City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, good morning to everyone. We're going to call today's council meeting to order. Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Thank you, City Clerk. Next, we're going to have the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. So I'll ask everyone, if you can stand, to please stand. Our invocation is going to be by Deacon Mark Schultz, the Chancellor of Diocese of Fresno. And again, once the invocation is over, I'll ask you to keep standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Welcome.

Thank you, deacon. Council, Vice President, would you please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance?

All right, we're gonna move on to approval of the agenda. Clerk, are there any announcements or changes from the agenda?

All right, Council, is there any additional changes to the agenda? Council Member Broaddus? No, thank you, Council President. All right, Council Vice President?

Okay. All right, I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda. Motion and a second. Any opposition to approving the agenda? That passes five to zero. All right, on to the funnest part of the day. We have our ceremonial presentations. First up, we have a proclamation sponsored by Council Vice President Maxwell, and that is a proclamation for Dr. Catherine Flores Day.

Dr. Flores, if you could join me at the front, and husband Juan, and anybody else that has an embarrassing story to share that wants to come up is welcome to do so. I'm going to reach that microphone behind you really quick. Good morning, everybody, and thank you all for being here today. It's very much like Dr. Flores to invite the whole team up here. You know, I kept on trying to give her credit in the back room when we were talking this morning, and she just kept insisting, no, no, no, it's not me. It's not me. It's my team. I'm nothing without the team that's behind me. And she has a big t

Juan, did you want to share a few words or anything you would like to say? I did want to share one thing.

Thank you for sharing that story, and thank you for everything that you've done for this community, doctor. I know you have an amazing team and compadres backing you up here, but seriously, thank you. It's an honor to honor you today, and we are very grateful to have you here in our own backyard and looking forward to the continued impact you continue to make in our community. God bless you. I do want to read this last part of the proclamation real quick. Now, therefore, be it resolved that we, Mayor Jerry P. Dyer and the Fresno City Council do hereby proclaim Thursday, September 3rd, 2026 as

If I may, City Clerk, before you start reading. Council Vice President, if I just may say a few words to Dr. Flores. You know, back in my Fresno Unified days, when I was an administrator there, I used to take my little one and I eat with me everywhere, including to school events and the Doctors Academy. And unlike me, she grew up seeing doctors around her as normal. And now she's in her final year at UC Davis in pre-med and getting ready for her own journey. So I want to say thank you to you and to the Fres Unified family and to everyone who helped her in her public education at Fres Unified a

All right, fantastic. Our next proclamation is sponsored by Council Member Perea. It's gonna be presented by the mayor today. And that is a proclamation for International Green Building Week.

All right, fantastic. We'll move on to our council member reports and comments. I'll come from my left to right. Council member Carbasi, do you have any report this morning? Come back to me, please. Okay. Council member Richardson.

Yes. Good morning. It is a beautiful day in District 6 this morning. A couple of things. We have this coming Monday, which will be Monday the 7th. It is Labor Day for a lot of folks, but there's going to be a fantastic and very historic event. and historical event going on at the Morocco Dhamma Center down on Kern, downtown, as part of Chinatown. Big Buddhist celebrations, fantastic. They're going to have all kinds of food and activities and a lot of meditation out there, if that's your thing. You're in luck. Again, if you want to see 1,500-year-old statues and artifacts and all kinds of thing

Thank you. Council Member Vang? Thank you very much, Council Vice President. Just a few comments to make. It is 9.45, early in the morning, and if you are on the eastern side of District 5, the Dutch Brothers, located at South Phillips and Kings Canyon, that's just east of Close Avenue, today is their opening day, and so Dutch Brother is opening today, and if you are near, on the eastern side of District 5, please swing by and grab a cup of coffee. And also, this year's District 5 Blitz will be happening on September the 12th at Winchell Elementary in partnership with Beautify Fresno. So if yo

Thank you very much. Council Member Carbasi, are you ready to give some remarks?

Yeah, sure. Real quick. I just want to say, it's only been a week, so I do want to thank the Parks Department, Aaron Aguirre, for your quick response on the field lights. I mean, super, super fast, super professional, Aaron. We always appreciate you, and the residents of Northwest Fresno are truly grateful to the Parks Department for being so responsive. I do... want to, well, I don't want to offend our city manager, but I do want to thank Scott Mosier for his many years of service to the city. Scott has been a terrific advocate for transportation and for access. And in fact, Veterans Boulevar

Thank you. Council Member Arias. Thank you, Council President. Scott, where's Scott at? Did he leave the building already? Oh my God, Scott. Just my express, I want to express my appreciation to Scott Mosier. In my tenure here, he's been always a guy that gives you a direct and honest answer and a really unbiased assessment of what the challenges are on any infrastructure project. And for far too long, you know, it's been difficult for us to rebuild our older neighborhoods. But Scott has taken the bull by the horns when we've allocated the money, and he's gotten the projects on time and under

Thank you very much. I'll give a couple updates myself while we're waiting for Council President to return. I want to thank Fresno State leadership for having us out there last week for the first day of instruction. We were able to greet hundreds of students back with city resources, internship opportunities, job opportunities with the City of Fresno. and some agua fresca. So welcome back, Bulldogs. Looking forward to a great year ahead. I also want to thank the children's movement for inviting me to speak at their state of the children's breakfast last week. The city in this year's budget was

All right. Thank you, Council Vice Presidents. You know, I'm happy to report to piggyback off of that. We did appoint the new members to the Family Affordability and Child Care Access Commission this week. So it was our first sort of full meeting. And it was great to have this group of very experienced individuals in early childhood development and looking forward to the course this new commission is going to take. And thank Council Vice President for his leadership on spearheading that initiative. Additionally, very excited to attend the Fresno City College's State of the College this Friday

All right, thank you, Mayor, City Manager.

Thank you, City Manager. Okay, we're gonna go ahead and, okay.

Thank you, Council Vice President. Sorry about that. We were just trying to figure something out there. So we are going to have, at this point, we'll take on the SEDA workshop here soon, the public financing workshop. Let's see if we can, get through the, just the consent, not contested, but at least the consent agenda that's remained on the consent. So at this time, I'll go ahead and open up public comments or anything on the consent agenda, the contested consent agenda, closed session. I'll welcome anyone in the public to come up and comment either in the chamber or on Zoom. Yeah, and per th

All right. I have a card for Mariana Alvaranga.

Thank you. Kaswer Kabasi, had you punched up?

Very briefly, we do have Brian Russell in the house, our soon to be director, and Scott gets to be here so we can thank him properly. But I do want to say city manager, great hire. someone from within who came up and he's very local and he'll do a great job. And thank you again, Scott.

All right. I'm going to go over to a zoom, but again, if there is anyone in the chamber who would like to speak with respect to the consent agenda, contest the consent or a closed session, you'll have the opportunity. But on zoom we have Lisa Flores.

Thank you, Lisa. Next, I have Anisa Seha on Zoom.

Thank you. Next on Zoom, I have Christina Soto.

All right, thank you. Next speaker on Zoom is Brandy Nusviegas.

Thank you, city clerk. Next in the chambers, we have Zahra Marin.

Thank you, next speaker's gonna be Brenda Dominguez.

Next speaker is going to be Arianna Martinez-Lott.

I'm going to go back to Zoom. Again, we're currently on public comment for the consent agenda, contested consent, or closed session. The next speaker I have on Zoom is Alfred Aldredi.

Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Liz McElvain. And again, we're on public comment currently for consent agenda or contested consent or closed session.

I don't see any more speakers on Zoom. Anyone else in the chamber who would like to speak again with respect to the consent agenda or contest the consent or anything on closed session? Seeing none in the chamber, seeing none on the, we have one, actually we had one on Zoom. Go ahead, Brock.

