Public Safety Commission - Regular Meeting

all it's one o'clock today is our inaugural public safety commission meeting and i will call the meeting to order we'll have jackie take the role

Yes, so when I call your name, just say present or here. Commissioner Dr. Raymond Sims. Present. Commissioner Larry Seingold.

Present.

Commissioner James McEachin.

Present.

And Commissioner Randy Coggin.

Present.

Thank you. Thank you, Jackie. So now we will have Mr. Quillacy come up here. And no, hang on. Sit back down. We'll do the Pledge of Allegiance first. Would somebody like to lead us?

I'll lead. Yep. Stan, if you could, please.

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. Now Mr. Quillacy, you can come up. Mr. Quillacy will be giving you the oath of office. Make this official.

Until we're completed with the oath of office, you're not officially a commissioner, and you cannot do any business as a commissioner. So if you would all please rise, raise your right hand, and repeat after me, except when I say state your name, state your name. All right. I, state your name, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. Thank you. That's the end of the oath, and thank you all very much. There will be forms here. I will countersign, leave them with you for each of you to sign your own form on the second page. Thank you.

Welcome to all of you, and thank you for doing this, being here in this capacity. So the next item on our agenda is actually the approval of the agenda. So what we would be looking for right now is somebody to make a motion to approve the agenda. Then we would be looking for a second, and then we'll take a vote.

I'll move approval.

I'll second.

We'll take a roll call for the vote. Commissioner McEachin.

Approve.

Commissioner Steingold. Approve. Commissioner Sims.

Approve.

Commissioner Coggin.

Approve.

Very good. So we now have an approved agenda, and the first item on the agenda tonight is the election of the commission chair, vice chair, and secretary. So I will turn this over to all of you. You've looked at the staff report I'm sure that we have put together. Never mind, we have to take public comment first. So we have, Jackie's got, looks like she's got three cards, and then we'll get on to the items.

I have two general comments. First, we'll go with Dennis Colburn.

Who is it? good afternoon welcome congratulations I submitted some paperwork to everybody as far as just some comments I had for the City Council meeting that was cancelled so what gave them to you my name is Dennis Colburn these are my opinions only and I mean no respect to any entity mentioned I believe that the High Valley Fire Safe Council evacuation analysis from 324 should be one of the workbooks for this commission. I believe that it should be at every meeting and gone through thoroughly from front to back, checking off every item as it is discussed and tested for its use as an asset or a solution to the need in an evacuation plan. this analysis has been available since 324 and considerable expense and i do not believe it's been discussed or acted on in any way for two and a half years case in point the recommendation for retrofitting the bike trail as an additional escape route the bike pack renovation started october 24th seven months after the analysis release and Completed on 1125 with no implementation of making this recommendation of reality and why? The Ohio Valley Fire Safe grant funding needs to be thoroughly scrutinized and severely curtailed, and the money is diverted to this commission to further projects that benefit people over structures. Projects such as the $12,000 pre-feasibility tool programs mean really free feasibility the $1,000 a home cost to the city for a free home hardening assessment really has to go as far as the city funding over $100,000 My research shows that the Ventura Regional Fire Safe Council's free home hardening assessments are funded by Edison International, a $30 billion company. Why are the citizens of Ojai footing this bill instead of Edison? We have to use the latest information technologies that allows any one of us to have instant precise information at our fingertips. There needs to be a paradigm shift in how we approach solving this protect the people problem we have. I will warn you that Hollywood of Ojai has picked up on our inability to create an evacuation plan, and my guess is soon you will be inundated with massive public pressure and innumerable demands and suggestions. I suggest you quickly form a coordinated and substantial response to the upcoming attacks. I did not wish for this problem to happen. I considered it the nuclear option. I think the time's running out now before that public pressure gets here. So I just think that you ought to be prepared for when it does. Thank you.

So just as a reminder for public comment, the timer is three minutes. When the yellow button gets yellow, that's 30 seconds left for your public comment. So next up, we have Sudip.

Commissioners, congratulations once again. My name is Sudip Motupelli Rao. I am with the Ohio Valley Fire Safe Council and I'd like to share information about two important things coming up. But before I share about the insurance workshop happening this coming Wednesday, August 5th at St. Thomas Aquinas Church as well as the two-day training, I just want to share Overall, having done many of these assessments myself in the city that was facilitated with the city of Ohio funds, we got to meet the neighbors, the individual homeowners. And the safety of our city depends on not just some external agency, it depends on starting from ground zero, each individual homeowner, each individual community, each individual block. And so enabling that kind of resiliency building is crucial. And so I hope that you as a committee will support these kind of grassroots initiatives. When homes gather together and communities gather together to form firewise communities or neighborhoods that help each other out, that's resiliency building in the city. So that doesn't happen from some remote control button. It happens from on the ground work. And so with respect to insurance, the insurance industry can bring about a fundamental shift in the way we build. And so the insurance industry, by virtue of insuring your homes, can guide and move the markets. Traditional insurance companies, when difficulty is met, when they have serious losses of billions of dollars, they may just walk away because they're just looking at it as just a mathematical financial calculation. But we have good news. On August 5th, this coming Wednesday, we have four different insurance companies, panelists speaking, D from Delos, from Rockrose Risk, from Tomorrow and also Farmers Insurance. And they're gonna talk about how they do the scoring, how individual homeowners can actually, and communities can actually articulate meaningfully their risk reductions and mitigations that can give discounts to their premiums. And second, and third, how they incorporate the standards, the IBHR standards, the standards for building homes and neighborhoods, how they can incorporate those into these risk scoring methods. So this is the new way of the insurance industry that can bring about changes. And so I hope that people who are listening and also the committee and others, public will attend. The other thing is a two-day workshop on August 17th and 18th. at the Ohio Valley Women's Club on wildfire resistant construction and landscaping. So this is grassroots deep work that is helpful. Thank you very much.

That is all the public comment we have. There are no attendees on Zoom either that are wanting to public comment. So we'll move on to the next item.

Thank you. So the next item, the first item, is the election of a public safety commission chair, vice chair, and secretary. So per the city municipal code, we are required to have a vice chair, a chair, a vice chair, and a secretary amongst this commission. So I would open that up for conversation amongst you, and we are looking for those three positions.

I would like to nominate Randy Coggins as chair I'd second that We'll take a vote on that Commissioner McEachin Aye Commissioner Seingold Aye Commissioner Sims Commissioner Coggin.

I think aye is okay.

Okay, great. So we now have a chair, Randy Coggin, great. So we will go on to the next position and that's the vice chair. So if anybody would like to make a motion or a discussion or whatever, feel free.

I'd like to nominate Ray Simpson.

Okay.

I would second that Any other nominations or are we good?

Can we have a race?

I'd like to nominate Larry Steingold So then would we just take a vote at this point? Weston?

We may, Director Palmer. And then just for the interest of the Brown Act, we will ask if there are, we haven't received any public comments on this item, but just we didn't touch that point in our report here today. But we can keep moving forward.

OK. So Jackie, would you like to take a vote? Take a vote? So I believe it's- Or discussion? Yeah.

Yeah, just point of order. Does my nomination need a second?

It received a second.

It did?

Yes, I did. OK. Motion's down. You're in. You're the chairman. You're the chair.

So I believe the motion to be for Vice Chair Larry.

Yeah, I was asking you if my nomination of Larry required a second.

I thought I heard a second for that.

No, there was no second. OK, was there a second? Do we need a second? Yes.

We have one motion on the floor for the Vice Chair of Mr. Sims, motion by Commissioner Steingold, second Commissioner McEachin. It sounds like we have a second motion from Commissioner Coggin to nominate Commissioner Steingold as Vice Chair. Do we have a second?

I'll second it.

We have two motions on the floor. We'll take the second motion first. And depending on the action of the second, we may hear the first. So take a motion on the second motion.

So we'll take the motion on the second motion first. OK. So the motion on the table is the second motion is Larry Steingold as the vice chair. We'll take a roll call.

Commissioner Sims?

Yes.

Commissioner McEachin.

Yes, or Larry.

Commissioner Steingold.

Out of curiosity, would I abstain or recuse my own vote?

You get to vote.

Sure, yes.

Commissioner Coggin.

Aye. Aye.

Great, so we have a unanimous 4.0 for Mr. Steingold as the commission chair, vice chair.

Does that make the next vote irrelevant?

No, the next vote is another position and that is for second. Yes, it makes the next motion the first, yes, correct. So now what we're looking for is a secretary. And I just want to make sure you have read the staff report and understand the roles. So here we go. So for a secretary, we're looking for a motion for our secretary.

Could we have a discussion on that?

You most certainly can. I would just be interested if anybody would be willing to serve as secretary And now there's two left right because they're not they're not can cannot be concurrent positions so Jim Ray Okay I'd agree to do it yeah okay then I would and I'll second

Very good. Shall I just do a, what was it, all I? Yeah, all in favor. All in favor.

I would recommend a roll call. OK, we'll do a roll call for this one. Sometimes we can do it unanimous through the chair, but since with this, we should do a roll call.

We'll figure out how we would like to move forward in our meetings, and I'm sure we'll get there. OK, so I'll take a roll call for the secretary to be Commissioner McEachin. Aye. OK. Yes. Yes. Commissioner Coggins.

Aye.

Commissioner Steingold. Yes. And Commissioner Sims. Yes. Great.

Congratulations.

Very good.

Boy.

So now we have the chair, the vice chair, and the secretary. So Chair Coggin, guess what? This is your meeting now. It doesn't matter. You guys, wherever you're comfortable.

I believe the next agenda item is the Brown Act training.

It is, yes. And we have somebody from our city attorney's office who will be leading us in this. And we understand it'll take about 45 minutes or so. So you have the floor.

And we have no public comment on this item.

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Lisa Tarossian. I am a senior counsel at Elish Ironwinder, and I'm very happy to be with you here today. And I believe this is the best time for this presentation as you are all a new commission. So we will go over some of your roles and responsibilities as a commissioner and your roles and responsibilities in your individual commission in this presentation. As a matter of housekeeping, did you all have my presentation up or did you want me to share my screen with you? How would you like to proceed?

