City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, everyone. We're going to make our way to getting started. We have a good quorum, and I'll talk slow as we get going. I'm going to go ahead and call to order the regular meeting of Vallejo City Council at 7.33 p.m. and ask our clerk to conduct the roll call. Mayor Soros.

All right. That is going to bring us to our third item, Pledge of Allegiance. If everyone would please stand for the pledge. All right. We're going to move to item four, report out of closed session. Council did meet in closed session immediately prior to this. I believe our city attorney and our vice mayor are going to have report outs. So go ahead. Or just vice mayor? All right.

Yes, I'm going to report out on item 3A, conference with legal counsel, anticipated litigation, significant exposure to litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.9D2, two cases. And in both those cases, the counsel directed outside counsel with appropriate action to move forward. And that's it for item 3A?

Okay, and do we have other report outs from closed session? Yes.

all right thank you that is going to bring us to item five presentations and commendations and we do have a couple of items here today first we'll be presenting a proclamation recognizing october 2026 as domestic violence awareness month this is our second year doing this proclamation to celebrate survivors and demonstrate our shared commitment as a city to standing by our survivors of violence. And we have invited our local organization, Vest Solano, as well as some of our other partners that work in Vallejo and Solano County. I'm not sure how many were able to make it, but we have the Solano

So if that's it for our organizations, we'll come down to the front and take a photo together.

All right, thank you all again. And as we... get settled back. I'll say also that this is a new proclamation that the city of Vallejo has been doing. And in my memory, I don't know that we'd ever done one for Domestic Violence Awareness Month. And it was something that was incredibly important to me and I know to my colleagues on this council and a commitment that we really want to reiterate. And I'll also remind us that there are so many survivors in our community who are carrying their stories. And we just want to let folks know that even if they aren't sharing their stories, that we see you

We will make sure we get that pulled up.

On your lower right, there's a little toggle switch. You can actually raise up the podium so you don't have to lean down. Down on the right, right where you're looking. There it is.

Perfect. Thank you so much. And I was actually, you answered the question I was going to ask, which is that we have a packed agenda this evening. And so I think it would be great if we could get the contact information for how to best follow up. Where could members of the public find information on the project? Is it on the STA website? Yes, it's on the STA website. Perfect. Okay. And then we'll make sure, Katrina, that the council gets your contact information in case anyone has questions. Thank you both very much. All right, that is gonna bring us to item six, our first community forum. This

Yes, Madam Mayor, we have a total of 12 people signed up. Our first three speakers are RJC, Ascari Sowande, and Dr. Christopher Adams.

All right, and again, I'm going to keep the three minutes because I know a lot of members of the public plan for three minutes, and I don't want to arbitrarily cut it down, but if you are able to cut it down, we can get through more speakers. So come on up. Please, please speak. We're going to put the three-minute clock, and I'll just ask that since we do have 12 folks here, if we have the ability to shorten, we'll ask you to do so.

Next speaker is Dr. Christopher Adams, followed by Josh Davidson, Ruskell C., and Liz K. King.

I'm here with some issues for the... Lower right, you can raise up the podium.

Thank you so much. We'll make sure we get somebody your contact information.

All right. Let's call up the next speaker. We'll make sure.

Next speaker is Josh Davidson, followed by Ruskell C., and then Liz King.

All right. In that case, we are going to hold, we're going to pause you right there, and we're going to have you speak when we get to the consent calendar. You are all good. We will make sure you get heard on consent. Okay. That will give us more time to get through more speakers now. Thank you.

Next speaker is Ruskell C., followed by Liz King, and then after Liz King is Carrie Swing.

Next speaker is Liz King, followed by Carrie Swing.

Thank you. Yeah, so we'll do the one that was already called by the vice mayor, and then unfortunately we'll have to save everyone else for the second forum.

Thank you very much. Really appreciate everyone that came out. And again, for those that didn't have a chance to address the council, we'll have one more opportunity at the second community forum after we finish our action items. So with that, we're going to go ahead and move to item seven, which is public comment regarding consent calendar items. And then we'll take our public comment and we'll do our consent calendar and approval of agenda. I do want to make sure that Mr. Davidson gets a chance to speak. So we'll invite him up first. And do we have any other in-person speakers?

Sorry, Mary, that is the only in-person speaker signed up.

All right, come on up. Do we have anyone online, Manny? We'll let the timer run a bit longer.

You can raise up the podium again if you want. I think somebody lowered it.

Hold on, I'm actually going to pause you really quickly. Can we just see if we can shut the, we'll make sure you get your time back. We've got Mr. Smith back there. Thank you. He's forcing it. The sound carries tremendously in this room. Thank you, Kirk. All right, go ahead.

Thank you. Thank you. Did you want to do a specific clarification? THE THREE ITEMS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WAS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? WE WERE JUST MAKING SURE WE GOT EVERYTHING. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT ON CONSENT AND WE WILL SEE IF ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ITEMS THEY WOULD LIKE TO PULL FROM CONSENT. COUNCIL MEMBER? ITEM I. All right, so we're going to take item I and turn it into 8.1. And, okay, if we pull too many items, we may move them until after the action calendar. Council Member Gordon.

Yes, I just want to say for the record, I did have a lot of questions. And to the constituents who asked me, the city manager got back to me and he answered those questions, so I'll forward them to you when you respond. Thank you so much, City Manager.