Thank you. Next speaker on Zoom is going to be Shelly Spencer.

Thank you, Shelly. City Clerk, you were punched up.

All right. Thank you, City Clerk, for that clarification. Let's give one last call for any public comment with respect to the consent agenda or contested consent or the closed session agenda. I don't have any more cards. I don't see anyone on Zoom. We'll go ahead and close public comment on the consent agenda. I'll entertain a motion. We have a motion and a second for approval of the balance of consent minus what was taken off for contested. Is there any opposition to approving the balance of the consent agenda? Seeing none, that passes 7-0. We'll circle back here to contest the consent later

Excuse me. Excuse me real quick. Council President, I missed the instruction portion. Would you like us to do questions while they're speaking or after they're done? Yeah, I didn't give instructions.

I think just for the sake of letting them get through it, we can get through it, and then we can do the Matlock cross-examination. Thank you, Council President.

Actually, Director, so I do have some members punched up, but I think we'll take us last. I think we'll go to public comment at this time and hear the input. So at this time, we'll take public comment on this workshop. We got to see the slides here and hear from the presenters. So we'll do public comment both here in the chamber and on Zoom. So if there are folks who would like to comment on this particular item, now would be the time. You can fill out a yellow card or come on down. Yeah, we'll take public comment, and if we're not done, we're gonna break for lunch around 12, but yeah, come on

Thank you. Thank you, Patience. Any additional public comment here within the chamber? I don't have any yellow cards. Come on down.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Esther, we're gonna have the next speaker come up to speak. Thank you, yeah, appreciate your comments. Esther, I'm asking you to, yeah, we have the next speaker coming up. Will the next speaker come on up?

Any bills, anybody else in the chambers wanting to give public comments, please come forward at this time. You'll have three minutes.

Thank you. Anybody else in chambers wanting to give comment on the workshop that was just presented? Please come on forward.

Anybody else in the council chambers? Good morning, Artie. I have three minutes.

Good morning, Mrs. Nahr. You have three minutes.

Thank you. Any other comments in the chambers before I head to Zoom? Good morning, sir. Good morning. Nice to see you. You have three minutes this morning.

Any other speakers wanting to give comments on the workshop items specifically before we move on to Zoom?

This is an opportunity to speak on the workshop.

Normally I don't respond, but you have been nothing but rude and demeaning and cussing at my staff on a regular basis.

Now is not the time to have this discussion. When is the time? When we have unscheduled communication, we will call you up. You're out of order. This is your first and last warning.

You're out of order, sir. Please have a seat. Anybody else in the chambers wanting to give comments on the workshop that was presented? Please come forward. You will have three minutes.

Any other comments in council chambers related to the workshop specifically?

I'm sorry. We have to be fair to everybody. Yeah.

If it's not directly related to the workshop, we're going to have to take it during unscheduled communication later on in the meeting. I apologize, but thank you for your comments on safety. Anybody else in the chambers? Seeing nobody at this, yes, got a speaker right here. Good morning, still morning, you got three minutes.

Thank you for your comments. Anybody else in the chambers? If not, we're gonna head over to Zoom City Clerk.

Thank you. Next speaker on Zoom is Liz McElveen.

Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Lanisha Senegal.

Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Joseph Rodriguez. Yes.

Yes, Joseph. You have three minutes. Thank you.

Alright, thank you. Next speaker is going to be Bill Betts.

All right, thank you. Next speaker is going to be Christina Soto.

Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Lisa Flores.

All right. Thank you. Next speaker is going to be Brandi Nusviegas.

So it's 1215. We're going to, at this point, break for lunch. We'll be back here in the chamber at 145. Council Member Perea, you're punched up.

Yes, thank you, Council President. I do have a family emergency, and so I'm going to be taking off, but I do plan on hopping back on over Zoom so I can continue to participate. I'll just be from another location.

A motion by Council Member Broaddus, second by Council Member Vang. The motion is to approve the good cause given the medical emergency. Is there any opposition to approving the motion? Seeing none, that item passes 4-5-0. Thank you. Thank you. We'll be back here at 1.45.

Resuming session. We left off, we're doing some public comments on the workshop regarding the public financing of SATA. We're gonna go back, continue on with Zoom. First speaker is going to be Pete Weber. Pete, are you with us? Let's move on to Natalie Ortiz, we'll see if we can come back to Pete.

All right. Next speaker is going to be Dee Barnes.

Thank you, Dee. Next speaker is going to be Kimberly McCoy.

Oh, yes, clerk. Sorry, you're punched up.

I do, City Clerk. I have my spouse, Gabriela Gonzalez Perea, and I have Angela Gonzalez with me in the room.

Thank you for the clarification on that. Yeah, there's no vote on this item. This is just a workshop and public comment, but for the remainder of the voting items. Okay, so resuming back to public comment, Kimberly McCoy, who'll be next.

Next speaker on Zoom is going to be Pete Weber. Pete, are you with us? Clerk, is he unmuted? Pete, are you with us? Let's move to Shelley. Spencer will figure that out.

All right. Last speaker on Zoom I see is again, Pete Weber. I'm not sure if the microphone's working. We'll give one more shot before I move back to the chamber. You're muted. Yeah, I'm muted, clerk. Okay. Probably technical difficulties. Okay, well, we're gonna come back to the chamber if there's any additional public comment in the chamber on this SEDA workshop, the public financing. Now would be the time. Seeing no more speakers in person or on Zoom, we'll bring it back up to the dais. I know the mayor had asked to round out the presentation, and we'll come back up to the council members he

All right, we're going to come back up to the dais. Council Member Vang is punched up, followed by Council Member Richardson.

All right, thank you very much, Council President. First, I want to thank the director for this presentation. Again, it's very thorough. And also, members of the public for your comments. Those who are here, thank you very much for taking your time to be here. Some of you have been here since 9 o'clock. I appreciate that. And some of you will continue to be here until this topic is over. And also to those who provided comments online, I listen intensely as much as I can. And for those who provided comments via emails, to let you know that I review those as well. And so I appreciate everyone wh

Yeah. Could we, could the city manager skip ahead of me? I can go after her. That's fine. If you want to. Yeah. There's no one else much that.

Yes. Hold on, please. Yes. General fund dollars are likely to subsidize South Seda in the early years.

Councilman Richardson. Okay. With most of the concerns I've heard about this pretty much fall into three categories. One, there are other parts of the city who are upset that development is, or that planning, a plan is to take place in a different part of the city. And I got that. The second is from the folks who are specifically those who I think are in the county who are concerned about quality of life, whether it's their livelihood, the way they get their water, the way they grow their crops, the way they, if your husband livestock, whatever else. And that's kind of a different category. An

Okay, is it, now I understand this is difficult when you're looking at a zoning map, because generally when you're looking at city zoning maps, there's like a blue, it's a little bit lighter than those chairs, that refers to institutional land. You can see things like the wastewater treatment facility that are like this, schools, I think City Hall is. Some of those little blue dots out there are those allocated to be namely fire substations. I don't think we have a plan to reroute the five policing district plan at this point, but Is it the interpretation of the city, and Jennifer, you can spe

That fire station that's planned along Armstrong, would its jurisdiction cover any of the proposed SEDA area at any point?

Okay. Then obviously it's too soon to talk about which one will be which, but is it fair to say, and is it objectively correct, that one of those blue institutional squares over there would reasonably be a first response, an emergency services location?

Well, one of them would be. The W and the C carry a lot of weight here.

Okay, yeah, that makes sense. I'd like to speak a little bit about the uptake and absorption rates, which honestly, before coming into this job and before this year, didn't know what those were when it came to residential development or industrial or commercial for that matter. I wanna talk about these for a second because one, all of these things are really based on and contingent upon whether the person who owns the land, wherever the piece of land is, wants to sell it in the first place. At that point, it would have to be purchased by whoever's going to build. Is that fair?