Lisa, you can share your screen.

Okay, give me one second.

Can you hear her clearly?

It's not the best sound.

Is there some way to make the sound better?

Lisa, you sound almost like you're underwater a little bit.

Oh, is this better? I moved a little closer.

That's much better.

Perfect. I'm so sorry. My setup here is a little weird, so give me one second. Sorry, is that working for you? Is that working better? Okay. Okay, let me start. Can you all see the presentation? Yes, we can see it. Okay. You're good. Give me one second.

Oh, no.

Give me one second to figure out how to read my notes because it's showing on both my screens. Give me one second.

If it helps, we can't see the notes over here.

Yeah, I'm seeing the presentation. Let me pull it up on my other computer. And I think that will be probably the easiest way to do this.

Lindy, or I don't know how to direct this question to you, Lindy, or to our new chair. I don't know whether to address this question to you or to our new chair, but what do we do about the vacancy? Is there anything, any role we have in that?

No, this will go back to council and they will make an appointment.

And we are not inhibited from moving forward with our- No, we have a quorum tonight. We have a quorum, so that's all right.

Yeah, we're fine. Thank you for asking.

Lisa, are you still there? Yeah, I'm still here. I'm so sorry. One second. I'm trying to pick up. Of course, I'm having technical difficulties and I try to be proactive about this as well.

Well, from the city clerk's office, I can fill some space here. We do have an existing vacancy on the commission, so we'll go through our regular process. It's up on the website now. So if we notice the vacancy to the public, we'll do a display ad in the paper. I'm going to consider this a continuous recruitment without a deadline. And then this one will actually go back to the mayor's choice, because it's a midterm vacancy. So the mayor will be included for this specific one again. And the last other note for that is that it's a two year, it's one of the two year seats. So if you're talking to any people around the city who are interested, it's one of the two year seats. So we are on it. We'll get this filled as fast as we can.

I'm sorry, I'm still here. One second, I'm almost got it figured out.

lindy while we're waiting can i just make one comment i'm good to go sorry just one quick comment for the record so everybody knows um nick clary would normally be here today but nick is assigned to the fox fire in washington state as part of the national overhead team and we'll be out of town for probably two weeks on that overhead team