All right, Council Member Letijoux. Item H. All right, so we'll take item H and turn that into 8.2. I am not seeing any other requests, so we will look for a motion to approve the agenda and consent calendar. And we are looking at potential, I'm going to asterisk it, a potential reordering and or moving of action calendar if we run out of time. We are considering continuing B and F if we are time constrained. We end hearing item A followed by item C followed by item E as the highest priority. So I don't know if we need to formally reorder the agenda now. Why don't we formally reorder the agend

Can you share how you have decided to reformulate?

The request, so I had asked the city manager in the event that we run out of time which items are the most time sensitive. And item C is a public hearing, which was already noticed. And item E is time sensitive because it's the warming center, which would be problematic if it got delayed. Yeah. So we're not going to continue anything at this point, but we'll just do that reordering to make sure we get through those high priorities. So A, then C, then E, and then we'll proceed through the rest. All right, we're ready for a motion.

Yes, I move that we approve the consent calendar relocating item A. item 8i to 8.1 and item 8h to 8.2 and with the potential reorder of the action calendar items based on the time constraints to 9a, the 9c, the 9e and the other items to fall into place as needed.

Motion carries unanimously. All right. Thank you. That is going to bring us to our first poll. We'll go ahead and take the consent items quickly now. We'll go to formally item 8i, 8.1, which was pulled by Council Member Bergenzer. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Vallejo amending the fiscal year budget to appropriate $256,000 from the Monsanto fund balance and $207,000 measure P for funding Axon Enterprise for our fiscal year. I'll turn it over to Council Member Bergenzer who pulled the item.

Yeah, and hopefully this will be very brief. I don't need a presentation. I'm very familiar with the Axon contract. My question is more globally with the police budget, and maybe this isn't necessarily for you, but for the city manager. I just want a guarantee, you know, because since the council had voted that we were going to hold the funding for the flock cameras until we have the group meeting, which is I think this Thursday between the POAC and the SOB to give us recommendations, I just want to make sure that there's no shell game happening and money is being moved around to make sure tha

Okay, so if the joint meeting that's happening on Thursday were to come back, that we are gonna move forward with FLOC, then you'd have to come back and get funding for that FLOC camera, right, because there's not funding for FLOC? Yes, that's correct. Okay, thank you. That's all I need to know.

Thank you. And I'll ask one quick follow-up, which is that because Council Member Bergenser and I weren't here for step one, my concern with this was that this seems like a really important recurring expense to have in the regular PD budget and not have coming out of Measure P. So if the city manager is able to answer, do we have plans to put this in our proper VPD budget going forward so we're not continuing to rely on Measure P for...

Yeah, we don't need to belabor it, but I wanted to just raise that, and I know there was a robust discussion at the last meeting. So I think we can go ahead. I'm not seeing anything else, and we already took our commenters. As long as no one else is jumping up, we will go ahead and get a motion on the item.

Yes, Mayor, I move that we pass a resolution of the City Council of the City of Vallejo amending the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget to appropriate $256,022 from the Monsanto fund balance and $207,978 from the Measure P funds for funding Axon Enterprise, Inc. for fiscal year 2026 and 2027 in the total amount of $464,000, step one of two.

So typo on the agenda, step two of two. Okay, we are ready to vote. It says step two in the recommendation. Motion carries unanimously. All right. Thank you. That is going to bring us to item 8.2, formally 8H, adopt a resolution to amend this year's budget to allocate $300,000 of Measure P funds to the Housing Authority of the City of Vallejo's Administration Fund. I will turn it over to Councilmember Letiziu, who pulled the item, and I imagine we'll want to get the gentleman's questions answered as well.

Thank you. So we're extending, my understanding is we're extending a current contract that we have had in place with ALICA for how many, for how long?

And what other work has ALICA performed on behalf of the Housing Authority before the Broadway project? For the Broadway project or for the Housing Authority? Before the Broadway project.

And how long have they been doing the recertification work for the Housing Authority?

Excuse me? Is the contractor in the room?

So my question is, how long have you been working or contracted with the Housing Authority of Vallejo?

And this has been ongoing work? It has been. Okay. So with that in mind, I would assume that your staff do not need the help of our staff to do the work that you're doing. Is that true or not true?

So when you say fill in the gaps, can you describe what that means? There's a backlog of recertifications. How far are we in a backlog of recertification? Can you give me an estimate?

Sometimes longer are we talking two months six months? I'm asking this question because I can say as a council member. I know how many emails I receive We just had a gentleman come and talk about not having his hearing The week before we have consistently heard this so how many months are we talking two months? Are we talking four months six months?

And... HUD's standard for recertifications, especially when our residents get them in on time, is how many days in terms of being fully certified and moving on.

Thank you. And so if we are 60 days, 120 days behind, that means that any changes that are required are not noticed on time, correct? That is correct. Okay. And so are you doing any of the reasonable accommodations, any of the hearings?

So Assistant Manager Conley, can you tell me what our backlog is?

Do you know the backlog of our hearings?

hearings are hearings so 23 or 26 hearings and those 23 or 26 hearings and i'm saying this for us as leaders those 23 or 26 hearings potentially means as that gentleman said when he came to this podium potentially someone being unhoused unfairly because why we have not been able to provide a hearing am i correct Yes. Okay. So with that in mind, what I would like to know, can you share what your expertise and experience is, please?

So do you provide technical assistance to housing authority staff As well from a transfer of knowledge and helping teams build up their capacity.

Okay. And so... Given your prior, given your experience of 30 years, of more than three decades, and working with multitude of housing authorities across the nation, can you share as you're doing this work, and I don't know if it's in the scope of the work, and I can be corrected if it is or if it's not, how you would also be able to provide technical assistance and help our staff um, increase their capacity for the work that we need to be done on a day-to-day basis.