Or develop and then build. Okay. Now, can you speak a little bit to where we got the numbers or these projections? And I understand the Visalia model, and we talked about the 500,000 on the conservative side, 2 million on the large side. and we've seen proof of that in Visalia, so another kind of valley comparable market, if you will. Can you talk to where we got this number for roughly the 1 million? Is that just a we think, or is that based on specifically transportation corridors, what Fresno brings, things of that nature?

Specifically with the FR&D, the South of Jensen portion.

Okay. And then outside of Icelia, are there any comparable markets, whether it's Madeira or otherwise that we looked at to kind of compare what our absorption or uptake would look like? Or was that kind of the golden standard there?

I appreciate that. I was going to ask to see if someone could send what those inquiries were that went to the EDC. I'd be curious to look at those. If they're preparing a report anyway, then I can wait for that. I would appreciate seeing that. I think other people would as well. And this is just a... We're going to spend some time talking about density. Overall, not that it matters because we're not really voting today. I'm not a one or a zero on this. A lot of times we think about this in very binary terms, but I'm going to analyze. I'm going to ask a lot of questions. I think you know that w

Okay. And then one of the concerns brought to me by a constituent of someone's here, I'm sure, yesterday, was the market demand study for the residential was done, but we hadn't seen one or someone hadn't seen one on the industrial area. But it's my understanding from the presentation earlier that was done last year. And I'm guessing that's where we base some of the absorption rates on.

Okay. Last two questions, I think, for you, Director, and Director Amico, you're here as well. I appreciate that. Are you willing to field some questions about water? Okay, I appreciate it. Last two questions I have for you, because we're about to do Nerding Out with Nick here when it comes to density and all that. Can you speak a little bit to the difference between net and gross when it comes to housing units and acreage?

Got it. So, okay, so what we're looking at with net density, you're looking closer to the actual acreage of houses, not acreage of just a residential area. Is that broken down a little more simply?

Okay, I appreciate that. With the... Not going to get into the water questions. I do kind of want to move into density. So I think that's all I had for you right now. Yeah, thank you for your answers, Director. Awesome. Director Mika, if you don't mind, just one or two. And then Ms. Lappin, if you don't mind, you're going to be next. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. So looking at, and because of the data center item, which I'm sure is going to be just a riot in about an hour and a half or two hours or so, looked a lot at water consumption lately, water consumption of local crops, water consumpt

Like what's their water consumption roughly right now, knowing that it's overwhelmingly agricultural? What is that water consumption set to look like with... Again, a window is fine, but with this flexible research and development.

Okay, water's important. I'm concerned with it. Very much.

Bernard, do you still have the slideshow available? Would you mind going to, in that slideshow, just for reference, slide, in the supplemental packet, it's slide five of 126. It's slide four in the presentation, if that helps, whichever you prefer. It has a map on it. That one. Okay. So when we're talking residential here, I think we've probably beat this dead horse, but we're talking about the portion that's east of Temperance, just north of Jensen there bounded by the canal. With that area, the number was thrown out. I know this number has gone up from previous projections from somewhere in

Okay. And again, that's assuming this 10,000 number. If that number were reduced to say 5,000 houses, is there any way, any cost of those homes that would still result in a surplus? Or if we slash that number in half, are we now automatically in the hole?

is tight, if that number were slashed down to a more realistic, reasonable number like 5,000 homes per that size, it would still, the number being 5,000 wouldn't drag us down out of surplus range? Okay. Now with the 20 homes per acre, those are small. Any of the math will show you, however, We have urban neighborhood, which I understand that low density, medium density, and urban neighborhood, these are not single family or multifamily necessarily. It's just a density of domicile units. Is that correct?

Okay, and for the urban neighborhood, capacity that we have in most of the planning documents that we receive, it shows 16 to 30 units per acre as that density. Yeah, 16 to 30 right here in urban neighborhood. and it's characterized in most of the land use maps as brown. I don't see a, and tell me if maybe this isn't the right step, I don't see in the proposed land use map that was shown by Bernard a few minutes ago on slide four or on the printed copies we have here, it's hard to draw that line to see which is what And again, maybe it's not time for that yet. I don't know. You can speak to th

Okay. With the median home price in Fresno right now, most recently calculated, I'd imagine you're coming in somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000. Single family home.

Yes, just your median home price in the city. If you have numbers for new builds, I would take that as well. That's...

Got it. With that, We talked about the builder having to go and get the loan in the first place from the bank to be able to sell these homes. What analysis have we done as far as the price point? How cheap, in theory, could those homes be? Because we've got a lot of demographics in the city, and you can ask the housing element. They're telling us you've got to have medium high income, medium income, medium low income, low income. You've got to have the spread. So what is the average home price that it could drop to, in essence, instead of that $550,000 number, that it could drop to to still re

Okay. And a builder is not selling a house, a new home for $350,000. It's going to be higher than that. So in theory, again, fingers crossed, in theory... a realistic price that a builder is going to sell a house, which would be over 400 kids, not going to be 350,000, you know, be honest. Not you. I'm not saying you're not. So if they're going to sell that for 400,000 or more, whatever else, as long as they're above that $350,000 per home median average, that would still land us in a surplus as well.

Okay. Alrighty. The, We talked about that. We talked about the plan changing, talked about the density, how that density could alter itself. What outside of the 10,000 number that we were given, what are the realistic densities are we planning for in there? And here's the reason I ask, and I don't know this. So teach me when something comes to, when an application comes to the city and nominally probably makes it onto some agenda during the consent calendar and And someone says, I want to build these homes out here. It's a lower density than the average we're trying to maintain for the residen

Okay. And the reason I ask is because 16 years from now, when there's a council comprised of entirely different faces up here, except George Ann will still be here. Yeah. I want to make sure that they're not here for this conversation. They're not having this, right? They don't have this concern about the density and the home prices and how many lots per acre. I want to make sure that instead of something slipping by that drops us below the density that's been promised and thereby not maintaining that surplus, that we're able to hold that honestly, that we're honestly able to hold that number

Got it. So that density is based on specifically how it's zoned and is not really up to the interpretation of a future council or a future this or that, or a future planning department employee. They are bound by the zoning and any breaking of that is going to require a significant votes choices recommendations things of that nature yes okay um that was a concern so i appreciate that um at least knowing that that there are elected officials or appointed officials who can be held responsible for that in the future um i think we've covered the update and the absorption um i just want to make sur

By Clarity, that was the name I was missing. Okay, do we continue to work with Clarity?

Got it, okay. That was one of the answers I was looking for. Okay, Council President, I think for now those are all the questions that I had. Thank you to the three of you for coming up and answering the questions.

I gave an on-the-spot homework assignment. That was on me.

Okay. I think that's fair. And again, all of these things are contingent upon whether or not the person who lives there wants to stay there. Correct. Correct. Okay. Thank you for crunching those numbers. No problem. There probably, I'd imagine there wasn't, so... Math for Marines here. Acre foot of water, roughly what, 336,000 gallons? 326,000 gallons. 326,000? Yeah. Okay. So let's break this down. We're going to go 326,000 gallons divided by 365, so that's per day. Okay, so that's 890, it's one acre foot of water. That's 893 gallons a day, which is about a third of this. However, if my memory

I was mostly looking at the gentleman behind him just to give me a little north, south, or east, west.

Just comparatively. I just wanted to see, hey, comparatively, what's this going to do in water requirements versus something else? So, okay, that was the clarity I was looking for. No pun intended. Council President, that concludes my questions for now.

