City Council - Special Meeting

Yeah, that's right. Okay. You guys ready? Are you rocking?

Ready? Okay. We're going to call this meeting the City Council special meeting to order at 5.30 on August 18th. And we have no disclosure of participation for government code section 549538. Roll call and declaration, please.

People can join this meeting remotely via Zoom. Are they going to put that up on the screen for us? Here we go. By following the information that's listed on the screen at this time. Let's make a note that Council Member Bedoya will Here at 531, no conflicts. Thank you. All right. With that, we have a request to conduct closed session. Do we, with conference with legal counsel, existing litigation. Are there members from the, no one in the chambers? Do we have anyone on Zoom that wants to make a comment? Okay. With that, we'll go to ask for a motion to go to class session. So moved. Do we have

We have a first and a second. Roll call, please. Yes.

Yes. Yes. We are going to go and we'll be back shortly.

to Channel 26. Ready? All right. We are reconvened to open session at 6.07 p.m. At this time, we do have a report of final action. CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TRACY MET IN CLOSED SESSION ON AUGUST 18, 2026 TO CONSIDER ITEM 2A, CONFERENCE LEGAL WITH COUNCIL, EXISTING LITIGATION, CASE NAMES CITY OF TRACY VERSUS SURLAND COMMUNITIES LLC AT ALL, SURLAND LLC AT ALL VERSUS CITY OF TRACY AT ALL. CASE NUMBER STK-CV-UBC-2024 County of San Joaquin Superior Court per government code section 54956.9 . With regards to item 2A, there is a following report. By a unanimous vote, Of all yeas, the City Council

Yes. Thank you. We are adjourned at 6.09 p.m. We will have a regular meeting at 7 p.m. Thank you.

All right. Good evening, everyone. I'm going to go ahead and call this meeting to order at 7 p.m. At this time, we have no disclosures pursuant to Government Code Section 54953.8.3. Roll call on Declaration of Conflicts, please.

Thank you. Please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ready. Salute. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

Now please remain standing for our invocation with Scott McFarland from Journey Christian Church.

Thank you, Pastor. Please be seated. Members of the public can participate in tonight's meeting remotely via Zoom by visiting cityoftracy.org.zoom.us slash join and using the information provided on the screen. This is also available in writing here at City Hall as well as on the City of Tracy website. That leads us next to presentations. And I'll go ahead and turn it over to Anoush.

All right, now we have some certificates. I'll ask council to join me. All right, at this time, we have a certificate of appointment. I'd like to invite Myrna Biles to come join us. This is for a planning commissioner alternate position. This is something new that we're doing. Essentially, we noticed we need a little extra help on our planning commission. We're very excited that Ms. Biles is going to be joining us. So we have a certificate appointment to certify that Myrna Biles is appointed as Tracy planning commissioner alternate for term commencing on August 19th, 2026 and expiring on March

Next up, we have our Youth Advisory Commissioners. This is super exciting. For those of you who don't know, we get to have some of our Tracy youth get to help us out in the City of Tracy on our Youth Advisory Commission. It's where I serve prior to being on City Council, so we're so excited to have them help us. And we're going to go ahead and treat this like a day of graduation. We're going to have you guys all shake hands, and we'll do a group photo at the end. And forgive me for names. All right, first up, we have Diazudir Chimudinga. Next up we have Natalia Lopez. Next up we have Shreya Ma

All right. One more round of applause for our youth commissioners. All right. Everyone's receiving certificates of appointments to certify that each of you has been appointed to the Youth Advisory Commission for a term commencing on August 3rd, 2026 and expiring on July 31st, 2027. We are so excited to have our young people join us here in the city of Tracy. And that will complete it for our presentations today. Next up, that brings us to consent calendar. Are there any members of the council that would like to pull any items from consent calendar? Seeing none. Staff, are there any members you

Thank you. If I can see hands raised, are there any members of the public who would like items pulled from consent calendar? Okay. 3H. 3H? Yes. And, okay, so, and 3H is related to the informational report on fireworks. Okay. All right, with that, I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the consent calendar minus 3H. Second. We have a first and second.

Yes. All right. Next up, that brings us to item 3H, which is an information report regarding our fireworks complaints during Fourth of July weekend. Staff report, please.

Thank you, Captain McKenna. Council, do we have any preliminary questions?

I just have a real, just mostly out of my curiosity, I think PD has explained it before, but for my memory and for the public. So when someone's located utilizing a deployed drone that is launching legal fireworks, how does the citation work from there? What's the process?

Yep. That's my only question. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional questions here?

Okay. With that, we will go ahead and open it up for public comment. Do we have any speaker cards for this item?