Thank you everybody for your patience as I got this together. Okay, so. Okay. So, as you know, a city's boards, communities and commissions are a vital support system for any city, and the better they function, the better a city can serve its residents. That is why it's important for members of these groups to be well informed of their roles, responsibilities and applicable laws. Boards, commissions, and committees are established by the Ojai Municipal Code. The current ones are the Planning Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, the Arts Commission, the Building Appeals Board, and the Public Safety Commission. There is also the Finance and Budget Committee. This committee is advisory to City Council and does not possess independent decision-making authority. Members are appointed by a committee composed of the Mayor, a rotating City Council member, and the Chair or Vice Chair. The nominating committee must make a unanimous decision for each nominee to be confirmed by the City Council. If a majority of the full City Council declines to accept nominees proposed by unanimous vote of the Nominating Committee, the Nominating Committee begins the process again and interviews candidates from the existing applicant pool to select a new nominee until City Council confirms the Nominating Committee's choice. Vacancies created mid-term are filled in the same manner. Qualifications for members are described in the respective agencies' ordinances. To join a board commission or committee, you must take an oath and sometimes you're required to submit a statement of economic interests. You will also be expected to participate in ethics training within a year of appointment and every two years thereafter. You may know this as the AB 1234 and AB 1825 trainings. However, recent legislation has changed the timeline for ethics training, which we will discuss later. You will also be expected to complete sexual harassment prevention training within six months of appointment and every two years as well. Members serve four-year terms, and there are a few exceptions, such as the youth commissioner of the Parks and Recreation Commission, who is limited to one two-year term, and the inaugural terms for the Public Safety Commission, where three members will serve four-year terms and two members will serve for an additional two-year term. All committee members must also serve until their successor is appointed and qualified. Members serve at will and may be removed for any reason. Some examples of those reasons are excessive absences, verbal or physical abusive behavior, violations of ethics policies, violations of city policies, and conflicts of interest. Committee appointments are non-political appointments. There is a process and procedure for the removal of members. The first step in this process is to have two city council members advise the city manager of their intent to place an item on the upcoming agenda to consider the removal of the committee member. Then the city manager must contact the committee member to advise them of the request and to provide them with at least seven days advanced notice of the agendized city council discussion regarding their removal. Third, the committee member can then choose to resign or object to the proposed action. If they choose to resign, 60 days notice is suggested to enable the identification and replacement of the member without causing a gap in the committee's membership. If they choose to object, they will be given an opportunity to speak to the full city council at that agendized public council meeting before consideration of their removal. After completing this process, any committee member may be removed by a majority city council vote at a regular city council meeting. Each board commission or committee must elect a chair, vice chair and secretary to serve a one year term as you all just did. Committee members may nominate themselves or any other members to these positions. No second is required. Once nominations are complete, a vote on the nominees in the order of nominations is taken. The nominee receiving votes from a majority of the members in attendance will be appointed. If no member receives a majority, the process shall be repeated, except in the event of a tie between the top two vote getters, in which case a runoff is held. Some boards, commissions and committees function in a purely advisory role, while others also have decision-making responsibilities functioning in a quasi-judicial, quasi-legislative role. Your commission is one that has a purely advisory role. All committees serve in an advisory role to council, however. As an advisory role, for example, you may recommend changes to the OMC if the change is within the committee's jurisdiction. Both informal and formal means of communication may be used to fulfill this advisory role. Formally, committee recommendations related to city actions are presented at city council meetings as individual agenda items or as action minutes. Other boards, commissions, and committees may also have decision-making responsibilities and function in a hearing mode from time to time, which is a quasi-judicial role. These responsibilities include the granting of permits and hearings of appeals. Some examples of those types of committees are the Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning Commission, and the Buildings Appeals Board. Recommendations to city council are made through formal action, meaning by a motion and vote, and sometimes the approval of a resolution. Committees may also perform additional duties assigned to it by the City Council. Members are expected to review the agenda materials, attend meetings, participate in discussion, and to vote on agenda items. If a member is unable to attend a meeting, they should notify the committee chair as soon as practical. Members of the committee shall attend in person unless arrangements are made in advance for attendance via teleconference. The chairperson presides over meetings as well as has other responsibilities that are discussed on this slide. As a chair appears on behalf of the committee when appearing before the city council, the chair is expected only to speak on matters behalf of the committee on topics where an action was approved by a vote of the committee. Each committee also has a city council liaison who facilitates the committee's work and communicates information back to the city council. The council liaison does not participate in the committee's discussions. There are two types of meetings, regular and special. Regular meetings may be scheduled with the posting of a cancellation notice and notification of a special meeting. Meetings may be canceled by either the chair or staff liaison. The reasons for cancellation should be sent to the council liaison, mayor, and city manager. Lack of a quorum of the majority of appointed members at a meeting requires meeting cancellation. Special meetings may be held at any time upon the call of the chair, a majority of the committee members, or city council, followed by the appropriate notice. Special meetings may be called to meet deadlines, to conduct study sessions or workshops, or when a quorum was not met at a regular meeting. Serial meetings and the discussion of official business outside of a noticed public meeting is not allowed. Serial meetings are a violation of the Brown Act. A copy of the most recent version of the Brown Act should have been provided to you all by the city clerk. If not, let me know and our office will get you one. Community members are subject to FPPC investigation in the event complaints are filed regarding the Brown Act. So it's important to abide by the Brown Act. The combined effect of serial meetings may inappropriately be a meeting of a quorum of committee members. For example, if a member of a seven-member committee speaks to more than two other members, it may constitute a serial meeting. Inadvertent use of the email, like the careless use of the reply all function, may also constitute a serial meeting. Engaging in discussion of city business on social media can also lead to a serial meeting. A quorum is a majority of members. There can be no meeting of the committee unless a quorum is present. If less than a quorum attends, any discussion by that group is characterized as a committee of the whole, but no record is made of this occurrence and no decisions can be made. All boards, commissions, and committee meetings are subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act, colloquially known as the Brown Act, which we discussed a little bit before in the previous slide, I'm sorry. And the Brown Act is codified in the California Government Code. Under the Act, all meetings are open and public. However, the Brown Act does not limit an official acting in his or her own capacity, meaning that you have the right to confer with constituents, advocates, consultants, news reporters, or to talk to staff or a colleague, but you must make sure that you are not discussing official committee business with them to avoid having a serial beating. The use of direct communication intermediaries or technology to develop a collective concurrence outside of a meeting is considered a serial meeting, like we discussed previously, and therefore prohibited. The seriousness of a serial meeting cannot be stressed enough. It's the number one way essentially commissioners kind of make a mistake. And the internet actually makes it a lot easier for legislative bodies to communicate with each other and their constituents and make it easier to have a serial meeting. So it's important to be wary of this. To avoid this, a good social media rule is to not react, share, or comment, or post on another comment made by another member of the body to avoid having a serial meeting. So the fear of having a serial meeting, however, should not discourage you from having individual communications or contacts with other members about noncommittee members. There is no prohibition on attending public conferences or other local agency meetings, community meetings, social gatherings, informational meetings with staff are also not a violation of the Brown Act. This slide is just some additional information about social media communication already discussed previously, but you can refer to it in case you need additional guidance. The agenda constitutes the roadmap for the meeting. The format and sequence of a committee's agenda is discussed in detail in the handbook. So I'll refer you there if you need additional details. Committees are also governed by Rosenberg's rule of order as far as the procedure goes. rosenberg's rules of order contain specific rules of conduct every member desiring to speak shall address the chair and upon recognition by the chair confine contributions to the matter at hand avoiding all indecorous language and personal attacks as well as tangential discussions of non agendized items A member may not interrupt a speaker except for the following reasons. The first reason is for privilege. The proper interruption would be point of privilege. The chair would then ask the interrupter to state your points. Appropriate points of privilege relate to anything that would interfere with the normal comfort or amplification of the meeting. For example, earlier you told me that you couldn't hear me, so that's a point of privilege. Or for example, the room might be too hot or too cold. That's a point of privilege. The second is order. The proper interruption would be point of order. Again, the chair would ask the interrupter to state your points. Appropriate points of order relate to anything that would be considered appropriate conduct of the meeting. For example, if the chair moved to vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that debate. The third is an appeal. So if the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body disagrees with, the member may appeal the ruling of the chair. The proper interruption is, I appeal the ruling of the chair. If the motion is seconded and after debate it passes by a simple majority vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed. The fourth is to withdraw a motion. During a debate and discussion of a motion, the maker of the motion may maker of the motion on the floor at any time may interrupt a speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the floor. The motion is immediately deemed withdrawn and any other members may make that motion once recognized. Other rules of testimony to keep in mind are that all comments should be addressed to the committee as a whole and not to individual members of the committee, members or public or staff. It is also helpful but not required for speakers to state their name in order that the secretary might identify them in the minutes of the meeting. The chair may limit public speakers to three minutes or less depending on the number of speakers and length of agenda. The process of consideration and action on an item is handled with the following four steps. The first is to present the item. The chair should announce the agenda item number and subject. The chair should then announce any special procedures to be followed. For example, if it's a quasi-judicial hearing. This is also when members would announce their conflicts of interest, if any, and recuse themselves from the vote and leave the room. The chair should then invite the appropriate people, typically city staff, to report on the item. The chair may provide an opportunity for committee members to ask clarifying questions to the person providing the report. This is not preferred as questioning tends to segue into position statements before public input is taken, which is inconsistent with the open meeting principles. The second is to ask for public input. The chair opens the meeting to public input and may limit speaker's time as discussed previously. A response to public comment, if appropriate, should not be provided until after public comments are finished. The third is to consider the item. The chair then requires committee's deliberation. Member deliberation would include questions of the person making the report or others with relevant knowledge, consideration of alternatives to the recommendation, additional considerations not previously stated, and other relevant facts and opinions. The fourth is to decide. The committee then decides by motion and voting. Appendices B and C of the handbook actually have more detailed information regarding this process if you want to see a step-by-step. For all action items, the chair should invite a motion from the members. No motion is made if the agenda item is to receive a report, unless the committee wishes to address recommended actions contained within that report. Once a vote is taken, discussion on the item ends. For public hearings, there are additional guidelines. After receiving the report, the chair opens a public hearing and accepts testimony in the following order. First, from the applicant or proponent. Second, from an opponent. Third, rebuttal if so rebuttal, at the sole discretion of the committee, of course. And the fourth is for public comments. The chair then closes the public hearing. Actually, as we touched on a little bit in the previous slides, committees may take action in different ways, either informal or formal. Informal actions, meaning no vote required, generally take the form of the chair giving direction after input from other committee members. Informal actions would include requesting information from staff or suggesting that a committee member prepare a report on a future agenda topic. Formal actions are taken by establishing a quorum, considering a motion, and then voting. Most actions require a vote by a majority of the appointed members unless a supermajority vote is required. All formal actions must be listed in the agenda and require a motion and vote in the affirmative. Motions are the vehicle for taking formal actions. A motion should be introduced on a matter after general information is shared, options have been considered, and members have shared their opinions and seek to persuade. The chair shall ensure that all motions are clearly stated and commonly understood before allowing deliberations and voting. Items may be continued by a committee vote to a subsequent time for the following types of reasons. if the committee needs additional information during the meeting, if new information comes to light that needs further study during the meeting, or any other reason that is deemed appropriate and substantial by the committee. In addition, a committee hearing may continue an item when Let's say for planning and commission or the building's appeals board, an applicant cannot appear at the meeting and has requested that the item be continued, the application is revised during the meeting, or the committee requests that the application be revised. Disrupting means engaging in behavior during a meeting that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting. Prior to removing an individual, the chair needs to warn that individual that their behavior is disrupting the meeting and that their failure to cease that behavior may result in their removal. The chair, after warning, may then remove that individual if the behavior continues. If there has been a use of force or a true threat of force, there is no obligation for the chair to provide a warning to that individual before removing them from the meeting. So a true threat of force or the use of force, you can remove. But for other situations, you need to give a warning and then you can boot them if the behavior continues, but it would only be for the remainder of, let's say, that meeting, not indefinitely. The public has a right to review and inspect public records with certain exceptions. Those exceptions are the pending litigation exception, which exempts documents prepared in support of ongoing litigation. The deliberative process exception, which exempts preliminary drafts, notes, or other information relating to the deliberative process. The personal privacy exemption, which exempts personnel files, medical records, or other such records, the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of privacy. Other records that are exempt are real estate appraisals, records pertaining to investigations, and generally the preliminary drafts, notes, or memos that are not kept in the ordinary course of business. If you need more examples of what constitutes a public record, you can refer to the slide. An agency must make copies of disclosable records promptly available upon request. So an agency responds within 10 days with a determination if there are disposable records to request and can request an extension of 14 days under unusual circumstances. Let's say if there are voluminous amounts of records to review or redactions are needed, they can request a time extension. This is important because any writing can be considered retained by the agency even if that writing is contained in your personal email account or your personal phone if that writing relates to the conducting of agency business. It would therefore be subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. Privacy concerns are addressed on a case-to-case basis. This is why it's important to not use any of your personal accounts when conducting official committee business. Use your city accounts. It's hard to claw things back because then it's kind of intermingled. So it's better to just be safe than to be sorry later on. Committee members are representatives of the city, meaning they have a duty to represent the city and to take only those actions they believe are for the benefit of the city. Committee members are expected to comply with all applicable laws and have the ethical duties of loyalty, due diligence, and avoiding bias. Under the Levine Act, no member with the power to make decisions or recommendations may accept, solicit, or direct contributions of over $500 while a proceeding, like a license, permit, or other use entitlement, is pending before them from a participant, party, or their agent. This also applies for 12 months after a final decision is rendered. This only applies to committee members running for elected office, so that's important to remember. If a member has received a contribution of $500 within the preceding 12 months, that fact must be disclosed on record of the proceedings before rendering any decisions. So, as we discussed previously, you know, chair will announce it. And then if anybody has a conflict of interest, that is a time to stay on the record and leave and not be involved in any of the decision making. If a member willfully or knowingly receive such a contribution within the preceding 12 months, the member may not participate in the decision-making of that proceeding or use their position to influence such decision. This requirement applies both to members that participate in proceedings as well as those running for office. So this requirement applies regardless. We already discussed members' ethics and sexual harassment prevention training obligations. However, new legislation, namely SB 827, amends the ethics training requirement deadline to align with the sexual harassment prevention training so that all mandated trainings must now be completed within six months of starting service. Effective January 1st of this year, SB 827 also expanded the ethics training mandate to all department heads or other similar administrative officers, regardless of their designation in the agency's conflict of interest code. Certain members will also be required to complete fiscal and financial trainings every two years. SB 827 only exempts county auditors, county treasurers, and county tax collectors from fiscal and financial trainings. SB 827 also expanded the records disclosable under the California Public Records Act to include those fiscal and financial trainings, and those records must be maintained by the city for at least five years. Also starting July 1 of this year, an agency must post on its website instructions and contact information regarding how to request those records. The city has a policy against using copyrighted works. The purpose of this policy is to protect the city from the legal and operational challenges associated with the use of copyrighted materials during a public meeting. The best practice is to not use any of these materials at meetings. If you need more information regarding this, please refer to the slide. Okay, and now we've gotten to the roles and responsibilities on your Commission specifically. The objective of diving more in depth regarding your specific role in the Public Safety Commission is to familiarize you with the laws that govern your position, the procedures necessary to properly effectuate your position, and most importantly, the responsibilities specific to you in your role on the Commission. The Public Safety Commission is an advisory body to the City Council as we previously discussed, which means that the Commission's main purpose is to make policy recommendations to City Council on matters that are outlined specifically in Ojai Municipal Code Section 3-9.08 regarding the powers and duties of the Commission that we will discuss more in the upcoming slides. The Commission does not have adjudicatory authority And is not responsible for the review or investigation of specific incidents for addressing complaints regarding specific individuals and is not allowed to interfere with the operational decisions of the city's contracted public safety agencies. For the inaugural commission, a nominating committee that is comprised of the mayor and a rotating city council member nominates four commissioners for confirmation by the city council, and the mayor nominates one commissioner independently for confirmation by the city council. All subsequent appointments are done by a nominating committee that are comprised of three members, the mayor or rotating council member, and the commissioner chair or vice chair. The nominating committee must unanimously decide each nominee for confirmation by majority vote of all members of the City Council. No nominee shall be submitted to City Council for confirmation without unanimous support of the nominating committee, just like we discussed in the previous slides. A confirmation by the City Council occurs only by majority vote. If a nominee fails to garner a majority vote of City Council, the nominating committee starts again. All members must live within the Ohio area of interest and a maximum of 2 members of the commission may have their primary residence and be domiciled outside of the city. As we mentioned previously, this commission, all commission appointments are non political appointments and this commission is also a non political appointment. The Commission annually elects a chair, vice chair, a secretary, and such other officers as deemed necessary. In absence or disability of either the chair or vice chair, the Commission may designate a chair portempore. A commissioner may be removed from office by the processes we discussed earlier in this presentation, so I will not reiterate right now. regular meetings of the commission are held publicly occurring monthly for the first six months following the appointment and swearing-in of the last commissioner after those six months the commission can continue to meet on a monthly basis but is then only required to meet once per calendar quarter Meeting minutes are required, and the Secretary of the Commission is responsible for providing them to the City Clerk through the Commission Liaison, so they are filed and distributed to the members of City Council within 15 days after the Commission's approval. The Commission meeting's procedures are also governed by the Rosenberg Rules of Order and the City's adopted Boards and Commissions Handbooks, unless otherwise stated. No members of the Commission receive compensation for their service as a member. As previously mentioned, the commission cannot interfere with the powers and duties of the city officers or the management or operations of the city. The commission cannot direct city staff or require staff to perform work on behalf of the commission. However, the chair or presiding officer can consult with the city manager and staff liaison regarding any commission requests for staff to perform work. Any request for work that is not included in the already approved annual budget will require City Council approval before commencement. The Commission does not have the authority to adjudicate any matters regarding resident complaints about specific incidents or allegations against City officers, employees, or contractors, and it does not have the authority to compel attendance of persons before it. As previously mentioned, for the inaugural commission, the first three members appointed serve an additional term of up to four years, and the remaining two members serve an additional term of up to two years. All inaugural commissioners are eligible for re-appointment. All subsequent commission appointments shall be for a term of four years. The terms of all members of the commission expire at the second regular City Council meeting in May. Members hold office until their successors have been nominated and confirmed, even upon the expiration of their term. A person who has been appointed to fill a vacancy holds office for the remainder of the unexpired term. The Public Safety Commission's powers and duties are set forth in OMC Chapter 3-9.08. The function and powers of the commission are limited to To make recommendations to City Council regarding Neighborhood Watch and Citizens Emergency Response, CRT programs, and other public safety programs and initiatives of the Ventura County Sheriff's Office and the Ventura County Fire Department. To develop and recommend methods for increasing public safety awareness to the City Council by recommending the most effective means of community communication and outreach. to recommend annual commendations by city council for private residents and public employees who make significant contributions to public safety within the community. To review community concerns and make recommendations to city council on parking regulations, sidewalk conditions and accessibility, speed limits and enforcement, crosswalk safety and visibility, and traffic control strategies to improve both pedestrian and vehicle safety. to recommend to City Council fire hardening and fire safety initiatives to improve community resilience and preparedness within the city's jurisdiction, including promoting fire safety education, and to provide other recommendations to City Council on issues involving public safety in the community as directed and as requested by City Council.