All right. I don't have anyone punched up right now. Question for the consultants or whoever might want to oblige, you know, in speaking to some of the community members and their concerns. These numbers, you know, these numbers look great. I mean, the numbers that's presented, they pencil. But I think there's concern with just sort of, the methodology, how these numbers were arrived at, some of the assumptions that were behind it. And so I won't nitpick at any one specific component, but for the benefit of the public and transparency, would you mind elaborating on the different methodologies

I don't want the five-minute. I don't want the one-hour. Give me something in between to help folks understand, again, these numbers look good. How did we get there?

I think for a public meeting like this, yeah. Obviously, I think there's a deeper level we could go. I'm not sure it's necessarily helpful in this forum. But I appreciate the kind of overarching. To kind of go back to the beginning as you were listing off some of the assumptions and what you utilized, the mayor kind of alluded to this as well when he was speaking. but I mean, what, I guess I would ask, what independent evidence gives us confidence that the city, the Fresno can absorb the total square footage of the dwellings and the industrial? I know there was some allusion to Visalia and the

Sure. And then, this is more of a physical question, maybe for you, maybe for your admin. But at Build Out, we're seeing this $17.2 million surplus. But notice in the report identifies about $7 million in additional street maintenance costs. Yes. Does that $17.2 million surplus account for that cost already?

Yeah, just trying to get, you know, make sure it's an accurate number. We're not supplanting it or, you know, overlooking, right, what the ultimate net effect would be. Okay. I'll leave you there for now. Okay. I'll give my colleagues an opportunity here. Council Member Arias.

Thank you. City Manager, do you want to take a stretch before we start?

I wanted to point out, City Manager, I know you have a little bell that you ring whenever you disagree with my statement, so I got a bell, too, that I will ring whenever you provide me a response that's not supervised evidence or whenever you guys answer a question without answering the question. Yes, that's a different conversation.

So in all seriousness, this is the most expensive decision that I will be a part of as I depart and complete my tenure on the city council. So what I am gonna ask of staff is that whatever questions I pose, you just give me a direct response. And if the response is we don't know, we'll get back to you, that's fair too. But not to give me a long-winded response that doesn't answer the question, because everybody's tired, I'm exhausted already, and this is a super complicated matter. So I'm not trying to do gotcha questions. I'm trying to understand a 150-page report that I got two days ago. tha

Yeah, a trade memo that we, of course, trade memos are public so that people see the actual responses and we're all operating under the same assumption when we get responses to questions. So if I ask you the cost of a trunk line is a dollar, then everybody should know that the cost of a trunk line is a dollar. That way there's no misunderstandings. And prior to my questions, I wanna just start off with this. We're all temporary caretakers of this city. And I think our hope is always that we leave this place better than we found it. And I think this council and the last few councils and the may

Yeah. And usually when we hear items, Director, as you know, we have an applicant. Either a development permit, somebody's applying for it, there's an interest, or the residents are pushing their council members to adopt a specific plan for their area to preserve neighborhood characteristics. In this case, walk me back through how we got here. Who exactly is requesting SEDA as a specific plan?

So when we put it on the shelf because of the recession, the housing burst, everything else, at what point was the decision made to reignite this? When did we make that decision that we wanted to proceed with SETA again?

Thus far, have we had any residents from the SATA area expressing support or interest or advocating that we proceed with this specific plan?

So in your recollection, there's two property owners who express interest in Zeta moving forward.

So can you put this on the queue of items that I would like? Can you provide me a list of property owners within the SATA area that's being proposed? that have requested that this plan move forward and that have development plans for their property. And as well as any residents from that area who have expressed opposition to CEDA moving forward. I want to understand, is it 90% of the people opposed to it or is it 90% people in support of it? And I'm talking property owners, because again, most of these folks are not our residents, they're county residents. So I'm trying to be thoughtful of if

Can you get that for all the plans for me, including for Copper River? I don't know if there's a plan in Northeast Brazil.

Okay, if you can just get it for me for Copper River specifically. Because as I recall, these areas require 25 years before they're fully developed. And I think Copper River is around that 25-year mark, and I don't believe it's fully built out yet. So I'm trying to assess this process, if I recall, was initially discussed on, we have a housing crisis and we need more housing inventory. Now it seems to be to transition to, we want research and development, therefore we want research development you know, section. So I'd like to understand what is the percentage of the build out of all the speci

the percentage of the built out of the plans that we've approved.

Sure. And also, and this may be a question for you, Director, or for the City Attorney, have we ever denied a development permit based on the area not meeting a certain growth benchmark? Because I think what I've heard today is a phased-in approach that we would put into this data And I'm trying to understand, have we ever done that before?

Yeah, and the reason I want to understand that is, I know this body ultimately has authority to grant waivers and exemptions of all city policies and make findings that ignore the stated city policy or the adopted city policy. So one, I'd like to understand, have we ever done that before? And two, WHAT ABILITY DO WE HAVE TO TIE A FUTURE LEGISLATIVE BODY'S HANDS TO NOT SIMPLY GREEN LINING A DEVELOPMENT EVEN THOUGH THE BENCHMARKS ARE NOT MET FOR SPECIFIC GROWTH IN THOSE PHASES. THE, DO OTHER, I WANT TO KIND OF GO INTO SOME OF THE COST. THE HOUSING. Is there a, the density housing, and keep in mi

Can you provide me a neighborhood, whether it's Fresno or another city, that matches the same proposed density that's being recommended for the financial analysis that you guys utilized?

So if you can show me a neighborhood of 10,000 homes in about 400-ish acres anywhere else in the state that I can drive myself and see what that looks like and feels like, that's what I'm interested in doing. Okay. I actually like showing up and experiencing things directly to see what that would look like.

You're looking at the overall then? I'm looking at it. Are we talking San Francisco? Are we talking LA? Are we talking Spicellia? Like, show me a neighborhood that has achieved that level of density that you guys utilize for your financial analysis to suggest that this would be a revenue generator to a city if it hit this benchmark. So... 450-ACRE SITE WITH 10,000 UNITS. I'M LOOKING FOR THAT KIND OF LIKE EXAMPLE. IN CALIFORNIA, I DON'T WANT TO TRAVEL OUT OF STATE. YOU CAN JUST LIMIT THAT TO THAT. THE STUDY, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF REFERENCES ON THE STUDY THAT I READ ON AREAS THAT WERE NOT ASSESS

Sure. EPS has not independently evaluated the feasibility of the proposed line uses as part of this study.

So how many anchors do you propose in a research and development?

So let's say 1,000 acres is research and development. To understand what you described on what portions a consultant did not study, the consultant did not assess whether Fresno, whether there's even a demand for 1,000 acres of research and development. They simply assumed that there is demand. the acres that you asked them to bake into the formula, correct?

So it was our economic development department determined that there's demand for 1,500 acres of research and development, is that correct?

So who in the economic development department could answer the question on how they came to that conclusion?

That's a fair answer. Same thing on the housing side. How did we come up with 10,000 houses being the magic number? Did we essentially identify the cost of infrastructure and then backed up that by saying this many homes are needed to cover the cost? Or did we determine that 10,000 houses are needed based on us being at 90% fill rate on the existing inventory that we have.

So what keeps us from saying instead of 10,000 units, we want 20,000 units?

So we could also say we only want 2,000 homes by changing the zoning to... many mansions on two acres?

Okay. I want to shift to some references about Measure P in parks. Did I understand that reference to suggest that it's going to generate an additional couple million for Measure P, or is it gonna require Measure P funds to build parks?

So you're suggesting in the study that 10,000 new residents would essentially generate more sales tax that would equate to about one point something million in measure P funds?

We can't count it in the general fund, but there's a special sales tax that just measure P. What I'm struggling with is it would make sense to me that we would generate more sales tax if we were locating distribution centers there. Because that's, you know, point of sale, generate significant sales tax. But if we're generating, if we're creating office space and manufacturing facilities, we don't get sales tax from those operations.