So in the scope of this work for ALICA, I have a reason for I'm asking these questions. Okay. In the scope of the work for ALICA, can you tell me, Assistant City Manager, are we asking for their technical expertise to help increase our staff capacity?

Okay. And so then from a long-term sustainability perspective, one of the things that I would like to see is how do we have or be provided what is the condition what is the current condition of our housing authority what is the fundamental strategic plan that will occur as we have the contractor there to assist us to move through those actions first of all most importantly for our residents that we serve to for us to get all of the backlog done, and then begin to do the necessary training and lay a foundation of the things that we need to do so that we can be a viable, operable housing authori

So the goal is not having our contractor replace our current staff and staffing up.

And so to our contractor who works across the nation, so from a perspective of hiring staff into housing authorities, generally what do you see? Usually we talk about having staff that have one to two years of experience and we're building departments. Can you talk about that a little bit?

All right, city manager, do you have something to add? All right, I think the vice mayor has a quick question. We've been on this item for a little over 15 minutes, and we do have six action items to get to, so go ahead, vice mayor.

So the quick question is, are we ever going to get caught up with your support, with the backlog?

So that is the plan. And to be clear, how short are we staff-wise right now for the specific positions?

So if I'm hearing you clearly, we're short four staff members, or we're short nine staff members?

And how many staff members is ALICA providing us to fill those four positions?

And to Mr. Davidson's point, how are we supporting getting our own staff as opposed to having to hire out for this.

And I know the city manager wanted to get in as well.

Understood, and I think we all are under the same goal that obviously internally hiring all this stuff is the utopian goal. But the fact they've been with us for two years now, that tells me there's not a short-term solution.

Okay, but that speaks to the other shortcomings that our whole housing department, so I'm just trying to make sure that we have a, internally we have a game plan that's going to address all the, I guess, what it looks like shortcomings in the whole department.

All right. And I know this is going to be coming back probably at least once before the new year to talk about the housing authority. So if I'm not seeing anything else, then in the interest of time, I want us to get a motion to approve this funding. And of course, we'll be continuing to have discussions about all of these issues.

Okay, I see Councilmember Letta's view. We have got to move on. We've got six action items to get through. All right. Well, we'll go right over to you then.

So I'd like to make a motion, and part of my motion will be that We'll adopt a resolution to amend the fiscal year 2026-27 budget to allocate $300,000 of Measure P funds to the Housing Authority of the City of Vallejo's Administration Fund. In addition to that, I'd like for us to put a moratorium on suspending the housing subsidy with a plan of where we're going to catch up because we have hearings behind. So we want to do a moratorium on suspending anyone's subsidy.

And I'm going to hold that because I need to clarify that we are actually able to do that in connection with this item.

We'll go ahead to the city attorney as well.

Okay, that's fine. And I will tell you, you're already late, so you're already doing that, to be very frank about it. I know what I'm talking about. I do this work every day. You're already doing that unofficially when you are not on time. And what's happening is we are being inundated by emails. We are having people come to council. And we have families who feel totally unsecure while we are trying to get to a place of being on time, responding. And while that's happening, continuously letters are generated to our families and individuals because our system does not show the information that'

I'm going to let the city manager get in and I'm going to offer an interpretation of the motion.

Through the chair. So I'm going to, go ahead, Council Member Gordon. And then if we're going to talk too much more, we're going to need to continue this item because we have six action items.

Go ahead, Council Member Gordon. We came here to work. So this is our job. So we got to speak on this stuff, right? But what I was about to ask, if you can please reset the vote because we need to be clear on what we're voting on. We are in the process of doing that.

SO I'M GOING TO REINTERPRET SLASH FRIENDLY AMEND THE MOTION TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS STATED ON THE AGENDA WITH AN UNDERSTANDING THAT AT A COMING MEETING AN ANALYSIS OF A POTENTIAL MORATORIUM WILL COME BACK BEFORE THE COUNCIL. CITY MANAGER BLACK, IS THAT ON YOUR END FEASIBLE? DO YOU NEED FURTHER DIRECTION ON THAT?

I'M FINE WITH THAT, BUT I WANT THE LETTERS TO STOP GOING OUT. to our families. I don't. No, we can. Because what we continue to do, we are sending letters because our system does not show that the work that's needed has been done. You all are not, I just have to stop and say this.

You all are not receiving these letters.

Our residents are receiving these letters. And so what we need to do, I agree that this is step one, but at the same time of implementing step one, we also need to acknowledge that we are behind and let people know that we're behind so that they are not on edge about their housing. It generates more... Contact to the housing authority which at this moment in time can't even take in all those requests So what I would like is yes, we can do it as stated But we also I would like For us to consider. How are we going to? Either notice our residents Immediately around this is what we're doing, this

So we have a motion on the table. My concern is I don't want us to violate the Brown Act, and we have a financial item here that is step two of two to allocate funding. So I don't believe that we can give direction on policy within the housing authority, but we've got an understanding. I think we're all on the same page. We have an understanding, and it will be coming back. So we don't need to restate the motion. It's the motion as stated with the moratorium coming back either via memo and probably yes and memo and council meeting future council meeting. We have a public commenter. Let's well,

You are extremely faint. We can we can hear you if you could get closer to your mic, though.

Thank you. We are finishing the two-step process tonight, but that is a good reminder, and we appreciate it. All right, we have a motion on the table. It's as this item 8H as stated with the moratorium and updates coming back to council. Motion carries unanimously. All right. Thank you all. Thank you for being here. We're going to move now to our action calendar, and I will ask our city clerk to announce item 9A.