All right, that's all I have for you all today.

I hope that This was helpful on your journey on this commission and the inaugural journey of this commission. So if you have any questions, please let me know now. If not, then.

Lisa, I do have one question. You had a slide on social media that you kind of glossed over. Could I ask you to go back and just kind of cover that slide in a little bit of detail?

Yeah, let me go back. Okay, so I have it up here, so I'll discuss it. It just says a member should not respond directly to any communication on an Internet based social media platform regarding a matter that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board commission or committee that is made posted or shared by another member. So, let's say. Uh, 2 of you have a Facebook conversation going, somebody post something about, um, you know, official business. So, if you comment under that, it could, it could be considered a 0 meeting kind of piggybacking off the point that we made in the previous slide.

Excuse me, could you slow down please? Yeah. Thank you.

So, let's say there's 2 Facebook pages that you both have, you know, you're both on Facebook talking about something. So, let's say somebody's on there talking about official commission business and then another council member comments underneath it. You know, the comment could be considered a serial meeting, and that's a violation of the brown act. And so that's why it's important to kind of not engage with other council people or council members. On social media to avoid the. you know, having a serial meeting or the, you know, maybe it appears like a serial meeting, but it's not, you know, just to avoid that in general, because it could, you know, lead to consequences for individual council members at the end. Let's say if somebody files a violation, you know, there's an investigation that happens. So just to avoid that, it's best to, you know, not avoid interacting with other council members, you know, visibly on, you know, on social media, or even invisibly, realistically, you know, we don't know, you know, that could be found out as well. So just avoid speaking about official business anywhere else other than the chambers. And then it's also important because this includes things like thumbs up, emojis, sharing or commenting. So things that you kind of would think are innocuous, let's say you didn't leave a complete comment but you shared it or you put a thumbs up to it or something, that could be considered having a serial meeting. Um, okay. Social media is, uh, is any online platform that is open and accessible. So it could be a Facebook, Twitter, even like an app, like next door, like, let's say where you could get information, you know, next door is kind of used for, um, speaking about what's going on in your personal neighborhood. Like, so it's just important to be weary of, of social media because it's kind of a new, you know, it's a new frontier. So,

lisa to clarify though that would only pertain to matters that are before this commission is that correct yes thank you any more questions from the commission good thank you lisa thank you lisa we appreciate it i wish i could be there in person i'm so sorry uh next time

okay so i will um present the staff report for the next item on the agenda and that is the establishment of a regular meeting day time and location um we sort of have already decided on the location and it's in here so um we would probably work around the parameters of when this space is available so um we wanted to we wanted i know that i had heard from many of you and we were all anxious and excited to get this commission off and running so we we set this meeting today doesn't need to be the regular meeting time unless it works for everybody. But this is up for discussion for all of you.

Is this the time slot now, this one to three period? Is that the open time for these proposed options?

Do you know if that's the case? I think that is the case for this space.

Okay, is there the Kent Hall space, is it available at other times?

Yeah, we would have to check with Weston on that. Most of the commissions are in this room. So I don't know if we want to go over to Kent Hall. I believe that that is not the direction that administration wants to go. This is kind of the commission room.

As far as I'm concerned I mean if this time and the first Monday and this time period works for everybody I'm good with that but I'd like to hear from the rest of the Commission Well I'd prefer the third Monday if that's possible I don't know what everybody else's plans are I'm fairly open

Like Larry, I'm pretty open. It doesn't matter whether it's a Monday or Thursday for me.

Okay.

And this time works as well. I assume this time works for all of you.

okay so does somebody want to put a motion forward and say the third that the did you say the third Monday the third Monday and we will you know if everybody's in agreement on that we've already checked in the room and the space is available then we can okay so I'll make a motion that we establish the third Thursday

every month is our third Monday I'll start again I'll propose a motion that we make the third Monday from 1 to 3 our appointed time for meetings okay so we have a first and a second Jackie would you like to take roll can we have a discussion first sure you sure can and we can also take comments on this so

If it's going to be the third Thursday, does that mean that we will not meet again until next month, basically six weeks from now?

Well, we can change that, can't we, if we wanted to, if we felt that was justified. We could have a special meeting.

We can have a special meeting, yes. would um the 24th is the third thursday uh the third monday sorry um would that be a special meeting would that be a regular that would be a regular meeting i think what they're asking is if there was some opportunity to have a meeting between now and then oh right we started yeah fine yeah two weeks yeah two weeks two and a half weeks um we just need to be mindful of of filling in that that six week period because we've got to get agendas out and we've got a very long lead time on that so And that's one of the reasons we selected the first Monday, too, just to not wait till the third Monday to delay it even a couple more weeks. Right.

So what's your feeling about this?

I think we should probably vote on making it the third Monday first and then discuss whether we want

to do an additional Monday meeting in two weeks.

And we can discuss that after the business of today to see if that's warranted and to see if that would be beneficial to everybody. I know it's a long time between now and the third Monday of the next month. And we'll have to make sure that we have a quorum. OK. So if we want to just set the regular meetings now and we can discuss after the business today and see what we need to do. Maybe there's homework for people to do, maybe there's homework for us to do. Yeah.

That's fine.

So we have a first and a second for the third Monday of the month. Jackie, do you want to take a roll call?

Commissioner McEachin? Aye. Commissioner Steingold? Yes. Commissioner Coggin? Aye. Commissioner Simms? Yes.

Okay. Motion passes. On to the next item, the one that we're all super excited about. Do you have a public comment?

Yeah, we do have two public comments for item number four.

We'll start- Do I give the staff report first and then the public comments?

I think we do.

Yeah, I got the thumbs up from the mayor. Yes. Okay, I will do that then. So I will present the next item from a staff perspective. We have a report and we have received direction from the city council. This is the first order of business for this commission. So we are tasked with putting together a draft speed hunt policy. So in your packet, staff, Jackie and I primarily, have put together. We started with the county of Ventura's speedhump policy because we needed to start somewhere. And we thought that that would be a very good place because we have Ventura County Sheriff and we have Ventura County Fire Department with us. So again, what we have presented, what we presented to council and what we presented in your packet, it's a starting point. So we're open to suggestions. We're open for conversation about everything. We're just trying to get something together. And once this body here gets some recommendations, we as staff will take it back to city council for adoption and comments from them.

I have a question. I put together a document that I made physical copies of today that applies kind of a different, a modified matrix. It could be added to this proposal. I think I sent it to you, Lindy. You did. But I don't know if this is the appropriate time to distribute this and discuss it, or if that is something that has to- I think you can distribute it.

The reason it didn't get included in this packet is because we had put, We didn't want to violate the Brown Act by these serial conversations and such. I understand. So we thought that this might happen today, that you would bring it with you. Right. And it's fine to hand out, and it can be talking points. All of this is talking points.

Okay, okay, I'll leave that to our chair.

And I believe that you're not the only one who had some suggestions.

I'm sure. So I'll leave it to our chair to determine the appropriate time for that.

Okay, so how we can do this, The draft policy here, you guys can talk about it. We can make notes. There can be conversation. So it's open for discussion. Do we take the public comment now? OK.

Unless any other commissioners have questions, and then we'll do public comment, and then we'll do discussion.

No. Questions. We'll come back to the discussion. Yes. Not that. We'll just take a public comment now. OK.

So my first public comment for item number four is Bill Miley. And then we'll have Wayne Maynard.

Hello. First of all, I remember the Drowned Avenue experience over the past few years. where residents were concerned about speeding cars and a road that wasn't really, no sidewalks, et cetera. And their request for either speed humps or bumps. I'm not sure which. I think it was the opposite. And at one point, I think they even paid for it. And also, I was actively involved in supporting a 25 mile an hour citywide speed limit that we discussed in the last year or so. There's certainly a need for more speed control on city streets. And I certainly support the issue of where residents are interested in reducing speed. and potential hazards through humps and bumps, or melee humps. The charts that were presented in the report, the first chart, the Public Works Department had a box that said, 67%, if 67% of the people on the primary street support speed humps, that would be accepted. But they also added that adjacent streets would also have the opportunity to vote where they would have to vote 67% to support the primary street. And that's wrong. That's really bad because in my logic, part of the problem is the people who live on the adjacent streets are partly the ones that are speaking to get home. So it's kind of like letting the coyotes who live near a chicken pen determine how you make the mesh to keep the coyotes out. So please do not include that. I definitely support speed humps and the way it's being approved or approached. And the city should certainly pay for it, never requiring the residents to pay for something to reduce the risk of living in the city. Thank you.