Where in this plan do we identify the amount of parks that would be needed to accommodate and to serve 10,000 new residents?

So in my seven years, the subdivisions have been required to build parks as part of their plans. We have either granted them exemptions not to build the 10 acres that they were SUPPOSED TO BUILD. WE HAVE ALSO GIVEN MEASURE P FUNDS TO OFFSET THE INCREASE IN COST FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARK. WE HAVE DEFINITELY USED MONEY FOR THE OPERATIONS OF MAINTENANCE OF PARKS SO THE CFD'S HAVE NOT FULLY PAID FOR THE PARKS THAT WERE APPROVED AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AND THEY DEFINITELY DID NOT FULLY PAY FOR THE OPERATIONS SO ARE WE ACCOUNTING FOR MEASURE P FUNDS

Are you guys proposing a new CFD in this area or the existing CFD to cover it?

Mr. Mojave, I may remind you you're under oath and you're about to retire, so you're free to say anything you want.

Especially the truth, even though he looks at you, you can speak the truth. Scott, what, Director, what I'd like to understand is, Does the current CFD fee structure that we have cover the full cost of maintaining all the existing obligations that we have? And when was the last time we made that adjustment? I know that some of them are grandfathered, where they're stuck at whatever amount. Some have escalators. Where are we at in the world of CFDs?

Which ones, so under the currency, if there's,

Walk me through the public safety CFD. Where do we stand on that, and what does that cover and pay for?

If you remind me and maybe the administration can, the last couple of fire stations that we've funded. 12 and 18. I recall impact fees were not sufficient to cover the cost. We have put in third party funds for that. We borrowed for some and then we put federal dollars for others and general fund dollars for others. Do you guys, can you guys get back to me on how much we spent and from what sources on the last two or three fire stations that we built?

And historically, Director, as I understand it, the city did not borrow money up front to build the stations. They were collecting money as they go until they had sufficient money to build the station.

So is it fair to describe the fact that we as a city are obligated to build fire stations at times and maybe police stations prior to the full build out of the area that fully funds that public safety service?

I recall numerous instances on the council where we've been told we're no longer approving occupancy permits for houses that have been built because we don't have sufficient fire service coverage. Hence why we had to borrow from Peter to pay Paul to complete the fire station because those stations are based on full build out of that area. So everybody pays their fair share. But the fire service is needed way before the full build out occurs.

I REMEMBER WHEN I RAN FOR OFFICE, I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND WHY WE WAIVED FIRE, POLICE, PARKS, ROAD FEES FROM AMAZON. THEY PAID ZERO FEES WHILE EVERY SMALL BUSINESS HAD TO PAY ALL THEIR FEES. AND SURE ENOUGH, THEY CAUGHT UP WITH US AND WE HAVE TO SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AFTER THE FACT BUILDING A BUNCH OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY ESSENTIALLY DAMAGE BECAUSE THOSE ROADS ARE NOT BUILT FOR TRUCKS. And I remember this council passing a policy, no more waiving fees for public safety, because we're all declaring that we don't have enough money to build fire stations. But that also brings me to this bas

Water or sewer main. Yeah, I don't recall. I don't recall. Olive and First Street, was that water or sewer? Sewer. Sewer. And then there was a major break on McKinley and Golden State. And I think we ended up with litigation because there was like, was it our fault or high-speed rail? Right. Turned out that the thing was 100 years old, so whatever vibration occurred broke it. And I also recall being told numerous times that we don't have the money in the Enterprise Fund to proactively replace all these mains. So we are relegated to having to wait for them to break to do the emergency fixes.

So try to keep this on basic English without the technical language of sewer lines. If you were to give a percentage of the network, how much of it has been productively upgraded of the existing network for the existing city residents?

We can do that. Where would you put the cost on us fixing a broken sewer line when it breaks, an emergency scenario versus a preventative cost?

And does the current system allow us to say this proposal is asking us to borrow nearly $100 million for a trunk line? Could we easily borrow that money to simply replace existing sewer lines and upgrade them?

So if we could bond out for new trunk line on Jensen, we can easily bond out to fix an existing trunk line on Blackstone.

Yeah. But the same mechanism exists. So it's a matter of what you want to prioritize. Well, it's about where the revenue comes from. So walk me through why we wouldn't want the developers to pay for that upfront.

The Copper River. Yeah. In South Sata, there's a developer to that own nearly 1,000 acres, if not more. Would that be sufficient for that developer simply to come in and say, I have enough land? I want to go ahead and pay for the upgrade myself. I don't need the city to borrow on my behalf.

Um, if you can get back to me on the, EXISTING NETWORK AND HOW MUCH OF IT HAS BEEN UPGRADED, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS THIS ONLY REFERS TO A SEWER TRUNK LINE. I'M ASSUMING PEOPLE ARE GOING TO NEED WATER TOO, RIGHT?

But we could use the same model for the sewer, can't we? Condition the development on them, paying for the sewer extension?

Do developers build their own water lines? Don't we do that?

Irrespective of whether they do it or we do it, they pass as our inspections, correct? We control the quality of construction? So we could easily condition a development for them to put their own sewer line and make sure it meets our standards.

I noticed that when it comes to sewer lines and water lines, are they on the same physical space?

It would also require the city to buy right-of-way acquisition, right? Or you spend rights?

So we have existing right-of-way on Jensen for a new sewer line?

So we would have to obtain right-of-way acquisition?

Do we have to have any right-of-way acquisition of private property owners that may be in the vicinity of the project?

Is there any above power lines on that right-of-way?

Oh, north. Well, it's been referred to as a Jensen truck line.

Do we have already rights to all that right-of-way?

months i mean it's a it's part it's through the design process of the of the sewer does this study assess any underground utilities that may exist there i know now pg e requires us to underground above power lines whenever we do work that would not be in the scope of what we did in public utilities we just looked at sewer costs has anybody looked at that cost and who would pay for that

IF I CAN GET BACK TO THE ACTUAL POWERPOINT ON THE PUBLIC FINANCING ANALYSIS ON PAGE 8, IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CONSULTANT LOOKED AT LAND SECURE FINANCING IN MALAROUS? I KNOW OUR FORMER COLLEAGUE MEMBER CHAVEZ KEPT TRYING TO CONVINCE US THAT MALAROUS WOULD SOLVE WORLD HUNGER AND SATA IF WE JUST DID IT THAT WAY. BUT IS IT YOUR CONCLUSION THAT THAT IS NOT A VIABLE OPTION? NOT THAT I DON'T BELIEVE MEMBER CHAVEZ BECAUSE HE CAN ALWAYS LAND THE PLANES.

Is there any mechanism in which development or corporations are the ones that take out the bonds and the debt to get us to a feasible approach?

So can they, in any of these proposals, does it include private development offering of capital towards the financing structure?

Why would it be a lot for a private developer and not a lot for the taxpayers? I'm sorry, I didn't mean to ask you that question. It's not a finance question. But it's fair to say that that is possible. If we had a developer who owned 1000 acres, had tenants had interest, that developer can bring forward capital, which would help offset any potential taxpayer subsidy.

And I'm assuming for them to pencil, a probably third-party banking financing institution would have to confirm that it pencils out for them. Unless they have independent wealth and they're putting in their own money.

Thank you, Mayor. Director from utilities, thank you. I may have some more for you. Isn't there an alternative where the developer can build their own standalone facility? versus requiring the city to connect our infrastructure?

Yeah, and what is the current capacity status of our existing sewer facility? Because for the public's benefit, we have a couple of facilities that... clean water, but only one facility that processes sewer. That's correct. Happens to be in my district, the whole city, and I think Clovis, we get some other stuff in our facility too. We do. So what is the current rate of capacity there now and when do I anticipate mean the next threshold with that facility has to be expanded irrespective of SATA or not? Irrespective of SATA.