Okay. Can I please see hands raised for this item? And who would like to speak on this item? Okay. With less than four, then we'll go ahead and allow four minutes. Go ahead.

THANK YOU, MR. DUBEY. OKAY, RETURNING TO COUNCIL, ALL FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND OR MOTION.

WE HAVE A FIRST AND SECOND. ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

Yes. All right, the item passes. Thank you. Tracy, please report. Much appreciated. Next up, that takes us to items from the audience. As a reminder, this is for items that are not on tonight's agenda. And the City Council is limited by the government code on how we can respond. Are there any members of the public who would like to speak on an item not on tonight's agenda? Please see hands raised. One, two, four, five. Okay, so with that, that would be, I saw six, so that'll be three minutes. Do we have any speaker cards?

Okay, that's still three minutes, so I'll go ahead and ask you to call the speaker cards.

Thank you, Ms. Rush. Next speaker card, please.

My first concern is... Ms. Spikes, can you put that microphone a little closer to you?

Appreciate it. Thank you. Next speaker card, please.

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Cole. Next be your card, please.

Thank you, Ms. Flechter. Do we have any additional speaker cards?

Thank you, Mr. Bogan. I think that takes care of our speaker cards. Do we have any additional speakers?

Thank you, Ms. Reese. Do we have any additional speakers? Please.

Thank you, Ms. Esther. Do you have any additional speakers? Seeing none. Do we have any online? Okay. With that, I will go ahead and close out items from the audience. We'll have a second portion later. That takes us to public hearings. And we'll go ahead and go with item 5A, which is an update on cannabis business regulations. Staff report, please.

Thank you, Ms. Contreras. With that, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing at 7.39 p.m. Counsel, do we have any preliminary questions? Seeing none, do we have any speaker cards for this item?

Okay. Are there any members of the public who would like to speak on Item 5A? Seeing none in chambers, do we have any online?

Okay. With that, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing comment portion for Item 5A at 7.39 p.m. Council, do we have any additional discussion, or I'll entertain a motion.

Mayor, I make a motion to adopt a resolution determining that amending Chapter 6.36, the Tracy Municipal Code, commercial cannabis activity is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, Subsection B, Subsection 2, and or 15061, Subsection B, Subsection 3. Second.

We have a first and a second. Roll call, please.

Yes. Madam Clerk, will you please read the title of the proposed ordinance?

Motion to waive the first reading by substitution of the title and introduce the ordinance. Second. We have a first and a second. Roll call, please.

Yes. All right. The item passes. Thank you, staff. We look forward to your further enforcement. That brings us to regular items. We have Item 6A, which is an informational update on the Citywide Pavement Management Program. Staff report, please.

So just thank you very much for the report. Just confirm right now we're at a 59? Is that correct, sir? That is correct. Okay, thank you.

Council Member Bedoya. Thank you. I have a question, I guess, about a specific issue that I saw and I guess could be largely applied if, you know, if it's appropriate. There's some railroad, I don't know exactly how it ties into the pavement, but there's some railroad tracks behind Williams Middle School, between Lauriana and Sycamore going east. And this is, there's a couple other railroad tracks that have a similar issue. essentially it looks like it feels like they're sinking compared to like the level of the asphalt and it's creating like a essentially like a divot um where it's causing da

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. I WANT TO MAKE SURE NOT THE TRACKS THAT ARE SINKING BUT THE ACTUAL METAL PLATING AROUND IT. NEW SPEAKER WE CAN ADDRESS THAT.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. COUNSELOR EVANS. NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, STAFF. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF COMPETING PRIORITIES ON THIS. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU BALANCE IT ALL. Council members, we hear a lot from our constituents on this issue. It's a very important issue, so I really appreciate your focus on this. I know there was some talk not long ago about, you know, us trying to catch up budget-wise to, not budget-wise, catch up to the funds that we have. There's a lot of work to do to catch up to the funds that we have at our disposal for this particular issue. I'm hoping we're making

Thank you. that we have a plan and that we we are in contact i mean the county needs to pay their share whatever that is so i'd like to know that we have that plan at least in place the communications happening as well as with any other stakeholders that need to contribute which i believe sounds to me like it's a rational statement to say they should contribute something as that particular and there's again a lot of priorities here but that particular airport our municipal airport we're we're getting more and more of a focus out there um aerobatic competitions and different things and we're st

Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Nygaard.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for the report. I had just some clarifying questions on page three, your... your pavement rehab prioritization. So you have the seven zones. So this is your residential zone map, correct? This is the priority is outlined on in that box that shows what year that then that zone will be paved. Is that how you read it?

