 479.1 million in the revised 26 budget, an increase of more than 70%. The district budgets tied to these assessments also increased sharply. Lighting increased approximately 49%, sewer 67%, landscape 24% and drainage 60%. Combined spending across these four districts increased roughly 50% in a single year. The 27 budget already identifies millions of dollars in anticipated property tax related revenue for these districts, including approximately 9.6 million for lighting, 7.1 million for drainage, 4.6 million for sewer, and 4.1 million for landscape.

Hold on, I want to check that. Is he accurate?

I don't know without the budget right in front of me.

I downloaded the city budget and dropped it into an Excel spreadsheet and this is the analysis that came out of that.

The increases in those districts? No, the total increase in the budget. Did we double the budget? 70% increased the budget. It's almost doubling.

George.

So Mr. Mayor, if he's comparing the original budget and the revised budget, any unspent funds from the prior year get added into the subsequent budget through those revisions. So he may be looking at a couple of years of spending, especially for those projects that were incomplete. In the prior year, we add that budget as authorized bidding for the subsequent year. So if you look at the original plus the revised and compare the two, it's not really an apples to apples comparison. But I would love to sit down with the gentleman and answer any questions you may have.

OK. I am comparing the actual 25 to the proposed 26 budget.

Proposed 26.

What was sent out in publication as the final proposed 2026 fiscal budget for the City of Lancaster. It recognized additional revenue from many sources including I'm sorry. Measure LC, Measure Y. Yeah, Measure Y, but a lot of grants and other revenue sources. That's correct.

I would love to have the opportunity to sit down with you and explain that any further.

Right. Let me finish my- Yeah, of course, you can. Thank you. The city needs to answer a very simple question. How were these assessment revenues placed into the budget before property owners had even voted? Are these numbers merely assumptions? If the assessments fail, what spending will be cut? What reserves are already available? What other funding sources exist and exactly what additional services will residents receive for these higher charges? Property owners should not be pressured to approve a blank check based on vague claims and incompetent and sorry, incomplete explanations. Until this city provides a transparent line-by-line accounting of collections, reserves, transfers, costs, and promise services, the only responsible vote is no. I do want to say one more thing. The first lady who spoke here and mentioned that there is not necessarily an opportunity, but at least we should consider the option of legal action against the city. She was right on course with that. She wasn't threatening, she was asking or stating that we should consider that, not that she was going to do that.

My recollection of what she said was that she was going to sue the public officials. No, that's not what she said. That's different than suing the city, right? No.

Okay.

If I misunderstood it, then I apologize. I also found it- I don't think I did.

Mayor Paris, I also found it incredibly rude of you to pick up your phone when Dr. Coronado was speaking to you as well too. I don't have my phone. Thank you.

I don't have my phone. Then you had something that you put to your ear. It actually is a device I put on my neck that calms my vagus nerve down. Okay. So I don't say something I shouldn't, which I have a habit of doing.

From my position out there, it looked like a telephone. Thank you. I'm so sorry.

We have to continue. We have lots of speakers, Mayor. Lavinda. Lavinda Dantzler. Lavinda.

Okay.

Dwayne Spolstra. Dwayne Spolstra. Okay, Arthur Callaway.

Okay, so first I would like the link to get the device that calms you down because sometimes I get angry too. I don't know if that link is available by the city, but I would like it. Second, thank you for removing the three. That was great. Great ideas that should have time to be implemented is a senior citizen commission. That should be something that's just ongoing that you all have access to. We used to have something called the tapestry and other commissions like that. Questions that I don't need answers for but would just like to say, and then there's going to be questions at the end that I would like answers for, but these are questions that I would like.

On PHA.

Second.

On PHA.

100%. Thank you, sir. On the sewer?

Yes.

Yeah. How do you get a new ballot? So many things are happening. What if I throw it away thinking that this isn't, we're not going to vote on it because I confused it with the other three. How do we get a new ballot? If I sent in my ballot, can I change my vote due to the extra information that is rolling forward that shows something that I might not say yes now, I might change it to no. Is it based on the turned in forms or the total affected parcels? Is this going to be counted as only the percentage of the turned in forms need to be protested or is it a 51% of the total sewer parcels that need to be there because we know that that type of turnout is not going to happen. I would like to know that this offline. Also, how many forms that the city have, but that's going to happen later because I guess y'all didn't count it. Are y'all counting it as they come in or you're going to count it today?

We will start sorting and opening envelopes tomorrow. That's the beginning of the tabulation process. We will not begin actual counting until August 11th.

Copy that. But that was some concerning information about the box and the open box type thing that goes to that. I would like the answers to this question. On the 11th, is it going to be the council's ability to say no if the public hearing shows all this information that we've been gathering that you all are not confident in the sewer assessment? Is that no going to be able to happen on August 11th?