So when do we anticipate having to expand the plant again, whether a SATA occurs or not, just naturally?

And since you use a general plan as kind of that capacity threshold, how many homes did the general plan assume in SATA at that time? I don't know the... 25,000 homes? 45,000 homes. 45,000 homes? And so, but the SAL SEDA is only 10,000 homes? Okay, thank you. On the second option of a revenue secured financing, why was that not an option, a feasible option for us to consider?

So that's the version that you guys are proposing that would require surcharge for us to fund?

In the reserve fund of the utility department? But isn't that reserve fund accounted for other things? If we empty out the reserve fund, we're going to have triggering rate increases again.

If you can just break it down to me, city manager or staff in basic English, how much of a loan are we talking about? What is the payback period and what is the interest rate that rate payers would be charging this SEDA development for that cash?

What's the current size of the reserve fund?

You know, not that we're gonna get to Prop 218 discussions, but part of the rationale for bringing forward rate increases soon on water and sewer was a dwindling reserve fund. So now we're proposing to tap into that reserve fund. So what is the current reserve fund? Thank you. Thank you for not making me use my ballot city manager yet. My medium-sized ballot.

So we have $32 million in the reserve balance, and we want to borrow $86 million?

What's the annual payment that we're making out of the reserve fund?

So let's assume we build this $87 million sewer line and we have annual bond payments of what? Two, three million?

So we build an $86 million sewer line We are on the hook immediately for a $6.5 million annual payment.

$72 million at 2029. But the full amount that we're borrowing is 86 million.

When you build a house, you have to incorporate the cost of financing the house. Yeah, I appreciate it. Let's keep it in basic English. So we build a $86 million trunk line, total cost, all in. We're immediately on the hook for $6.5 million annual payment to that bond debt. Starting in 2030. In 2030. What if the development does not occur? Are we, what's a mechanism to, do we just continue to have the reserve fund pay that annual debt? You could, that would be one likely option. And we would have essentially five years before that reserve fund runs out?

What's our backstop to stop the bleeding if development does not occur within the projected seven-year payback that is being proposed. Would the backstop then be the general fund, or do we go and raise sewer rates?

Did this financing plan in any way put development or the corporations or the developers on the hook if we build out the infrastructure, the project does not go through? Is there any deposit that we require from them to in any way put them on the hook for making the bond payments if the development does not occur that was promised? The reason I ask is, We have track masks that have been approved for a decade yet never built on, right? So if this happens here, how do we protect ourselves?

How long was it paid back for the Gretlin trunk line?

The reason I'm pressing on this city manager is I keep on being told up to this point that the payback is four or five, six years, seven years. But I'm assuming the trunk lines that you're referencing to that we use as financing mechanism took more than five, six, seven years to pay back.

When was the Grantland trunk line built? Do we know? Was that in the infamous Federal Rezone days? I don't know that history.

That's fine. What about the Fowler trunk line one? Was that built-

And do you know an estimated amount what they cost?

So it's fair to say that in the past, when we've used this financing mechanism, it's taken us about 20 plus years to pay back.

and paying interest on it when we already collect other money to pay it fully?

Do we have any history of paying off a sewer bond in a five or six year period?

Okay, thank you. For the consultant, is there any financial mechanism options that you're aware of in other municipalities that you did not explore for us? So it's fair to say that these are essentially what's available in the market.

Thank you. What happens to the financial analysis if we only built half the homes that are being projected? Does it just mean that the subsidy gets bigger? You don't have to, I don't want to put you on the spot, but you can just get back to me.

THANK YOU. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR A MOMENT. AGAIN, I HAVE A FEW OTHERS THAT I'M GOING TO SUBMIT TO YOU IN WRITING. I just want to give us some history around projections around, you know, assumptions. The baseball stadium that we built was sold to us as it's going to pay for itself. The owner is a baseball baseball team is going to pay for it. They're going to pay the annual bond payment. And then year after year, we renegotiated to a point of essentially them paying $0 in today's and We've had to come up with all the capital improvements of the stadium. That was supposed to be

All right, thank you, Council Member. At this time, We are going to, it's 4.30, I didn't know we were gonna go this long on this item. We do have to hear one time sensitive closed session item. We'll do that one item and then we'll come back out here to wrap up the rest of the open session. So at this time, City Attorney, would you please read the closed session items.

All right, we are back. At this point, we're going to take on item 2N. I know folks have been waiting for this one. This is the Councilmember Richardson's item related to the prohibition of data centers. So I'll give the floor to the sponsor.

All right, Council President Anderson, over the floor. Okay, this is going to be pretty brief. If I have any questions, it's going to be one or two. So the intent here, I want to be pretty clear with what my intent is. And if anybody's seen any of the news coverage over the last few days, this is exactly what I've said to everybody. Throughout my time on the council, I've been very... I wouldn't even say conciliatory. I've been very dedicated when it comes to studying the effects that decisions have on business. And the intent here is not to cripple or tell any sort of business we don't want y

Okay. Mayor, did you, were you pitching something in over there? Yeah, if you're done with the questions. One more, then we'll let you have it. This may be for you, it may be for the city attorney. In your professional analysis, on the record, would this meet the requirements or the immediacy for a quote-unquote emergency ban right now? Does it meet the imminency threshold requirements? And I'm looking at a representative from the city attorney's office who has an opinion on this. Because this was brought up as well.

Okay. So to that point, and to put a cap on this... Not sure to what extent you can speak to this. Are there any pending applications before the planning commission for a use of this type that you deem likely to pass the director's determination thresholds?

Okay. So it seems like we're not meeting the emergency ban threshold. I'm comfortable with those answers. Thank you for the professional analysis. Mayor?

I appreciate it. We spoke earlier to the, to the one zero of binary code, which especially applicable with data centers. I feel like what we've reached here is a good 0.5 right in the middle of the two. Um, And I'm glad that my other colleagues have also had similar ideas. We obviously can't discuss these things given Brown Act restrictions with each other whenever we'd like. So this conversation is taking place here. I'm not gonna go to detail about the water consumption, but director with this tasking, I don't know if this would require an amendment to it or not, but I think it's worth our f

Yeah, this was, Council Member Arias pulled it, so I'll go to him, and then Council Member Perea is punched up as well after him, as well as others.

Thank you, Council President. Of course, I think I, like others, are in support of not allowing data centers in the city. However, I think the item can be improved in a couple of ways. One is the new language that you included suggests that this would only apply to those who are primarily for the purpose of an AI data center. Is it my assumption that we would be okay with data centers within an existing business building? Say if Amazon decided tomorrow in my district to automate more of their internal delivery systems and use half of the million square fee and convert that to a data center, we

So it doesn't specify just AI from the legislation text. It says AI or cloud. And what cloud is, we're all familiar with the cloud. It's not actually in the air. It's actually servers somewhere. So it's not necessarily just AI generation. We do have hospitals. We do have manufacturing facilities and other things that use some sort of data store. I mean, we use it here in City Hall. Yeah, we all have a server room.

Every institution has a server room. That's not what I'm getting at. Our server room is not half a million square feet of floor space. So if these Amazon distribution centers are huge in their size, if they decided they're also in the AI business, if they decided to take half of the square footage of the existing million square feet of floor space and turn it to a server room, would that be considered auxiliary use or would that fit the definition of a data center under this proposal?

half, so half of that would fall above the threshold here. It talks about specifically 20,000 square feet and over, which isn't huge, especially when you're compared to the rest of the footprint of an Amazon center. We can speak, maybe Director Clark, you want to speak to this? We could talk about perhaps putting verbiage in there that talks about a percentage of a business or some sort of commercial uses footprint. If you want to talk about, hey, no more than 25% of it can be for X, Y, Z. In here, there is a definition which is sufficiently specific, I think.