Councilor, are you looking at page slide five?

Slide five, page three. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Sorry. Page three in our book. But yes, slide five actually has the diagram of your seven areas in the zones. And then the little box refers to the year. Is that the year that it would be the pavement rehab would take place?

because I'm a little confused because then slide 13 you have an action plan and then it does say on the first bullet point that end of 2026 complete the design CIP for zone 7. so did I'm just kind of confused on does zone 7 then fall under the end of 2026 or under what slide 5 shows in the table

Thank you, Councilmember. So I'd like to, if we could get to slide two, please. That's three. I'm looking for slide two, please. Thank you. So the question I had is, do we have an update to this particular map? Because I'm recognizing that Bessie Road here is still in the very poor condition, which now is one of the best roads in Tracy. And I also see that in front of West High along Lowell, that's all red, but that was also recently redone. So do we have an updated map on current conditions, including all the updates we've been making over the past couple of years? That's what the new consult

NEW SPEAKER. OKAY. AND THE REASON I ASK IS FOR MY NEXT QUESTION IS IF WE COULD GO TO SLIDE FIVE. One more. Five. There we go. So when we're looking between zones six and one, so I understand that the zones were selected, or actually, can you describe how these zones were selected?

UNDERSTOOD. AND IF I RECALL ALSO THAT THERE WAS SOME ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO CLUSTERING IT IN THESE PARTICULAR WAYS, MS. LIGHTWOOD, IS THAT CORRECT?

And then the reason why I was asking is because if we're looking at zones one and six beyond Lowell Avenue in zone six, which is the large portion of red and THE WEST PORTIONS OF 1 AND 6 ARE ALL APPEAR TO BE IN THE BLUE AND GREEN MOSTLY, BUT IN ZONES 1 AND 6, IT'S THE VAST MAJORITY OF RED AND YELLOW. SO I WAS CURIOUS IF WE COULD POTENTIALLY RECONSIDER THE ZONING SO THAT IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THESE ECONOMIES OF SCALE, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO DO THE EASTERN PORTION OF 1 AND THE EASTERN PORTION OF 6 INTO ONE ZONE, SINCE THOSE HAVE THE most need. Just something to consider. I understand this is an

So I know that I've spoken with Ms. Lightwood and I've been speaking with our state legislators about funding some of those in front of schools. So it's something that I'd like us to consider when this is brought back if we can provide an equity adjustment for in front of our schools where we get the most amount of cars. Yes. And then my last question is I recognize that the potential pathways forward are it would look like it was up to the pavement index of 69. But I was curious why we don't look at it going to 70, where 70 is the lower end of good. So can you please explain that?

Absolutely. And I understand that. I think what I think because it's going to be coming back to us for reconsideration and part of that will be a financing component. But what I my ask would be is I don't I feel like I wouldn't be doing the public's due diligence if I'm not asking how do we get good roads and good being the condition of the bottom level of good. So even if the council doesn't take that particular plan, if we could have it as an option just so we can see the actual difference. I think that'd be important for the public to be able to evaluate for themselves saying, is it worth 3

Just to piggyback off what you were addressing, Mayor, I'm curious what it would cost just to address the failed roads, the red. I mean, there's not an enormous amount of red, but there is some definitely scattered red every zone. I'm curious, what would the cost be to just tackle the failed roads and bring them up?

Thank you. Anything else from council? Council Member Bedoya.

Thank you. Does this 2023 plan reflect as much as possible of Ellis and Tracy Hill's And I guess the second part of the question is when it comes back to us in the fall, how much of Ellis and Tracy Hills can be represented as being part of our PCI? I think roads have to be turned over and all that.

No, exactly. I guess my question is when could we expect that they be included in terrible way of bringing up averages. When do these get included and like hypothetically how much could that I guess affect the average?

NO, WHATEVER SCOTT THINKS APPROPRIATE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WOULD ALSO INCLUDE, LIKE, THERE'S SOME DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN, LIKE, HIDDEN LAKE AND ELISA GARY AND THEN ALL OF OUR NEW AREAS THAT COULD BE TURNED OVER. THANK YOU.

Thank you. Anything else from Councilman? Councilman Robbins?

Thank you, Mayor. I guess I'll just add in. I do like the idea of getting categorical with the numbers and understanding what the cost is overall of repairing the very poor slash failed, poor at risk. And that would be the three categories, I guess. So I would like to know, I don't see us attacking the problem that way, but I do think there's some value to knowing what the value of each of those is. for us to formulate an attack plan on this. But also, as with the example I gave earlier, I would like some comfort level. If there's any exterior roads that are going to be part county, you know,

Yes, because I think you could look at those as opportunities. There aren't. I don't know if there are. I guess that's my question or my proposition to staff is let's take a look at that if we haven't already and assess that and IF THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES THERE, LET'S INCORPORATE THAT AS A COST SAVINGS, POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. IF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. SEEING TWO, WE'LL ALLOW FOUR MINUTES. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS ON THIS ITEM? NEW SPEAKER OKAY. WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK.