All right, and I'm going to quickly ask the council. I think we're going to be due for recess at some point just to stretch our legs. I might suggest that we hear the staff presentation and take public comment and then take a short break before discussion, but we might play by ear unless anyone has strong feelings at this point. We'll go ahead and turn on public comment clock for anyone wishing to address the council on item 9A, and I'll turn it over to our public works team and Director Jobe for the presentation.

We got the wrong president. Manny's working on it. Manny's working on it.

Hold on one second. Sorry, I'm going to pause you. If our folks in the back could either, just the sound carries tremendously. It's shocking how much it carries. If you all can either step right out the doors to have the conversation. Thank you.

all right do you want to put up the last slide and then we'll i think we are yeah we were on here we have comments for sure from council what i think i'm going to do thank you both by the way um i know this has been a laborious and lengthy process i think what i'm going to recommend is that we take public comment and then we take a short break and then we'll do the council discussion if that seems okay to folks uh do we have any commenters in person on the item none signed up in person mayor okay how about online

Let's go ahead and call them, and then we'll take a short recess after that. The vice mayor and I don't see it on ours, so go ahead. Come on up. That's a perfectly fine way to sign up for public comment.

Thank you very much. All right. Let's call our online speakers.

we can't hear you we've got we've got you now okay we are you're a little faint we're just gonna hold on one second and all right let's try one more time if you can get close to the mic okay can you hear me better now we're working on it i think we're okay to go ahead

All right. Thank you. I think we had one more speaker.

All right. Thank you. Does anyone else raise their hand online?

All right. We're going to close public comment on the item. I am feeling a short recess would be helpful before we get into council discussion. I think we all agree we've been sitting here for about two hours. So why don't we take 10 minutes and we'll aim to come back at 935. All right, I'm going to ask everybody to make their way back. All right, we're going to go ahead and come back. And I'll just ask everybody in the audience to keep it down so we can get started again. I will gavel, thank you all. All right, we have received our staff presentation on item 9A. We have taken public comment.

Thank you for the presentation, gentlemen. I want to go over the value engineering option number two and option number three. And if you can entertain me, could you please define the difference between these two options again?

The police stay in that building when phase one is fully constructed, then they move into that building.

And then how is this different from number three?

So they're up on the northern part of that.

So sorry, so number two, the dispatch will be in the Maja building? It'll be in the new building, correct?

And then I just want to go over just kind of an issue with the range, the shooting range. Was it 25 yards, 25 meters? Yeah. And is that just something you're just spitballing, or is that a specific request?

So I've never been in an indoor shooting range that's also in the same building where there is office space. In my understanding with shooting ranges, it requires a high amount of ventilation. So I mean, has that been, I mean, is there another building that has this same situation where it's an indoor shooting range and there's also two other floors of office space?

Okay. So, I mean, and just to reiterate again, you said the ventilation will be segregated from the rest of the ventilation from... the rest of the building because... That's correct. You're right. It's a big deal having a separate ventilation system for a firing range. So what happens if the ventilation doesn't work or if you have to do repair for that one?

Thank you, Mayor. Before I dive into the topic at hand, I just want to give our new Public Works Director a compliment. You are on a generational run, my friend. Repaving streets. You got machetes done. You're the fitness center to the waterfront in a short period of time. Bravo, sir. And this. Thank you.

I know it's a team effort, but amazing. Amazing. Keep it going. Amazing. Anywho, on to this one. So I'm going to make some general comments, and then I'm going to tell you guys where I'm at with this because we got to go home, and there's still a lot of items to cover. Okay. We all know that there's been mismanagement It's been delays. There's been a series of missteps that have been made on this project. And at the end of the day, not just this facility, but all of our public safety facilities need to go through some sort of evaluation, hopefully in the next 10 to 15 years, because they're al

Thank you, City Manager Black. And, you know, we're having a conversation here, so I'm going to tell you how I'm really feeling about this. THIS IS WHAT IT HAS FELT LIKE. I'VE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL FOR 20 MONTHS. WE'VE GOTTEN THREE PRESENTATIONS ON THIS ITEM. MAYBE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN ONE AND THREE. AND WE'VE TAKEN A FEW VOTES TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. AND IT JUST FEELS LIKE EVERY SINGLE TIME THE PRESENTATION IS, DO YOU REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY WANT TO DO THIS? AND EVERY PASSING you know, interval of time that goes between the vote we take and the work that staff does, the cost continues

And 100% and also I think that's what we are here for, in my opinion, my humble opinion, You do the work and then you say, okay, you got a big problem, folks. You got to decide which one is the lesser of the, as opposed to like, what type of engineering y'all trying to get done here? Because it's like, I mean, I think I got one engineer, one architect on the team, but I didn't go to school for that personally. So, yeah, I'm done.

Thank you, and thanks for the presentation. You know, when I started, I guess when several of us started almost four years ago, and we voted at that time to keep it at 111 Amador Street, you sat in that very chair. You were here at that time. But we discussed the plan being, at that time, I went back to my notes, it was $50 to $72 million total project for this location. And so there is quite a bit of scope creep in the last three and a half years. And I know that I have asked many times whenever we came for the budget, making sure we had money to pay for the design and making sure this kept m

Good evening. Thank you so much for your presentation. I do appreciate all of the work that went into it, and thank you to Council Member Mateus for requesting this financial option. My big question to my colleagues and also to legal, to Attorney Knapp, what is the problem with my island way i've heard a little here and there but what the pants we can't sell it we can't do nothing with it so what is the problem with that location maybe someone can give me a little history because i mean there was like a survey say well why don't we use that space that's already there And we will save a whole l

I was just wondering if there was something legal connected to it. So basically there is nothing.