Wayne Maynard Wayne Maynard first I'd like to thank you for your volunteering for the positions and congratulations on your your appointments to this very important Commission my name is Wayne Maynard I'm a resident of Ojai live on Gridley Road and I support a policy I think it I don't support the policies written but we do need to have a policy I'm probably more of like in the favor of not having very many speed humps in the city I think it causes people to transfers the problem I think from one street to the next street and and that's I think there might must be other solutions that we can look at I'm also concerned I spent many years in the fire department and I know for a fact that even with the humps it slows down your emergency response I'm concerned about that as well. With regards to the proposed policy, 67% of the people along the street, it's not clear to me are you measuring for a long street like from the first one cross street to the next cross street or from speed hump to speed hump you know what what is the length of the street that you're measuring for your 67 percent and the same thing with immediate adjacent joining streets is not really well defined what those are so that'd be a concern with that the policy talks about speed humps and speed cushions but it doesn't really i don't see where it defines how you determine which one to do or how it's requested i'm also concerned about who is the final authority to make the decision is it the public works director is it the commission or the city council list of where these things are going to get put Looking at some of the other agencies in that matrix, the proposed policy we have is that the public safety agencies are notified. I don't think that goes far enough. The city of Santa Paula requires approval or no comment or no objection from another city city of Santa Clara Clarita requires that the agencies be involved in the decision-making process whether that goes or not there doesn't go I think we need to have the input from our public safety agencies on deciding where these go and what their design designs are that's it for that thank you

No more comments? Okay. No more comments. So it is open for discussion.

Okay. I tend to agree with much of what was said by our public comments. The 67% is an issue. Not just 67% of the property ours, but also 67% of motorists exceeding the 25 mile an hour speed limit. To me that seems somewhat arbitrary and doesn't really make sense. There's also a volume issue. Here it says there's traffic volume of 1,000 vehicles in 24 hour period, but I don't think we have any studies of traffic volume. that I'm aware of in any period. I know we discussed this offline, but I'm not sure that's the case.

We do. We have some volume studies on various streets. We would have to pull those up. But I would expect that once this policy gets adopted, I would expect that there's probably going to be some some volume, but most specifically, speed surveys, because it's a speed hump, not a volume hump.

Right.

So as somebody mentioned before, you slow down the speed on one street with speed humps, then it just moves to another, and then that gets slowed down, so they're bouncing back and forth.

Right.

So there's some challenges.

Well, I just also note the other thing, and I don't know if this is traditional or not, and you can correct me if I'm mistaken, but it seems like many of the speed surveys that were done involved very short periods of time, a half an hour in a lot of the streets. Only a half an hour of time was observed. They seemed at random times during the day, they moved from one street to another to another. There were some streets that were observed for an hour, maybe an hour and a quarter, but never more than that. So my question is, with that methodology, and I rely on Chief Abbott for his input on that, is that really meaningful? If we don't know, well is that the rush hour? Is that when all the traffic comes? Like for instance, near a school, there's a lot more traffic in the morning and the mid-afternoon. And then almost nothing during the middle of the day or evening. So my question is, how do we decide when those speed surveys are done?

So several months ago we had a traffic engineer specifically on Quiama doing a speed survey. When we reduced the speed limits just several months ago. And he was out there throughout the day and there were several streets that he couldn't get enough data because there was not enough traffic. So he went back and redid it at a period of the day that he thought there might be more traffic. We like to look at schools at drop off time and in the afternoon at pick up time because that's conceivably when the most volume would be there, but not necessarily the speed. So we're talking about two sort of distinct issues here, speed versus volume.

question starting with sorry starting with the petition line it talks about property owners on one side and then it talks about residents on the other and owners and residents are not necessarily the same right And so does each property owner get one vote? What if the owner has 75% of the street frontage? Does he get one vote, whereas multiple owners get? So you get into the weeds there. And if we're consistent, is it owners or residents? Because residents could be tenants. And who's got more? Speed survey. More than 67% of motorists exceed. Shouldn't it be 0% of motorists exceed? Because then, by putting in any percentage, we're sort of allowing speeding. I mean, the attitude should be zero exceeding the speed limit, just as a policy. Otherwise, we're allowing speed limits. traffic volume same thing the idea of having a thousand vehicles is not gonna have a thousand vehicles and the adjacent question going to the mr. Maynard's question regarding the length of the street do we go to the next property owner on the adjacent street we go down 100 feet 200 feet 500 feet on the cross streets and how long are we doing this and that sort of issues. But I mean, it's the little things that make it all go away, solve the problem. And then we can figure out how many bumps and where...

I've got several questions first of all I agree with Bill and his email that he sent me in regards to the adjoining streets I'm just not certain that they necessarily should have a say on what impacts their neighbors It's mentioned in your matrix where you compare Ventura and proposed OI standards for adjacent streets, but I don't necessarily see it mentioned in the policy itself, so I'm not sure if that became a moot issue or not. The 67%, I'm just, is there something magical about that 67% number?

No, other than we have pulled speedhump policies for the surrounding cities and including the county, and that seems to be where things fall.

Okay I mean because I saw some that said 50% Some that say 50 not very many local cities but these are all questions that you guys get to answer So carrying on let me let me get through everything that I had so the 67% question is in my mind the exceeding the speed and I've just heard this from several people simply exceeding the speed are we really concerned about people that are going one or two miles over or should it be like exceeding the speed by more than five miles per hour And I would look to Chief Abbott for his input on that. It doesn't seem to me the person that's going one or two over is causing the problem. It's somebody that's going five miles per hour or more that's causing the issue.

Yeah, and I think, at least from the neighborhood we're kind of talking about that got this ball rolling up in Cuyama, speed, at least from our perspective, is not the issue up there. Although people are speeding, we know that from time to time, but the focus enforcement, the periods we've done up there, especially with a motor officer who's very skilled in LIDAR and all that type of stuff, speed's not the issue. It's definitely the volume up there from our perspective. So I don't know if speed, to us we try to give a ballpark, five or six miles an hour, give a little bit of leeway for people before you're going to do an enforcement stop, a little bit of grace. Yeah, I don't know if speed's so much the issue up there in particular, and I don't know how you set a benchmark for that. I think, to me, the true focus of the issue or the question here is the volume and the traffic calming, how we're going to kind of mitigate that. And to me, that's a layered approach. And truthfully, I don't know how we solve the volume, to be quite honest. I think the speed humps will help. But I think, again, it has to be layered with enforcement, with signage, maybe removing some trees, things like that, get better line of sight. But it's a multi-layered approach, especially in that neighborhood.

When we did the presentation that I was involved in to all of you, we talked about a layered approach, about signage, about painting intersections, so it's clear what directions people are supposed to go in. and having some uniform standard of how we treat those roundabouts. There were also visual things, tree clearance, brush that blocked the views, it's stop signs. On El Paseo, we talked not about speed humps, but a stop sign and a crosswalk at Sierra. So I think that none of those things are really, I think the speed hump is an issue, but is a possible solution, but there are these other things that have not yet been addressed. So maybe there's a tiered approach.

Yeah, and there is. I believe, and I would just say from my perspective, this is my perspective. It becomes challenging because half the people, it's kind of like my line of work. take off half the people and you're going to please half the people. So you can't make everyone happy. So it's all a matter of perspective. Because there's other people I've talked to in these neighborhoods. They absolutely don't want speed bumps. They don't want speed humps. They don't see a problem.

One other thing, if I can just throw this in. This just came out the other day. One of the complaints that I heard on Kuyama was all the mailboxes are on one side of the road. So people are forced to jaywalk to go to their mailboxes and as pedestrians and then they go they have their mailbox in a blind corner and a car is on them and maybe another tiered approach is putting the mailboxes on two sides of the road i don't know if that's a possibility but i just wanted to throw that in there

I do too, and one other thing that I would like to really sort of point out, we're all talking about Cuyama. It is not the only street in the city. We've gotten many, many requests for something. And so I think when we adopt a policy, we need to look at it citywide, something that we as staff, something that council can get behind, that can be applied throughout the city, not just one street. The other thing that I would like to mention too is, well, I'll just leave it at that. You continue your conversation and I'll pop in.

So, Chief, I mean, are you advocating then for just using the language simply exceeding 25 miles per hour? Or do you think that for the sake of, I guess, legality and having something to enforce, if somebody wanted to challenge it, that it should be like, you know, exceeding by more than five miles per hour or leaving it to the discretion of the officer? I'm just well and it's not really the officer. It's a person that's out there. That's doing the count Okay, as to how many people that are speeding when the request is being made. That's what's concerning me

Yeah, and Lindy can probably speak to that, the engineering component. I would say I leaned more this side of this language because it's a good framework. It mirrors the county's policy. It's an overall general kind of generic policy. My opinion is leave the language as it is. Okay. Yeah. Thank you.

And we also have some specific, when we reduced the speed limits just some months ago, we had speed surveys. So we have the data for a variety of streets. throughout the city. And as Tyler was pointing out, it's hard to enforce speeding for one to two to even five miles over the speed limit. And the reality is the data that we collected illustrated there's not really a speeding problem. As a real global statement, any of us who have lived here for quite a long time know that the volume has increased. It's become a popular place to be. um but that's not speeding so um the other the other component to that and and this is again for discussion for all of you and that is um and we heard um maynard come up here and say he's not a proponent of a lot of speed humps you know what we've heard both sides of the coin there's a lot of people who don't want speed humps on their street And so I think we as a body need to start thinking about, do we want to develop a restrictive policy so we don't see them on every street? Do we want it permissive? Do we want somewhere in between? This is why we couldn't get a traffic engineer to give us a draft, because they're like, well, what do you want? Is it permissive, restrictive, somewhere in the middle?