Thank you, Mr. Duby. Next speaker, please.

Thank you, Ms. Hester. Do we have any additional speakers? Seeing none in chambers, do we have any online? Okay with that I'll go ahead and close the public comment period for item 6A. Before we have additional discussion I want to go ahead and ask staff. So we heard a question related to how does the prioritization become affected by the receipt of alternative funding sources? How does that change any particular plan?

Some of them are grants, some of them are state funding from state taxes. Every once in a while we can get funding. So how would that affect these plans if we get additional funding?

Understood. I have another question that will kind of go with that. So essentially, when there are particular funding opportunities, we reevaluate the priorities based on that economic opportunity to do additional work. I understand that. So I think the question that we have is, when we have additional funding that comes in, it sounds like the capacity we have to engage in the operations doesn't change. Is that correct? So essentially, if we got some, I think it was a hunk of ARPA funding, right?

Yes, that's what it was. So we're utilizing that funding in lieu of public funding that we get locally as opposed to doing multiple simultaneous projects. So essentially it's a financial prioritization versus an expansion of in operations. Does that make sense? So do we ever consider expanding our potential operations or are we limited in capacity by staff capacity to do these particular projects in a certain way?

Thank you. Head back to council for additional discussion, or I'll entertain a motion. Council Member Bedoya.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to tell staff I'm looking forward to fall's iteration of our updated plan to see kind of how you take council's different levels of consensus and comments and incorporate that for options. I do want to elevate a comment I heard from one of our constituents. I think I agree with somewhat of the approach being centered on return on investment. I do like the idea of focusing on our most used roads, most traveled, well-traveled, most used roads. In my mind, I picked, you know, from August to June. Basically, it's the school year and then part of summer school. But I w

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to accept an informational update regarding the citywide pavement management program and pavement rehabilitation program projects. Second. We have a first and second. Roll call, please.

Yes. All right, so that passes. So thank you, staff. We look forward to additional work on our pavement management. That brings us to item 6B, which is an informational update on our citywide energy program and our EV transition plan and infrastructure deployment plan.

mayor can i ask before we go into this agenda for some clarification with staff um the the the agenda item actually um addresses you know two major issues um and i just wanted to kind of make sure that that the public is aware um it is you know one the zero um vehicle fleet and infrastructure program. That's our state mandate requiring, you know, us to transition to purchase clean trucks and buses or zero emission buses and trucks. The second issue is, you know, and that one, that issue we are being asked for direction. The second issue is an informational update on our citywide energy upgrade

Okay, thank you, Council Member. Staff, have a staff report, please. Yes, good evening, Mayor and members of the council.

Thank you, Mr. Najed. We'll begin with council questions. We'll start with Council Member Nygaard.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for the report. And yes, it is very positive to feeling to feel that we are moving forward in addressing our state mandate and our energy goals. I do have a couple questions. So under option one, to purchase a portable, Are you aware of the Volt Vault program by U.S. Energy?

So that is actually a rental program where they can rent to you portable charging stations. These would be the DC, the fast charging stations for all different size fleets, so your midsize to large, up to eight ports in a portable unit. So it does meet immediate needs. So that is an option to look, I would say that would be another option to look at as far as what that cost would be. And it's, I believe out of Oakland. So they actually deliver the unit fully charged you use it for 24 hours I believe they come back with with another unit to take away the other one to recharge but they keep you

If you have the answers to those questions, you can respond now.

Thank you. I'll pick up, I guess, where Council Member Nygaard left off. I am curious about option three, and I just want to be sure I understand. Option three alone, if implemented, does that put us in compliance with the state mandates? Sorry. Option three alone, does that put us in compliance with state mandates?

So, okay, so it states may offer cost savings, but then it also states EV infrastructure... funding must be provided by the city. So what is the cost?

Okay. So I'm being asked, I believe we're being asked to select an implementation option, correct? Correct. So I need to know what the cost is going to be before I can make a determination on that option.

Understand. Okay. So it sounds like we have two kind of open items so far, at least from what I'm hearing, that we're going to need. I will need to understand that information and the data to move forward with that. Because it sounds like a great option, but there's a big question mark on that cost.