Say that again.

Will the City Council individually be able to say no and actually stop the assessment increase on August 11? Or is it going to be a public hearing that you hear and it's just we're moving forward?

I couldn't imagine us not being able to say no to anything.

So after the tabulation, we will know the answer to the question of whether there is a majority protest of parcels within the district. After that, if there is not a majority protest of parcels within the district, then the council will have the opportunity to vote yes or no on whether to increase the assessment.

Okay. Say that again?

Okay. The sorting will begin tomorrow. Tabulation will occur on the 11th. After the tabulation, if there is not a majority protest of parcels within the district, then the council can vote yes or no. If there is a majority protest, the council cannot vote yes.

Awesome. That is going to be great. I'm going to come to the August 11th to see that one. The last question, if I may, I think that We're not getting as residents the benefit of the doubt of understanding that pipes degrade over time because that keeps being the statement that's made to justify us barreling forward to this thing that a lot of people seemingly don't want. My question is, is it in the engineering report that says that there's some type of emergency repairs that need to happen where these sewers are going to be backing up? Is that actually in the report or are we just saying that in a general manner that over time if we don't do something now that it will back up eventually? Because I think we all know that and we're not asking for five-year deferment. I'm just asking to maybe January 1st so that we can implement tier strategies and all the other things that those staff is coming up with.

If there was an emergency, I'm sure I would have been apprised of it, and I have not been apprised of an emergency situation. The one thing you haven't asked is what do we give up? I mean, sure, we don't have to raise anything. What do we give up? Should I stop the Lancaster Police Department? Should I repair fewer roads than we're already repairing? Should I stop any homeless services we have? What is it you would like me to give up? Because this is not a bottomless pit.

Understood. I would say, and I'm sorry because this is not always like the question with the question, I don't know what we have given up. It's been 15 to 20 years as we've said in the reports that we have not done it correctly as in charge correctly. In your question, I agree, but I would answer that by saying, what did the staff give up over the last 15 to 20 years that we were paying this through general funds? Because if it is something that we can still do for three more months, four more months, five more months, I would prefer to continue as we are because I didn't notice any detrimental losses for the last 15 years. I've been here since 2008. If that is the case, I'm good.

There's nothing that's not on the table. We're willing to look at everything. The point I would like people to just recognize is, okay, do you want crime to go back up to 400 part one crimes per hundred? I mean, 100,000? Do you want the gangs to proliferate in the valley again?

But through your leadership, you've been reducing crime with the 15 years. That's right.

And that's exactly what we have done. The point I'm just trying to make is, yes, I don't want to charge anybody anything. But I also want a city that people want to live in, where people can thrive. And I'm willing to work with any of you as to how we make that balance happen. Acting like we want to raise taxes- That's not me. I know it is not you. I appreciate your comments. You think them out thoroughly. Your questions are relevant. You're not beating the war drums just to hear your own voice. That's not true of everybody, is it? I guess I've said enough.

We have more speakers.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Arthur. Robert. Robert O for PH8. Robert O. Cheryl, PH8. Oh, I'm sorry. Robert? Okay.

Robert Olagi, 4104 West Avenue, J3. I only have one Well, maybe one compound comment or question, and that it relates to we all know that we are on a extremely high level of pressure and throughout the nation. on this spiral of every other day, we have an increase on anything. Here we have how many propositions? And every one of them, it says annually. Then who is creating? that expansion in cost of living for every single human being that is over here in the States. Every one of these one says annually that you get yourself a 20% increase annually for your people over here. that you get yourself another 10% combined for every single people over here that are in the city? Is that what it's leading to? What happens to the cities that think that they have endless people out there that all they do is work all day long to get barely the minimum standard of living. That's all I want to say. Thank you. Thank you.

Cheryl, PH8, Seward.

I just want clarification on the sewer because like I had stated before, it depends on the parcel land and where you live and everything. Then this gentleman was talking about, he said, well, they're just doing a figure and doesn't want to do individual for the sewer unless you deal with the water. Maybe we would rather it go through our water bill with the sewer then because I live in a home, but I'm a single person. My sewer isn't going to be as much as somebody that has a home that maybe has 10 people living in the home. That is the question I have is how are we going to work it to where it I'm hoping it doesn't pass, but if it does pass, then how are we going to make it so it's fair for each individual home to pay for this? Thank you.

I don't know that fairness is possible. in certain things like this. The risk, the cost, everything is spread through the community. And do we do a census of how many people are in your house and then figure out how many times they flush the toilet and then figure out a bill on every individual? Of course not.