Well, in response to that, this kind of brings up the thing I put together, and it was sort of inspired by your comment a while back that there's a limited budget for how much we can do this. So I thought we have to come up with a matrix for what streets qualify for consideration.

Correct.

And so I put this together. You've seen it. I'll pass it out to the others, the other commission members.

Yeah, and speed hump installation is not insignificant in terms of cost. Right. Each speed hump is about $8,000. Right. So if you're putting a series of four on a street, you do the math. And that doesn't include any traffic engineering studies either. So it could be $50,000 for every segment of a street that we are installing speed humps on.

And it's not anything that's instantaneous either, given the fact that you want to tie it to the repaving program on streets.

At least that's your recommendation. That would be the most cost effective. When we have a crew out there and they've already mobilized, that would be obviously the best time to do it, but not the only time.

Could you also clarify? not necessarily the difference, but when a speed hump would be used as opposed to speed cushions?

Well, in the packet, there's a standard drawing. And that is what we would suggest. That's what the County of Ventura uses. And so what we thought would be the best idea moving forward is utilize a standard drawing that the county of Ventura has already approved. And Ventura County Sheriff's Department, Ventura County Fire Department is already familiar with. And so that's what we have here. They call it a speed hump slash cushion. So I think the terms could be used pretty, you know,

Interchangeably Yes Okay that's what I was confused about Well is there a difference though what is the difference I mean I can see it in the drawing but you know it seems to me like you're gonna have an open area between on the second type of cushion and think about motorcycles electric bikes going through the center part of that so they can maintain their desire for speed

And so we've got a variety of different street widths too. So one thing that we want to keep in mind always is to not reduce the emergency response time or the least impact. And so if we have, like on Drown, we have two speed humps. And so you can straddle it. They can straddle it. Fire department can straddle it.

So can everyone.

And lots of people can.

That's the problem.

It's not a perfect solution. None of it is a perfect solution.

Well, that's still what's got me confused, though, is that they seem to be They seem to be two different types of installations.

They are.

So, I mean, that's what I'm trying to figure out. When would one be used? When would the other be used? Or are we going to standardize on one and not the other?

Yeah, based on the street width, and every street would be assessed individually on which apparatus would work best.

I got it. I got it. Oh, sorry. No, go ahead, Larry. After listening regarding speed versus volume, if for example let's use Cuyama as an example if we had a thousand cars going down Cuyama there and you slowed it down to 500 cars those 500 cars are going to have to go somewhere that means Ojai Avenue so this becomes very what's the word my daughter used holistic very holistic because you've got roads like Summer that have no stop signs and cars start and they speed up pleasant same thing come around the corner where there's no stop sign and it's through traffic doesn't stop which is probably another signage we could probably use so it becomes do we slow the speed which is fine but if we're if the calming if the goal is to slope get less than the number of cars you create another problem which now Ohio Avenue is getting even slower and then people start cutting up Bristol and they go so do we put more stop signs I mean I'm just an example I mean do you put them on summer do you put them on Pleasant do you put them on Guyana do you put them on all these streets

And what Chief Abbott said, there is no simple solution. I don't know any solutions on reducing volume unless you don't allow cars coming into town. I mean, I've talked to half a dozen traffic engineers and they're like, we don't know. And speed humps don't necessarily do it. They push traffic around. And then there's these unintended consequences. Then Ohio Avenue gets slower, so people are like, okay, I'll just take and roll through the speed humps. I mean, we've all seen it probably. I've seen it. Yeah.

Well, it seems to me that this should be a last Kind of a last resort that we should try other traffic control mitigation, signage, painting lines, clearing brush, other things, adding stop signs before considering speed humps. And maybe it's a last resort also because of the expense. And part of the reason I did this qualifiers to this priority matrix is how do we prioritize who is actually considered for speed humps? All these different things, the school thing, the pedestrian traffic, history of bypass usage, the traffic study of course, consent of the residents, liability which no one has really talked about. the city is doing that's flagrantly unsafe and presents a legal liability should anyone be injured. Anyway, I think then the mailbox location. I think these things could score. You could say, look, they hit a lot of these buttons. Maybe we need to seriously consider some kind of traffic mitigation thing, be it stop signs, signage, painting lines, and at the last resort, speed humps.

I agree. I think that, as many of you have mentioned, a layered approach. And when I was out at, let's speak about Quiama again, and looked at these stop signs on the opposite side of the street. I wouldn't want to do that. And that is a post office condition, I'm assuming, that they want to just roll by and drop everybody's mail. But there might be an effort there. in the Arbolada, it's a real issue. I've seen it. We have a lot of sight distance problems there. And if those hedges could be moved back to the property line, or at least allow people the visibility of seeing in either direction that you don't need these domed lights that create more unsafe conditions because the sun hits them and it's blinding. That's what happened on the Quiama East and West when there was a fatal accident. Sun right in your face. I think there's some simpler, and to your point about the striping, we are working on that right now, so that's good news. The triangles up in the Arbolada are confusing.

That stop sign you installed at church really helped on the hill on Cuyama. That made a big difference.

Hugely, hugely. And stop signs are easy. They're annoying. A lot of people find them annoying, but those are the ones who are just going to roll on through anyways.

That's an easy ticket to write.

It's an easy ticket to write. So, I mean, there's some more simpler potential fixes. The other thing that I might add too, I believe that if we were to get to this level, meaning a speed hunt level, it would probably be prudent to do a before and after survey to see if this is really fixing the problem.

Regarding the Cuyamen Arbolada specifically, how many people, I don't know the answer, I don't know if anybody does, but how many people drive through the Arbolada just to go into town and don't know which road to take? So they're driving all over the place to get from Maricopa to downtown, and they're just wandering.

So you're suggesting maybe signs to get to downtown. I understand what you're saying. It's like a maze up there sometimes.

It's like how do you keep them, you know, Cuyama to something to, what's the one in front of the Junior High School?

El Paseo.

El Paseo. El Paseo. El Paseo. El Paseo. El Paseo.

And then just some other way direct.

Yeah.

Yeah, it's a little crazy because I've lived there for 22 years on Paseo and Sierra. So I've seen both the traffic on. And I understand the neighbors are quite animated about the speed humps. And I've tried to represent that we're probably going to have to approach this in a tiered manner. Don't assume you're just going to start with the speed humps. yeah regarding volume and this is completely anecdotal so i'll but i'll put it out there there was somebody some years ago that did a traffic count just a simple car count one of those machines that counts cars and my neighbor was noticed the guy was picking up the machine and he said so what did you get and he goes take a guess it was in a 24-hour period he goes i don't know 800 he goes Try 5,000. Now, I don't know if that's true, that's anecdotal. I don't have a report to point to, but the point was it shocked him, the number of people that went through that corridor on Koyama. And anyway, so that's where the volume thing does become a little bit relevant. But anyway, I'll leave it at that. Go ahead.

I was just gonna say I'm so I'm trying to figure out where we go from here because this obviously was sent back to us by council to allow you to bring something back so

Can we make suggested amendments to it and submit them? You can. What's the process for submitting them if, let's say, two of us formed a committee? I assume we can do that. to make some amendments to this and redraft it, do we then present it at the next meeting or do we present it to you for your input? How would that work?

So what I would recommend, and I do believe you can break out and do an ad hoc committee, a speed hump ad hoc committee, I would suggest whomever those two folks are, Get together, mark up this, we can get this to you in a document if you wanted to redline, whatever. And then I would recommend we come back to this committee, this commission here, and get a majority vote on whether or not to forward that to city council as the recommended. And it may take more than one meeting or so.

So would you recommend just using your format with the county of Ventura, perhaps we just slide over and make another column with our suggested amendments?

Sure. We're not married to our comments. It was a complete starting point. If you want to just use that column, it's fine. We've got the document. But if you want to put another column in and make some recommendations, we're fine with that too.

Well, I think the tiered approach is important and should be part of the policy. Just a statement that these are going to be considered if other means have been used and not been successful as just a preamble to this type of policy.

I think with that approach, and I don't disagree at all, I think we have to be careful because we have to define what the previous criteria is that we've tried. So we want to just be mindful of that.

If you had the power and the chief to say, okay, I want to have speed bumps here, where would you put them today? If you just could put them down and why.

So, do you want to go first? Go ahead. So, what I would do first is to determine if there's a speeding problem. Right. First and foremost. Now, we all know that Grand is pretty speedy. But we couldn't put, I think the vehicle code states we cannot put these on arterials. So it would all be collector streets or residential streets. I would look at the data before making a decision based on anecdotal hearsay observation. Let's get some facts and make a determination on whether a speed hump would reduce the speed. Number one, do we have a speeding problem? I have not seen it as a global problem. And I'm not saying it isn't. Gridley, people, it's a fast street. Some of these real straight roads that have nice new pavement that we all love. I mean, it makes for speeding pretty easy. I would look at that first. That's how I would make the determination, based on the data.

I would second that. The data is the official way, if you're asking Tyler, in my opinion. Yeah, if you said, look, I know it's anecdotal, but you're out there. Anecdotal, one place in this city would probably be near El Paseo, Ojai Valley School, the school over there. I've seen some darn close nearbys with kids.

No, I have too. I live on it. I've seen people driving 50 miles an hour. As children. Like freeway speeds.

It's the data. I would go with data. You've got to go with data with traffic. Because, again, you're going to. Take off half the citizens, the other half are going to be happy with you. So you got to do what's best for the city, and you got to go to the data to show that.

And if that were a street that we all wanted to look at, we can do a speed survey. That is not a problem, and determine what, and that's a great street. It's pretty straight, people can get moving. We can also consider the stop signs on the street.

I got a question only because it was asked this by one of the residents in the city is there any potential to add something to this that says and this just may be out of the blue if you want to request speed humps you also agree to having bike paths installed on your street

I haven't heard that. That is, I mean, it's an idea. It's a costly idea.

There was a proposal a few years back that was done in a study to put a sidewalk through that corridor on Kuyama. It was quite an expensive project, and there were homeowners that were objecting to giving up, of course, their easement, which is an easement. And they don't have a right to.