And Council Member, if I may, Director. Yeah. 20,000 square feet, give me a visual what that is. Is it this room? Is it this building?

So say that a current warehouse facility is a million square feet, and they decided to section off, I don't know, 100,000 square feet. But their argument is we're not providing cloud service to a third party, right? We're providing cloud service for ourselves. Amazon's a pretty big corporation. They can, I'm sure, take enough space in a million square feet by itself and not be sufficient just to provide their own company. So would this definition as written apply to those who are just providing cloud services for themselves? Because there's a distinction between the hospital and an Amazon. The

Yeah, I guess the example I'm trying to process is, Community Medical Centers is a big hospital, and I'm sure their data, their server room is pretty large, right? It should be. It's pretty big. Amazon, they're, if they have a server room, it's one thing for the server room to be for that facility versus the server room to be for the whole corporate and international corporation that therefore they can claim a million square feet at the Amazon on 99 is incidental to my corporate uses. So therefore.

So let's say on that example, If tomorrow Amazon decided that they wanted to reconfigure their existing building to allow for that, would that trigger a requirement for permit from your office?

And would that eventually come to council or is that approved at administrative level?

Let's assume they argue it's not a data center, right? They say it's just incidental.

But you could also prove it and say that you can make the findings that is incidental to that facility only versus to the whole corporation and it would go through.

Well, I think the differentiation there is in the description and the definition of written on page two and four, the supplemental packet portion, when it talks about hyperscale. Hyperscale, you know, you don't need, pardon me for nerding out here, you don't need petabytes or exabytes of information generation for the maintenance or logistics of an individual company. That is more along the lines of what you're talking about with a multinational corporation or this or that or a The other purposes mentioned here, like data mining, cryptocurrency validation, high-performance computing, it specif

My other question, Director, is how much time do you need before you think you'll be prepared to bring a text amendment forward?

So, so that's, that leads to my other concern, um, to council member Richardson. PUTTING THIS, BAKING THIS IN TERMS OF A TENURE, THIS ITEM SIMPLY DIRECTS FOR THEM TO INITIATE THE PROCESS, WHICH COULD BE AS SHORT AS A FEW MONTHS OR AS LONG AS A YEAR. IN THAT TIME FRAME, WE COULD POTENTIALLY BE HAVING TO PROCESS APPLICATIONS BECAUSE when people pay their application fee, we're required to process the application, right? When there is not yet a determination by this body on whether we're going to allow them and whether it's in our best interest or not. So what I would recommend in terms of amendm

WELL, THEY CAN ARGUE THAT THEIR PROPOSAL DOES NOT FIT THE DESCRIPTION OR THE DEFINITION BECAUSE ONE DOESN'T EXIST.

But what if you change your mind next month? Because you think that the proposal before you, there is a sufficient water or power.

I appreciate that. But just let me give you this context. In my 25 years at City Hall, i.e. Luis Chavez, we did not have a definition for smoke shops. And overnight, hundreds of them popped up in the city. And then we had to play catch up to define a smoke shop and regulate a smoke shop. So additionally, we are not allowed to rezone a certain property, but yet we kept that subject alive for a year.

Right? SO WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS WASTE THIS BODY'S TIME AND STAFF'S TIME WITH SOMEBODY SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION, WE GETTING DRAGGED INTO THE CITIES GOING BACK ON THEIR BAN FOR DATA CENTERS BECAUSE THERE'S STILL A LACK OF A DEFINITION. IT'S GOING TO TAKE MAYBE FOUR MONTHS OR MAYBE A YEAR TO GET BACK. IN OUR LAST BUDGET PRESENTATION IMPROVAL PROCESS WE HAD, THE DIRECTOR AND THE CITY MANAGER MADE IT CLEAR WE HAVE NO MONEY FOR ANY MORE TEXT AMENDMENTS. So we're tapped out. So if this does trigger a sequel analysis, i.e. money to do the environmental, this is gonna be another conversation we h

Would that then push it to a less public process? Because the director's determination process is very public. Would that then make it a less public process for an application to be submitted? Because I don't want it to be less public. That seems like going backward.

I don't know when was the last time a director's determination was on the council agenda for public discussion. She can probably speak the last time a director's determination came up.

To even suspend your authority on data centers?

Can I add something, Councilmember? Yeah. Just to be clear, this is more of a structural argument. This is not about Director Clark. You're a good director. Yeah, for sure. Yeah, absolutely.

So Director, if I may, to Member Karbaugh's point, this isn't about you or about this current administration, it's just historically, people have found loopholes, right? And tech companies are much better at this than we are in finding loopholes, to a tax code, to the environmental code, to . So what if, in terms of amendment, Member Richardson, we include that if the city receives any application for a data center or for an auxiliary use or incidental use of a data center storage system, that the council will be notified. I don't want any secret.

Yeah. I don't think notification would require a CEQA investigation or anything. I think that's fair to notify us. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Cause ultimately I just want to know, and I want my predecessor to know if Amazon's planning to get creative and turn their distribution center to a data center. And I don't want to know after it shows up on planning commission. I want to know when the application comes through and maybe by that time there is no policy yet. And, we have to then speed up the process of adopting a policy or dealing with the reality. Well, your predecessor isn't here anymore, but... Not my predecessor.

But I think notification, if that's the amendment you'd like, I'm down, and I think your successor will appreciate that as well. My successor, yes.

All right, well now, when you go to motion to approve, I would appreciate an amendment that includes immediate notification of the council offices of any, of all council offices for any application that seeks to use a data center as their primary use or incidental or auxiliary use to their operation.

Any other amendments? All right, so I have Council Member Perea, who was followed by Council Member Vang.

Thank you, Council President. I wanna start by just thanking my council colleague from District 6, Council Member Richardson, thank you for bringing this forward. And I wanna thank the Mayor's Office for adding in the definition. I think my initial concern with how the original resolution was written is that we were being asked to ban something without actually clearly define what it is that we were trying to ban. So I think just giving staff clear direction as to what a potential ban would look like is going to save us a lot of work on the back end. With that being said, I do have some clarif

Okay, because that was the other instance was we called out exceeding 20,000 square feet. So the other question was, if it's 19,000 square feet, is that allowable? And so I just wanted to be sure we were crystal clear if there is a ban that's going to take place. To me, how this definition is currently written is that there are potential thresholds. So if your data center meets these thresholds, then you qualify for a ban. And then on the other flip of the coin, if you don't meet these thresholds, then to me, how this is written currently there's a possibility that it will be allowed. And so m

Director, if I can piggyback on that too, Council Member Perea, it seems to me that the descriptions, the definitions that are put here in the legislation, it's kind of like dropping a magnet into a box of nails that currently there's nothing, no type of business like the dog food, cat food example to associate a data center to, so it's not gonna happen. This gives a description that even if it doesn't meet it word for word, letter by letter, still gives a use that could be comparable to somebody who makes an application for maybe something smaller or with less megawatt capacity. which would t

Understood. Yeah. It's you know, we learned during the tobacco retail license item, how difficult it can be to move words around and to, to write policy in real time after the fact. And so I just wanna make sure that because this is only an initiation that we're all on the same page with what exactly it is we are defining and what exactly it is that we were asking city staff to go and write a text amendment to ban. And so with that being said, during the budget process, I set aside 100,000 to do a text amendment to make it easier to construct neighborhood serving retail uses. So pharmacies, gr

Understood. Thank you. And then what is the cost to complete this tax amendment with a level of CEQA, assuming categorical exemption? And where is that money going to come from?

Understood. Okay. Council President, I think those are all my questions for now. I don't know if this is going to come back while I'm still here. And so I just want to be sure that those council members that are going to outlive some of us are comfortable with this definition. And if not, then now would be the time to make any definitive changes so that we can lock it in. And yeah, just go from there. Thank you, Council President.