Well, because I heard that it belonged to state farms or something of that nature, and we can't sell it, but we're spending money in it and on it. So we're talking about we're in a financial situation, but we have a building right there. Well, then pick us up and put us there and put them here. I mean, I just don't get why we have this property and it's just sitting there.

I'M HAPPY TO JUMP IN. I WON'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY. I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF. I'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY IS VERY AGAINST HAVING IT ON THE WATERFRONT. THE POLICE PRESENCE ON THE WATERFRONT IS NOT SOMETHING THE COMMUNITY WAS INTERESTED IN. WE HELD SEVERAL TOWN HALLS AND COMMUNITY FORUMS ABOUT IT. THAT'S WHY WE HAD CONTINUED THE VOTE TO HAVE IT BE AT 111 AMADOR STREET. and not have it be on the waterfront. I think it was very misleading at that time. If I recall, when I looked at my notes, the police headquarters at 400 Meyer Island Way looked like it penciled out cheaper, but th

We have asked for years why we can't rent that space out to other people, but previous city managers have determined and have put police operations, even though the council gave direction not to put police operations at 400 Maryland Way, and if there were any, to have them removed so that we could lease that space out, and nothing has happened with that building other than letting the police be in that building.

I appreciate that because you have half the city saying this, well won't we put them in there? We have half the city say no, but nobody understands what is the issue to why they can't be there. So I appreciate you clarifying, thank you. All right, Vice Mayor Matulak.

Where do I begin? So quick history on that also. So besides 400 Mayor Island being proposed, number one, it was against the community and the council, two councils, one council even before us said no. And part of that was when it came to us was the structural upgrades that were going to be needed to get that to be a, what is it, type one fire safety or for public safety facility like that. So that would have been part of the extreme cost to get that upgraded to what a police facility would need to be. But part of that was also the vision of the waterfront there, the redevelopment of that, and

Yeah, thank you. I'm in agreement with a lot of what has been said. And I'm going to truncate what I had prepared because a lot of it has been said. I think the big thing to remember for everybody, I want us to look forward. Boy, do I wish I had a time machine. But I want us to look forward. I wish I could get that $6.4 million back. But I do want us to sit in this for a minute because this is a master class on how not to go about doing something in the public sector. Not for any of us here. Like everybody is new. This is a master class that should be taught at schools of design and public pol

Thank you, Mayor. So can you guys put up option three on screen, please? Okay, so... My first question to Director Jobe and the architect is, here, does this $36 million number that you've referenced, does that also include the $6 million you said you can additionally save if you use cheaper materials and finishes and yada, yada, yada, like all the other stuff? So is that number really 42 or 36?

And then my follow-up question is, a few slides before, you had sort of referenced that if we went with option one, there would be a 10 to 12 million dollar expense to relocate the Corp Yard. So, assuming we went with option three, what happens to the 10 to 12 million in that instance, given that the Corp Yard stays in its current location?

Got it. And I have proposed an alternative to the courtyard issue, but I'm not sure if we can pursue it. But that's another subject for another day. So on the $36 million, that would come off of the, like, 156 number? Is that right?

So can you go back to the slide with all the numbers? Yes, here.

I want to make sure the city manager gets in. I think he has a follow-up to the question.

That's all it is. I totally hear you guys and I think all of the points I've personally heard are all well taken. And at the same time, the thing I've been pushing on since I was sworn in 20 months ago is I don't, and again, there's no world where we're gonna spend any less, according to your estimate, any less than $80 million on this facility, right? Is there a world?

Yeah, so definitely respect my colleagues' opinion on this one, but part of where I want to see the conversation go is say we say, look at this recommendation. We also get a feel for what's going on with the streets. Again, I agree with you, City Manager Black. We had a whole plan for the streets too. We were supposed to go out and bond, right? And the previous council had signed off on that. And then I get sworn in, a few of us get sworn in, and then it became a pay-go program. And there was no council direction on that. So I think that's the thing I struggle with, that sometimes it feels lik

All right, I'm going to add that I was, I didn't realize that was citywide IT in there. That is just, I mean, again, that just is another example of really not thoughtful decision making going into this. I'm going to go over to Council Member Letajieu and then we'll, and then Council Member Gensler, and then we'll try to get a motion on the table.

So my first question to IT, does the police department not have a subset of IT staff that runs all their MDCs, all of that equipment that actually is lodged in the police department?

Okay. Thank you. So can we go back to the page that has all the indirect costs and all those things there? And just to the architect, you know, we talk about, I think on another site, we talk about cost savings as it relates to downgrading, you know, different building materials, but the reality is how much cost saving is that really? And when we talk about that, that cost savings, is it really worth it when we think about the longevity and the quality of the building? And I'm asking this question because I do development and I am very picky about product because it is important how we build w

So what's the purpose of having a three-story building versus a two-story building?

So when you talk about a sweet spot between a two-story and third-story building, from a cost perspective, what does that look like? Like, what's the delta?

Yeah, but if you're only building, just as an example, you know, I'm not asking you to put three buildings on, three smaller buildings on the lot. If we're only building, quote, unquote, one building, does it really need to be three stories? What's the third story for, theoretically?