They don't.

But it would be very costly.

Well, and the city does have a document called Complete Streets, and it designates the profile, of what streets should look like, Grand Avenue being one of them. And we've got 66 feet of right of way out there, and we have 40 feet of pavement. So we have 13 feet on each side that we could use for sidewalks, for bike lanes, for all of those things that make active transportation and multimodal transportation much safer. There's also a huge cost involved. And over the years, over the many years, this city has allowed private improvements in the public right of way. So we got to push them out to do these improvements. And that's the same case on almost every street in the Arbolada?

Because I am on a bike most of the time now. And I have biked through the Arbolada and Cuyama. The routes that I have tried to take safely is El Paseo to, I think it's Sierra, and then to Cuyama. And if people just know, here's the bike path. That's how you get through, and that's how the kids bike to Nordhoff. they don't have to cross over to the bike path and they just stay on the main sort of the main streets right except for Sierra even if it's just from there to Bristol it's something other than oh we're gonna go this one that one it would just it just makes it easier yeah and cleaner and straight it's just really expensive

It's just really expensive.

So I get it and that was something that I didn't know the expense and allows me to at least respond to this person and factor in a cost.

And there's this appetite to do it in terms of reaching out to all the property owners and saying that block wall you put in, guess what? We need a bike path or we need a sidewalk. And one big issue we have on Grand is we've got power poles everywhere and those are incredibly expensive to relocate. No.

I think that may be a consideration or a solution that's even beyond speed humps.

It is, it is. We're kind of going off on a tangent, but it's information to have. So I think our item in front of us tonight, to bring it back to what we are tasked with doing, is to come up with a policy, if there's a policy. If this body is recommending a policy and Again, how restrictive, how permissive do we want it to be? To me, that's kind of the starting point. And if we've done A, B, C, and D, and those haven't worked, maybe this is the last resort.

Right. I kind of go back to making a movement that we, maybe Larry, you and I can break out and try to put something together that is It's cohesive and it all kind of incorporates all these ideas we've been talking about into a single cohesive policy. Does that make sense to you, Chairman?

I'd like to go ahead and task Larry and Jim to work as an ad hoc committee and bring this back to us. I think there are two people that are directly affected by this. and I'm very comfortable with the results that they'll bring back the only thing I ask is that we definitely build into this policy that it's it's something of last resort okay and even including and maybe you know discussing it with the chief as far as what are the you know conditions precedent to going ahead and asking for for speed humps just precedents aren't the right word but what what do we need to try before this last resort

It seems to me it's not just a speed hump policy. It's a traffic mitigation policy. And speed hump is one aspect of it, but there are other ones. Stop signs and all the things we've discussed. So maybe we should call it, rather than a hump policy, we should call it a traffic mitigation.

I would like to add something to that, too, because I've been hearing two things. I like the idea of you guys coming up with kind of these preemptive, like, what can we do before we initiate a speed hump policy? But I think we might want to keep them separate, right? Because if we have the things that we know we could do before speed humps, so let's say signage, stop signs, maybe even increased education on that road, whatever it may be, I think we need to come up with those things beforehand. And then

We also have some good information, again, from the county of Ventura on their criteria for all of these things we're talking about. Right, right. For added stop signs, for new signage, for all of those things. kind of like the idea of a more comprehensive approach rather than a standalone stop sign policy, a standalone speedhunt policy. And so we look at this holistically.

And that was my point. And maybe I was hearing something different from Jackie, but I was actually envisioning the things we would do before going ahead and accepting an application for speed to be part of that policy. And that, yes, we're broadening the nature of the policy to more traffic calming policy.

Yeah, traffic calming measures.

In order to request a speed hump the city must do this this this and this this first if these fail okay then here's the criteria for applying for a speed hump does that Yeah I mean the direction we got from council was to adopt or review the speed hump policy and come up with something I don't think

they would be opposed to looking at this holistically. I'm looking at somebody who might know the answer to that. And I think what they're looking for is some help in determining what we can do to improve safety.

All of the things. I'm just trying to get to the point where we have a one stop, one shop, where you don't have to go looking at several different policies to decide what's going to happen.

I like that idea I really do If I could ask the two of you to incorporate that concept into this Included in that I know when we've asked for stop signs and the police would say Oh, there haven't been enough accidents. That's kind of the offhanded comment, which is probably true. If you don't have any problems, why get a stop sign?

Yeah, it's the data, yeah.

Right, so are there any more rules like that from your standpoint that there have to be at least three accidents or one something that- It's hard to do in writing.

It's a gut feeling, but- And I think that's going to truly be the challenge with this, is how do you set objective criteria? Where's the benchmark? Where's the matrix? Tell us, hey, the stop signs aren't working, the tree, you know, the landscaping is not working, the signage, the education. How are you going to quantify that? Because again, you're going to, some of the neighbors are going to be cool with it and some are going to be against it, right?

That's why you use accidents.

Yeah, and that's why you have to go to the data. But a lot of this, I understand the human side, it is anecdotal, it is emotional.

Well, it also seems to me, once this policy is authored and approved by council, that it needs to be published in a way that people can look it up online. If they come into your office and say, look, we want speed humps in our street. Well, look, this is the policy on what we do for traffic mitigation. Read through it, look and see if your street actually qualifies and has these kinds of problems. and then we can take it to the next step, whatever that step is defined to be. But I think transparency is probably really important so people don't feel like they're just being ignored.

I think a comprehensive approach is really better because you want to look at your different tools of how you're going to approach this. And I think speed humps is one. and as has been said here, maybe that's sort of the last resort we'd like to use, but it also has to be backed up with, each tool needs to be backed up with data to justify the imposition of another stop sign or going on to speed humps. So I think a comprehensive approach is a good thing. And I don't know, you don't have a stop sign policy?

No, we don't have a stop sign policy, but we have some at our fingertips. Again, we've got some good tools. That'd be great. And if this ad hoc committee gets formed today, I can forward that information. We would love that. That would make our lives easier and better and more communicative with the community and we have something concrete to talk about.

And we want to do that.

Yeah, I'd like to add. We appreciate that. As a staff member too in the public works department, we would appreciate something to go off of. And like the chief said, it's going to be hard to have a set of criteria because you're going to want to expand on that every single time something new happens. But as long as we kind of have a roadmap moving forward, we can be transparent with our residents and the people coming into our office and say, hey, there is a procedure for this finally. And we don't have to rely on unfortunate, you know.

Ad hoc approach.

Yeah, not just that, but, you know,

far as I know Lindy doesn't want to have discretion all on her we want to have a data-driven approach but it's also a matter of making the right decision and making the one that's the best for the community I'm also thinking that this may mitigate the number of people that want to ask for speed humps when they see that they have to do this and this and this and this before they just may say no forget it okay

And I think there's been this sort of loose narrative. I've worked for four other cities prior to this one. And the installation of speed humps is not the solution to everything. And it's not even the solution for speeding necessarily. And I mean, I'm We will do what we need to do and what the commission and the city council want us to do. But I can tell you not anecdotally, but factually, they don't solve speeding problems necessarily. They might reduce the speed a bit. Yeah, maybe the outliers. The people who are going 40 in a 25 might drop down to 30 or 32, but they're still going to speed.

Well, and I want to go back to what Wayne said. I mean, this is the back of my mind is that for every speed hump that you put in, it does cause a reduction in response time of emergency responders. And I know going from speed bumps to speed humps was supposed to help that some, but I think that practice has proven that's not necessarily the case. You still gotta slow down, particularly if you're carrying a patient. Okay, so.

And there's also the acceleration and the deceleration as you approach a speed hump. The noise, a work truck that's got tools in the back that's a loud sound and that's not a good sound.

Yeah, just because of my position as a neighbor in the Arbolada, I know that that sets people off because they go, I don't care about the noise. I'm worried my kid's going to get hit going out to the mailbox. So I understand that. I think a lot of us are prepared for the speeding up, slowing down noise if we can mitigate. Because there's a lot of kids that go through that corridor to go to school. Not as many with Matilda Hall closed, but- But there's still OVS and there's still some kids that go to Matilla. So there's that as well. But anyway, I think we got it. I mean, I don't want to belabor this. No, I just want. But maybe we can, should we make, I mean, have we made it? I just want to. Yeah, go ahead, sure.

There are, in Florida and in Larchmont, I think it's Rosner Avenue, there are speed bumps or hubs or tables, whatever you want to call them. But they're closer together. And that lowers speed because, and I know they're like 250 feet apart. So by the time you're done going over one, you've sped up a little, and now it's time to go over another one. That slows down. So that really works. But now you're talking every 250 feet, which are 500, whatever it is, it's not, becomes more of a real problem.

Okay so to clarify and I know we're getting ahead of ourselves a little bit but let's say that we decide that we do want to meet on the third Thursday of this month third Monday of this month again Is that something that the two of you could have back to us that we could actually go ahead and take action on? I think so.

I think we can move ahead right away on that, and then we could have something to present at the end of the month.

I'm not saying we're doing that. I just wanted to kind of get a time frame from you. So that would be August 17th.

based on my calendar just putting the date out there just so people know okay august 17th um we can like you said approve that when we're done but you know if we could have that back by then at least we could get something before us and we can have a special meeting with just this on the agenda yeah

I was going to make a motion to go ahead and appoint Larry and or Commissioner Steingold and Commissioner McEachin to an ad hoc committee to bring back to this body a traffic calming proposal that incorporates speed humps and conditions prior to that at whenever our next meeting is

Okay, so I just want to let you know that's two weeks away till the next meeting. But it's about a week and a day or so before we need the data so we can put the information out and post it and get it through where we need to get it through. I mean maybe a little bit longer. It's a special meeting so we don't have the 72 hour posting requirement.

So when would you have to have something by date wise?

Maybe the 12th? The 12th. So that's like, you know.

And this is just on speed humps, this isn't.

Well, I think we can, well.

Or.

It's just writing.

Or what if we did a meeting on the fourth Monday and give you another week?