All right. Next, we have Councilmember Vang.

Thank you very much, Council President. I am in support of this resolution and I want to thank my colleague, Councilmember Richardson, and the Mayor for bringing this legislation to council discussion today. Society is usually behind technology and the law, again, is usually behind technology and this is a discussion that reflects that approach as well. And as the mayor mentioned earlier, a lot of cities are looking into data center, and many of them are looking into banning data center from their cities, being that, again, it does not create jobs. In fact, it takes away jobs and uses a lot of

Director, quick housekeeping note. Council Member Vang, I appreciate your proposed amendment. I just want to smell test and test the necessity of this. Without adopting the SEDA-specific plan, would we have any way of preventing these from being built in the sphere of influence area currently considered by SEDA?

somewhere in the vicinity of the SATA area, what would that standstill look like if we were ready to move on and now there's a data center in addition to all these rural developments there?

Would we be able to then annex that as a city if we had a prohibition on that?

So really there's no way to guarantee that it's... doesn't get built in annexable property unless you approve SEDA.

The other option too is for us to include in the resolution that we should not provide them any services. Because the county does not run a water department or a sewer department. So we can say that any data center within the sphere of influence would not receive any city services.

So I think what this boils down to is, as the city of Fresno, we can make laws that pertain to the city of Fresno. As a city, we cannot make laws that pertain to the county. I mean, it sounds like I was asking a question. I'm not. I think that's kind of what this boils down to. I appreciate your amendment. but it sounds like that's outside of our jurisdiction, unless I'm reading this wrong.

Well, if I understand, it's not necessarily that you're trying to make sure they're not built in county area that then becomes annexed by the city, but rather when we pass this saying no land in the city of Fresno will support this use, at least for the next 10 years and then infinitely, that when we do, the city does take on property on one side or the other, annexation takes place, that it still applies to that land. Is that what you're saying? That it can't then be a new use? That's correct.

Yes, that is correct. It says here, a clear prohibition on data centers throughout the city of Fresno. I mean, that's clearly stated in there. What my amendment is, just to strengthen that, that if a territory has been annexed to the city of Fresno after the effective date, and that applies to that, and also it applies to any territory for which an application right now, if there is any, for annexation is already pending, And so it just strengthens the language you have in here that, yes, it prohibits any data center throughout the state of Fresno, but it's just been very specific in terms of

Is that something, one, is it necessary, two, is it within our jurisdiction to say that, and three, does it get in the way of the spirit of this adding that at all?

And I think that's the intent of adding this language to that. Yes, it is redundant in terms of the idea of that, but in terms of the language itself, it's different. It's very specific. And so, again, the reason being that I want to be specific is if there is a data center being planned, it's logical that Southeast Fresno is a candidate for that amenity. Got it.

I think, were there any other amendments? My colleagues, or has not everyone spoken yet who's punched up? No? Okay. Planning Director, with the understanding that that would be redundant, but not contradict the spirit of the plan, nor be outside our jurisdiction, I would make the motion... Well, I guess I didn't pull it, so. But I would be open to two amendments. One, that would apply to land in or that becomes part of the city of Fresno. Council Member Richardson, it's your item. Even though I pulled it, I'll defer to you on the motion. I appreciate that. First one, applies to land in or beco

Second that. All right, we have a motion, we have a second. City Manager, you're not punched up anymore? Okay, great. Great work, Council Member Richardson. I don't say that super duper often. Really great work and excited to be able to vote on this today. I don't see anyone else punched up. Is there any opposition to approving item two and three? All right, seeing none, the item passes. That's gonna be six zero. Yeah, but I don't see, yeah, six zero. All right, fantastic. Thank you all for a lively discussion. We're on to item 2K, pulled by Councilmember Richardson. We have two more contestan

This is on the PD step, motion to approve. Council President, I have my questions answered. All right, second that.

Any opposition to approving item 2K? All right, seeing none, that passes six to zero. Now item 2O, also pulled by Council Member Richardson.

This was brought forward by Council Member Arias. I just wanted you to explain, I've never done this, so I want you to explain kind of what this process is, please.

So in general, each time we adopt a budget, we also adopt the budgets for each council office. And then whenever we have to make adjustments to our council budgets, we're required to bring it back to the council for approval. So in this case, I am moving some money from infrastructure to operations, primarily for a couple of reasons. AS I FINISHED MY TERM ON THE COUNCIL, WE'VE BEEN NOTIFIED BY PUBLIC WORKS THAT MONEY THAT WE SET ASIDE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PROJECTS THAT WERE SCHEDULED TO BE DONE ARE NOT GOING TO BE DONE DURING MY TENURE. AND WE'VE ALSO GOT SOME NEW COST INCREASES ON OTHER PROJECT

It's out of your district's infrastructure budget to your districts operation budget Yeah, and then one last thing

As you guys will do this too, as we leave office, our employees who are also leaving with us or retiring from the system, they have compiled a lot of sick leave, vacation and whatnot, and those have to be cashed out towards the end. So those typically don't get cashed out for the whole time. So yeah, that's the case.

I'll make a motion to approve then. All right, we have a motion, we have a second. Any opposition to approving item 2-0? All right, seeing none, the item passes six to zero. Last thing on our public agenda is gonna be unscheduled communication. I'll invite anyone in the chamber who would like to participate in unscheduled communication to come forward.

All right, she's excused. All right, please come on down. We're on unscheduled communication. Welcome, you have three minutes.

Thank you. I had some cards from earlier on unscheduled communication. Hester Hensley. Burnett. Alyssa Pratt. brian cole no we'll move over to zoom uh on zoom we have lisa flores welcome good evening i'm going to make it really short i need 58 000

Thank you. Our next speaker is going to be Joseph Rodriguez.

All right. So our next speaker is going to be Alfred Aldredi.

We're going to take a two-minute recess here before we adjourn.

All right, we are back. Council Member Carabasi, you're punched up.

Yes, unfortunately, when I stepped out after the long conversation to go to the restroom, I wanted to vote in favor of the data center ban, and unfortunately, I didn't realize the vote had taken place. I was going to ask for a motion to reconsider, but Council Member Perea, because of a family emergency, cannot log back on. Well, if the sponsors will agree to that.

Can council member register a yes vote? It's positions for the record. Any last words, council member?

Well, this is not a time-sensitive item. Would the council consider reopening it so we can deny it at the next scheduled meeting? Oh, she's on? Okay, thank you so much, council member. So I can't make the motion to reconsider. If someone else would do that, I'd really appreciate it. So we can move forward. Council Member Harris is still here. I don't see the council member.

All right, I'll second that. Thank you. Council Members.

Being that it was my item, I'd like to call the motion, Council President.

I'd like to motion for the approval of item two November with the two added amendments. We're not there yet.

Oh, are we still opening up? Sorry. So our motion stands, motion to reopen has been seconded. Do you have to take public comment on this procedural motion? Okay. All right. Is there any opposition to reopening the item 2N, the data centers? All right, seeing none, the item is reopened.

Hold on, is she on yet? Okay. And thank you to the council for your patience.

Thank you again, Council Member Preya. Appreciate you coming back.

Go ahead. All right. Council Member Richardson, it's your item.

Yep. Council President, motion to approve item 2N with the two added and recorded and previously accepted amendments. Second that.

Okay, so it's identical motion to the one made when it was opened the first time. We have a motion, we have a second. It's identical and we're ready to public comment. Is there any opposition to approving item 2N on the reopens? Seeing none, that passes 7-0. Thank you. All right, thank you. Yeah, Council Member Ferreira is online, so that's 7-0 vote.

Thank you. He's in the chamber. He's allowed to vote as long as he's in the chamber.

Thank you all. The meeting is adjourned for tonight.