So when we talk about the building size, even a three-story, we have a police force, theoretically, that's no more than 100 FTEs, and at any given time, You're running three shifts where I don't know how many X, Y, Z police officers are coming in and out of the building. And you have how many, I don't know who's here from the police department. You have a staff, a stagnant staff that comes to that building and literally sits eight hours a day when I'm talking about administrative staff is to the police department. How many staff is that? This is not a large force. And a good portion of that ar

But the question is, we're not, but my real question is. What's he talking about? I'm building, I'm not building for what we think is optimal. It is, you know, the chief of police is not here, but the city manager is here. And fundamentally, the real question is for our police chief and our city manager, it's like when you think about this building and yes, it's in motion and we have to make some decisions and when you come back, what does that really look like for what we envision our police force to be and how much space do we really need based on what we can also afford that's reasonable fo

I see, all right, I see Council Member Bergenzer and then back to the Vice Mayor. And then we've all gone once, we're about through twice, and then I think we're going to try to move to a, we'll try to move to some direction.

Yeah. I'm just wondering, because I agree with all the comments that have been made. I agree that, you know, option three is probably the safest bet. But can we look at phasing some of, the main building can we can we look at phasing and doing just the first you know build out all three stories but don't you know build like you said build the shelf for three maybe build the shelf for one and compact things on on the first floor until the police department grows to the optimal 200 or whatever it gets and then we start expanding and finishing spaces and see what we truly need i think building ou

Because honestly, like what Council Member Latouche was saying, the $6 million in savings for all the finishes and things is not the problem. That $6 million is nothing compared to the $180 million that this project is. I would rather spend a few more million and redesign and plan down for what we can afford versus trying to scrap this or do something totally different or try to fund this entire project.

All right. I'm going to go over to the Vice Mayor. Before we do, though, I'm going to ask, I have a quick question to build off the previous two comments. What are the staffing levels that this design was intended for? Like, what are we building for here?

Okay, so what is that? 1.44, I can put it in my calculator.

Okay, I'm going to just, that's why I asked it. We have 86 sworn staff and we are designing a building for 200 sworn staff. If we have the funding to triple the size of our police department, we can build a palace for them. We are not going to have funding to triple the size of our police department. So can we, this is, I mean, and how many unsworn staff? How many unsworn staff is it designed for? 95.

So we're authorized. So again, I just, to get back to the, none of this is on you, by the way. My frustration is at the ether and our predecessors. I hope I'm not giving the impression I'm frustrated with anyone here. We are authorized for 129 police officers We currently have 84 and we spent 6.4 million dollars to design a building for 200 plus officers Yeah, I mean someone in the audience laughs that's what we should be doing at that idea so I would like Thank you vice mayor for letting me interject. I wanted to ask that question. I Would like for us to just go back to the drawing board and

Thank you, Mayor. First and foremost, we need to do right by our police department, period. And end of story right there. And so this is where I'm very hesitant for us to be making decisions on their behalf when we're saying they need this, they need that, when they haven't even chimed in on this stuff. So this is where, once again, and once again, I'm not to beat a dead horse, but this started with the programming issue right from the very get-go to where you were given directive to go based on your numbers. I mean, and correct me if I'm wrong, but when we were at max sworn officers, we were

And if this came from, if this was what they said they needed, that city manager needs to have a conversation with PD about what a realistic expectation is for the next 30 years.

Thank you. All right. Vice Mayor has a follow-up comment, and then we'll go over to Council Member Gordon.

And based on your firm's reputation, I have all the faith in the world that you can get us to that solution. You've just been given... misinformation or kind of not given the direction that you really needed from the very get-go. So we're trying to make up for that. In my mind, we're trying to make up for that. But once again, I have full faith in your firm that you're able to get us to that point. We just need to give the right direction and the right guidance with the police input. And that's where I want to end this one.

All right. Council Member Gordon. Thank you. I also want you all to keep in mind that whatever we kick down the road, As you mentioned earlier, Councilman Beganza, about it was 50 this, but now it's 100 and something now. Cost of materials and so forth will go up. So if we're trying to cut here and there, please keep that in mind. I think I love the idea. I don't want to go back to the drawing board because we spent already so much money, but it looks like we have to do something because otherwise this building will never get done because we won't have the money from what I hear and it's going

I'll make a suggestion in a second, but I'll let the city manager get in.

I think that's really helpful because that was going to be what I said. BEFORE MY SUGGESTION, I THINK WHAT WE'RE CENTERING ON IS PROBABLY WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED WITH THE FINANCING MECHANISMS AND OPTIONS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS AND THEN THE REASSESSMENT, BUT WITHOUT PUTTING A TON MORE INTO DESIGN, JUST A REASSESSMENT OF WHAT THE SCOPE WAS OF WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DESIGNED VERSUS WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO NEED PROJECTED IN THE NEXT 30 YEARS. BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO, COUNCIL It sounds like we might be able to significantly scale back the scope of this and reduce the cost

I have a dumb non-architect question. Can you just not build the third floor? Just put the roof on the second floor and call it a day? Like how hard is that?

I think you can. I'm just eyeballing. My colleagues have brought some interesting points. And you can move things around. And I don't think they'll be hurt for space if you just have the two floors. And I think there'll be an easier way than just doing a complete redesign, just two floors.

Thanks. Do we need a motion on that, or is that good direction to come? It sounds like we're coming back with some additional information. Would it be helpful to make that motion? I can make the motion.

WE SHOULD PUT IT IN WRITING. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE GIVE DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER TO RETURN TO COUNCIL WITH BOTH OPTIONS FOR REDUCED SCOPE THAT BETTER FIT OUR PROJECTED NEEDS OF THE DEPARTMENT GIVEN THE FEEDBACK THAT HAS BEEN EVALUATING WHAT WE NEED AND THEN ALSO COMING BACK WITH FINANCING OPTIONS AT A FEW DIFFERENT LEVELS THAT ARE COMMENSURATE WITH THE SCALE OF THE BUILDING WE'RE LOOKING AT. THAT'S THE MOTION. WHY DON'T WE VOTE ON THAT MOTION SO WE CAN MOVE ON FROM THIS ITEM.