Just for this one?

Just for this one. I'm just talking about the next one.

Okay. That makes sense.

And then we do the third Monday in September.

And there wouldn't be also such a great time period between meetings. Right.

Right. So three weeks and three weeks.

Right. That makes sense.

Maybe that.

Okay.

That gives you guys more time to get your stuff together. Yeah.

Okay. And that is, I'm just looking at the dates here.

Okay. And then Jackie's saying for the 24th, we would need everything by the 18th back to us.

Can you send that to us?

Pardon me?

Can you send that to us?

Yes, we'll send you one.

It would always be helpful to have the date that you need information by.

Yeah, I've got it noted here. So we're going to author it. So we've got it, the 18th.

OK. I don't know if it requires a motion or not but I've made a motion to appoint Larry and Jen in order to form this committee Let's do a second and we'll do a vote and it'll be in the record I'll second

Okay, let's take a vote. Commissioner Steingold? Yes. Commissioner Sims? Yes. Commissioner McEachin?

Yes.

Commissioner Coggin?

Yes.

So the goal is a more comprehensive approach? Yes. Is that what we're talking about? Okay.

So if we could get that data from Ventura on the stop sign stuff.

We will send it to you. That was included in my motion, or should be noted that it was included in my motion to make it comprehensive.

And let's not talk to your friends other than you two. Not a bunch of emails back and forth to different commissioners. Let's just keep it there.

Very specific, understood.

So we have, unless there's more discussion on this item, we have our final item, which is very appropriate to what we're talking about now. Because we just wanted to give you a report of some of the traffic calming requests that we have received in the last, I don't know, months or so. But if you look at it, there's a table on the back, attachment A. And we've got the request for four-way stop signs, more stop signs, speed hump installation, add stop sign and crosswalk. So a variety of things. And we've got the locations where those have been noted and the date that we received them. So that might be some interesting information. There's no action required on this item. It was just basically a receive and file.

Would the action be, though, to receive the report?

It would, yeah. Yeah, it would be just to receive the report. But I just wanted to point out for the two ad hoc members that that might be a helpful table for you to take a look at.

Right, I noted that there isn't the El Paseo stop sign. Was that earlier before these?

Yeah, and we knew about that one. Okay. Those are new.

On any of these, specifically the stop signs, is there anything that, any data from the police department regarding accidents, things of that that would say, yes, they need a stop sign at Kenyatta and Oak, even without this committee, without anything, as an example?

Yeah, I'll probably actually have my traffic officer go through this list and just see and pull accident numbers and see our collision rates there.

And could we get, I know maybe there's nothing official, but unofficial three accidents. Yeah, absolutely. What rises to the level of, yes, they need a stop sign. Not maybe, but hard stops.

Yeah, and I think, again, that's going to be very subjective. It's hard. Right, but- Yeah. I can get you the accident numbers, the collision numbers at specific intersections.

If there's some data intersections that have a high propensity for accidents, Tyler can get that information.

Then that would rise, would float to the top and say, OK, here's a reason. Let's look at this as an example.

I think this list sort of highlights what we just talked about. There's a variety of needs, and they need to be put into perspective as to what to go after first.

Yes.

I do have one question the request for a speed survey on Aliso was that was that a request based upon the request for a speed hump

No, they started out saying that there is a lot of cut-through traffic. So if you look at the notes there, the request is concerned about cut-through traffic volume increasing during commuter hours. So this is what they wanted to know, if the data would support that, if the data supports their observation. And then what next?

I'm just reading the suggested speed hump and stop signs at Rickon and Mallory Way I'm not sure where that fit into the request They're worried about volume they're looking for solutions and we didn't we have not been directing people to any solution yet until this commission was formed so um they would be looking for any recommendations and probably this comprehensive approach could we receive this report with an addition to it sure so hang on a second okay yeah my question is on the section you know where you talk about um other policy framework Could we also include in there installation of bike paths?

Well, we can add that to the bypass sidebar. Can you say that one more time?

Okay on your under the discussion you have you know staff believe a similar framework could be beneficial for other commonly requested traffic calming measures including stop signs curb painting speed surveys I guess bike paths don't necessarily fit into that but

I do have one public comment on this item and I apologize but we have Wayne Maynard

Thank you again. Wayne Maynard, resident of Ojai on Gridley Road. And in reviewing this item five, I saw just a discussion item, but I want to point out that somebody on my street requested speed bumps or speed humps. And I just want to point out that the speed limit on Gridley Road is 35 miles an hour and I talked to my council person when they were doing the traffic study that I thought that it should have been included in that last traffic study or speed study whatever it was but apparently it wasn't so like grand avenue the speed limit is 30 miles an hour and you turn off a grand you go down gridley which has way more driveways and a lot narrower than grand and the speed increases to 35 miles an hour so i i think that we should be looking at the speed limit on gridley road before we look at putting speed humps in and I think that I don't think it meets the criteria for residential district because of the number of parcels facing the street but we could get the speed drop to 30 at least and I think people doing you know 35 people feel comfortable doing 40 and 45 right and that's what the problem is I think so I would like to look at that the next thing is with regards to using streets streets are stop signs for speed control I'm little bit concerned about that because I think my opinion is when you put a stop sign that doesn't really need an intersection that doesn't really need a stop sign and it's for you have intersection control people are going to start rolling through that stop sign because they don't really perceive a need for that stop sign for intersection control and so now you create a situation where you may have a pedestrian that assumes the car is going to stop you get a car that drives through there all the time they roll through it all the time and potential conflict right so i'd be very careful i think on you know putting stop signs in for for speed control I think that's a concern so and one that I can't believe still is the the drown Grand Avenue and drown twice I've like going west on Grand I stopped at the stop sign I got ground right to my right and somebody pulls up on Grand come in the other direction they're like 200 feet in front of me right and so i'm going to make a left turn on drown so they i start moving forward they think i'm going to continue on grand i got my my blinker on and as i make my left turn to go down drown they start off because they think i'm going straight for whatever reason when the city was laid out we'd have very few intersections that are Like this, they're all like an offset. Very difficult to do traffic control for that. Everybody wants a stop sign, but I don't really think it's the solution all the time.

Thank you.

One more question I have. Oh, go ahead.

I agree with the gridley road thing, because I drive that fairly often, and it is a big speeding potential. But it's also a major artery. It is. So I don't think that it really qualifies for speed humps from that perspective. I think lowering the speed limit is the first step, and then enforcement of that speed limit, hopefully.

I have one question for you with regard to the speed studies. What kind of expense are we talking about? Do they have to be done annually in one clump?

We have a bunch of designated streets, or they can't be done in a one off, that's not very- They can be done one off, but it's more expensive, obviously, any time you do a one off. We did a pretty comprehensive speed survey just months ago. We didn't do any residential streets except Quiama and you know I mean we can look at it there's probably probably if we were doing one-offs I'd say probably three to four thousand you know depending on the segment you know maybe five.

Per segment?

Per street. Per street. A segment is between streets, between perpendicular streets. So segment one, two, and three. But it's not inexpensive. It's not inconsequential. None of this is.

Yeah, it's not. No.

Yeah, I get it.

So we have to create a threshold before that's tripped because that's another problem. Yes, it is. As far as limits of resources.

Yeah.

So I would entertain a motion to receive this report.

Yeah. Second? Yeah, I'll second it.

You want to do a roll? Shall I do a roll call or all in favor?

All in favor.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye. So I believe this meeting.

Future agenda items.

Future items. Well, we know what next meeting's future item is. We can talk about future items at next meeting, because next meeting we decided it was one item.

One item, right. But for future, for perhaps the one after that, we had a couple of gentlemen speak very articulately about the fire opportunities and these symposiums I guess the insurance symposium and is there be nice if somebody from our board could attend one or both of those I don't know what you think about that I would encourage everybody to attend but I'm sure if we're not writing a traffic plan but I will be there Yeah, Wednesday. Is that this Wednesday? What was the other one? There was a- 17th and 18th.

17th and 18th. I didn't catch the times.

Yeah, could we, because he brought a bunch of flyers.

Did he leave, maybe he left them somewhere? I don't know.

I thought he wanted to hand them out to us.

Wednesday. Yeah, Wednesday is 3 to 5. I think the question is about the home hardening workshop.

Yeah, that's on the 17th and 18th.

Yeah, 17th and 18th. OK.

Nothing. Well, but the next meeting, we've already set the agenda, because it's these two coming back with comprehensive information. then at that meeting we can set the next agenda sound good yeah information versus a speed hump just limited right yes no we're just talking about what she just said well i i i'm just trying to i'm just trying to make Yeah, whatever you bring back.

We'll write a policy.

You will write a draft policy, a comprehensive policy.

Hopefully something we can vote on.

No, that's fine.

Okay. And I'm gonna provide you the draft word document so you guys can mark it up, put your column, or red line it so you guys have a starting point.

Okay, anything else?

Well, I have two questions. One is I understood from Weston that we were going to have city email accounts.

And you do.

And how do I get that?

Oh, how do you have access to that? I can get that information. Because I can send them to you. I don't know where.

We will be handing that out after the meeting.

That was James. Who's talking?

That was James, our IT manager. What did he say? That they'll be handing these out. He'll give you the emails after this meeting.

Okay. My other question was in the discussion from Lisa, there's

requirement for ethics and sex harassment training and who provides that So the ethics training is online

How about we get information from Weston and we will use your official commission or email once you have access to it and let you know what you need to do and when and how.

Thank you. The AB 1234 is on the Fair Political Practices Commission website.

There's also a next, I think it's next, I know I took something for financial training.

Okay.

um so we'll send that to you to your official email address what would be really helpful to us is if you just if you let us know you received it just like a quick email back because we're always wondering did they get that did they get that if we don't hear from you so that would be really great just received or something

I think just as a general note, it would be really good any time we receive information from Lindy or from Jackie that we acknowledge that we received it.

Yeah. It's helpful for us to kind of keep track of everything. All right. Thank you. Good meeting. Thank you.

Wendy.

Amen.