All right. Thank you. Here is my suggestion. Thank you. Thank you. This is, by the way, just a really important, this is just an important discussion we need to get through, so I appreciate everyone. And I am going to suggest that we do items, quickly do, oh my goodness. So I have, I will say, I didn't mention this earlier in the meeting, I have some really big meetings tomorrow on behalf of the city that I don't want to be here too late for the sake of us all. I'm going to suggest that we, yeah, you're in it with me. I have C, I'm going to suggest that we take C quickly and potentially E and

All right, thank you. We'll open up the public comment period on this item. This is going to be a public hearing, so we will take our presentation from staff. I will open up the public hearing. We will take public comment. We will take any very brief clarifying questions from council, factual. Then we will close the public hearing, have discussion, and vote. I will turn it over to our planning director for, hopefully, a short presentation.

All right. Thank you very much. If there are quick, very, very quick questions, just clarifying elements of the presentation, we can take those now. Otherwise, I'll do the public hearing. Council Member Gordon. ALL RIGHT. APOLOGIES, I'M HAVING A SNACK. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SORRY, EVERYONE, IT GOT REALLY LATE, REALLY FAST. WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTERS IN PERSON?

ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTERS ONLINE?

All right. Going once, going twice. We will close the public hearing and we will now invite deliberation and discussion from staff or from council. We will start with Council Member Gordon.

Thank you. As everyone already know, when it comes to CEQA, my ears and eyes open up. So I'm going to stick, as you all know, South Vallejo is known to have high rate of asthma. We are also next to Highway 29. We have tons of vehicle actions all the time going through there because it is a main entry into Highway 80. So this is my concern. So I'm just going to read my concerns, okay? The pros of this policy benefit would ensure local compliance with updated state-mandated VMT threshold, CEQA section, as quoted earlier, 15061B3. Exemption prevents extended litigation timeline, provide clear met

Thank you. So my biggest concern is I attended a meeting that was in Fairfield and I heard someone say they wanted to eliminate CEQA requirements.

So like I was reading my report, you're basically making sure that what you're proposing is is for particularly the city of Vallejo because we know some part of Vallejo has a mass of wonderful air, but we are literally, we have Highway 80 here and Highway 80 here. Yeah. So we get all of that. pushed back from the vehicles, whether it's trucks, whatever. So that was my concern. So this right here, you're saying if they want to build a project, for example, on Highway 29, Sonoma Boulevard, which has mass of travel, how would that affect this?

Thank you so much. I appreciate both of you.

Thank you for the presentation. So for new projects that, I guess maybe the word score is the right word, but score a low VMT or maybe ranked, is that the right way to say it?

Okay, so this is a related question. So if the whole point of this is to, or a lot of the point is to encourage infill development and also TOD, will there be any reduction in impact fees associated with that to further incentivize those kinds of projects and make them pencil out?

OK, so this would be at whose discretion to reduce that fee?

Oh, yeah, per the master fee schedule. But do you have discretion as just a one-off?

Interesting. I thought you have some discretion.

Oh, I see. Okay. Interesting. All right. Thank you.

All right, I'm not seeing any other comments from council, so I think we're ready for a motion on this item.

Move that we hold a public hearing to consider a resolution amending the Vallejo General Plan by adopting July 2026 Transportation Analysis Guidelines and finding such action exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061B3.

All right. Thank you. So we're going to move on to, per the original plan, item 9E. I'll ask our clerk to announce this item.

Thank you. All right. So my suggestion is going to be why don't we go ahead and open up public comment on this item? We do have to do two steps for this process that I know there's probably a lot we could talk about with respect to warming centers But given the hour and the need to be ready for winter My suggestion is going to be that we take public comment and then vote on step one unless anyone has objections Do we have any commenters in person at this time? All right. Do we have any commenters online?

Would it be possible briefly to answer the question of flat fee for, or I'm assuming it's flat fee for the coverage of the

That's good to know. So it sounds like as it was established, the word got out and the usage increased.

That makes sense. Thank you for clarifying that. I'm going to go ahead and ask for a motion per my previous comment, unless there's anything. There isn't. Let's get a motion.

I move the notice of intent to amend the fiscal year 2026-2027 budget to appropriate $76,400 of Measure P funds to provide warming center activities at the Vallejo Navigation Center, step one of two.

MY QUESTION FOR EITHER THE CITY MANAGER OR THE PLANNING DIRECTOR WITH RESPECT TO ITEM D IS, IS THERE ANY ADVANTAGE TO US APPROVING THIS TONIGHT SO THAT IT CAN GET STARTED FROM A NEED STANDPOINT? IF COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS OR WANT DISCUSSION, I'LL SUGGEST THAT WE CONTINUE THE ITEM, BUT IF WE'RE ALL SUPPORTIVE OF THE BUILDING permit fee reduction pilot program for low-income homeowners, we may be benefited. Is there any value to doing that now? Through the chair. Let me have him answer. Okay, sorry about that. Yeah.

It is something we'd be supportive of. I guess my question is, is it the type of thing that would take effect? I don't want to get too into it without calling the item. Is it the type of thing that would take effect January 1st? And if we heard it at the next meeting, it would be no different than now? Or is there an advantage to us going ahead and voting on it?

All right. I'm going to go ahead and announce the item. Let's have the clerk announce item 9D. Thank you. Sorry, Dawn. Would you mind announcing item 9D?

Thank you very much. We'll start public comment period on this. And I'm hoping we will limit our discussion and just do a quick vote if we are supportive of this. But, Director Pollitt, is there anything you wanted to share? No. that you feel is important to get on the record i think the staff the staff report is pretty self-explanatory i i i mean if you're comfortable with it i'm i'm good yeah and we had one of the reasons why i'm comfortable having us do this a little quicker is because we had this discussion at length when we discussed the fee the fee increases over the summer a couple time

To your point about making sure that we have it on record, I did ask this question because it was brought up. And thank you to staff for answering it. So if my colleagues or my constituents have any questions, I can forward that to them. Great.

Yeah, I do not want our low-income homeowners to be delayed by our long meetings. Let's see if we have any public comment in person.

And do we have any public comment online?

All right, going once, going twice. If there are no speakers, we are ready for a motion.

I move we adopt a resolution establishing a limited approximately one year building permit fee reduction pilot program for low income homeowners.

Wonderful. All right. My suggestion is that we continue B and F, take community forum, and then adjourn. If there are no objections to that, I will go ahead and continue B and F, and we will move to item 13, the second community forum.

Yes, ma'am. We have one, too. Five speakers listed here. First three speakers are Karen Grobner, followed by Kirk Smith, and then Lily Hurd.

And Council Member Matias, do you have a question or comment?

I just want to add an item to the hopper before we adjourn.

All right. I don't believe our first speaker is here, but I know Mr. Smith is. So come on up. Thank you for your patience. Yeah. It got late. It got late. We accelerated through the agenda. We accelerated.

Thank you very much. Thanks for staying up with us.

The last three speakers in this order are Lily Hurd, TJ Wu, And Richard Hybels.

And I don't believe Ms. Heard is here. TJ, I don't believe, is here. So I think we're ready for Mr. Hybels.

THANK YOU. LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL OUR ONLINE SPEAKER.

All right. My plan was to go ahead and adjourn. I did see a light from Council Member Matias. If it can't wait till next meeting, we can go to request an actions for future agenda items or special projects. Go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor. And to the public speaker who just called in, we have received your email. It has been reviewed, and city staff's working on it. You should hear back from them, hopefully, in the not-so-distant future. But it has been reviewed. My item is the following, and this is, again, the initial step in the process. Request for consideration on the part of the Vallejo City Council that we have the Measure P Commission evaluate a $1 million appropriation for a storefront facade improvement program alongside business corridors that have been or will be repaved in the next year ahead, in t

I'd like to see a ban or moratorium on data centers, so...

I confirm that. Okay, go ahead, Vice Mayor.

Yes, I had a brief conversation with our city manager about, especially with the upcoming elections, that we have still yet to update our charter to account for district elections as far as identifying seniority. And I think this is something we have passed in the past. And I think this is something that we need to at least update our charter on to make sure that it does speak to district elections versus city-wide elections. Because at some point, we may not have felt the need to do it, but at some point, there are going to be council members that will take it more seriously of seniority base

All right. Can those be received and noted for the record? Or do we need to vote on them?

I don't know how this works, but I know I'm putting it on the council's hopper on our list so that we have to go through the process and then we do the engage in the sausage making later on.

I loathe this process and I would like to change this process, but I'm asking the city manager what it takes to these are requests for things to go into the council hopper.

So can we take a vote on each one of our requests? Yeah, let's do that. Let's do that.

Yes, I'm not sure how I can really word this, but I would like to see if we can get staff to see how we can look at getting a grocery store in South Vallejo. We've all been marked across from each other, and yet to this day we have no... LIBEL HEALTHY GROCERY STORE IN DISTRICT SIX.

That's my request. We've got grocery stores sitting on top of grocery stores in other parts of Vallejo. We've got to pack the kids up on vacation to go shopping.

Okay, so can we move that we add to the referral list the exploration of facade improvement program, add the moratorium on data centers to our existing, we can just add that to our existing item of moratoria that we continued tonight, and the conversation about needing to update our, whether it's charter or municipal code, I'm not sure.

It's neither. It's actually a policy. So potentially updating that policy. And then we'll follow up on the process for grocery stores. That's not necessarily an agenda item, but that'll be a follow-up from you.

OK. This is why we need to change it. So my request is that we change this process, because I need to adjourn and get out of here. So if we need to vote on each one of these individually, we can vote on each one individually. Frankly, I'm going to start voting no until we change this process, because we add six items for every one that we get through, and we're never going to get through everything unless we change the process. So do we need to vote individually on each one?

What is it that you want agendized for the city council? What is within the city's power, the city council's authority, that we need to agendize for us to vote on?

See, that's the complication of this, because before... We have, I'm seeing grocery stores pop up everywhere, but there's no grocery stores being designed in South Vallejo. So what is working there that's not working here for us to be sitting there?

That's information the city manager can provide. Because that's actually not within our purview.

So maybe Mr. can help us with this as well with the question. I'm looking to see because we have business popping up everywhere, but we have nothing happening where it's really needed.

All right. I'm going to move all of these in one block. that we add them to the hopper.

We have to vote. You all, I wanted to adjourn minutes ago, and you all decided to add all these things to the hopper, so we're going to vote on them. I didn't create this process. All right. We are going to adjourn at 1141. Thank you, Don. We're going to adjourn at 1141 p.m., and we are going to adjourn this evening in memory of Calvin Ellington Saucedo.