Okay, and your concern is the state mandate and the date that we're required to have this done by, correct?

thank you for that question i was asking about three it's hard to make a decision if you don't know what the cost is um is there a timeline you keep talking about pg e that we may have to pay back if we don't proceed is there a timeline that we have to show them we are moving forward do we have the six months to get the full report to figure that out what's the parameters regarding the PG&E funding?

Okay. But we would have time at least to explore, as Councilmember Nygaard pointed out, if this Volt situation, we do have time with PG&E at least to Look at that so we don't even have to pick option like one tonight and do the 500. We have some time to look to see if Volt is a viable option or not.

No, I understand. But hopefully we can find that answer out within six months, I would think. Right, Steph?

Okay. Thank you. And then if you could go to slide 15, is that possible to bring that up, please?

So we're looking at the purchase of, oops. So we're looking at vehicles to purchase. That 18, is that 18 EV vehicles or you need 18 vehicles to be purchased and they may be a combination or what are those 18 vehicles you're indicating there in 26, 27?

Okay. Is that... So... Did we budget in that? Because I believe the EV vehicles are a little more expensive than gas powered. Am I correct on that?

We've already got that in the budget to do that, right? Okay, cool. All right. so yeah i think we need i'm not i need more information and not making a decision on an option tonight because i would like to get the answer to council members night guards regarding the vote for option one and then i need to know what the cost is best we can for option three it's hard to make a decision on that because we were just previously talking about funding more funding for roads We also got an aquatic center that we're going to be coming back to. We got a police station we're looking at, substation, lookin

Thank you, Mayor Patem. Council Member Bedoya, do you have anything?

I definitely want to move forward with something once there's a greater comfort level amongst the majority of council. If there's information that council thinks is appropriate to have before we make any decision, I'm all for that. Better do it with all the information and a clear conscience. Thank you.

I have a question real quick. Go ahead. With your PG&E plan, must you purchase an EV charging station to qualify, to keep that funding in compliance? We have...

Is there a minimum number of level 3 chargers that you must purchase?

OK. Yes, I would hope that we don't fall in default with PG&E because I do believe what you've started is a significant project. I think if we could purchase a minimum number of EV to make sure that we stay in good compliance with PG&E. Could the EV be augmented then? Because your first option was to just purchase temporary or the portable EV charging. Does that fall under PG&E? So that option really doesn't help keep us in compliance then with the project with PG&E?

So with the energy audit that is going to be happening, You had mentioned that whichever company comes back, they will be exploring opportunity for grant funding, which could be meeting some of our EV need. We don't know yet. You're saying that it will have to be evaluated by the organization that wins the contract. And that will be about a six-month time frame. But there could be EV opportunities. opportunity in there?

So when we come... That's 3.6 million that we would have to come up with to put the EV charging at the four sites?

And that's, you're talking, this is strictly under the EV, the electrification of the fleet, not the energy audit?

Okay. As for my question, so essentially, I want to think about affordability. I think it's important for, you know, investing, we want to make sure that we're getting savings for our families. So I think that goes towards the investment grade audit. So in particular, it sounds like the places in which we could get the greatest savings that would trickle down to Tracy families would most likely be things like the wastewater plant, these really large energy-consuming facilities. So those types of things, it's really important that we go through the investment grade audit first, which will take

Okay. So with that, I would be in support of option three to receive... the investment grade audit.

I appreciate it. So with regards to that component, we would have to go through the audit before you could give us the additional dollar amount and the potential savings. Is that correct?

the investments that would potentially reduce costs for families. Those are the really large-scale ones, wastewater, not particularly City Hall or the Police Department. With regards to those strategies that would reduce costs for families, we would have to go through the investment grade audit.

Perfect. And that's related to option three? Okay. So that's what I'm going to support because I want to see what we can do to reduce costs for families. Now with regard to some of these other things, for the portable EV chargers, is the intention there to only have them available at legacy fields or would they be available for the general public?

Okay, understood. So I think it sounds like there are some potential options that haven't been evaluated yet, including the Volt. I think we would like some additional information. With regards to option two, We're talking about the investment at Legacy Fields. However, this option two also talks about City Hall, Police Department, and Boyd Service Center. In order to not lose, in order for PG&E not to reduce the investment that they have made, what cost would we need to invest currently?

So in option two, there is a $3.6 million suboption and a $1.5 million suboption. We've already begun some infrastructure development. Which option makes it such that PG&E will not withdraw those investments or ask for reimbursements?

So the city would need to invest $3.6 million by the end of this year to ensure that PG&E doesn't request reimbursement?

Okay. Okay. I think I would want more information to Council Member Nygaard's point about what would be the minimum that we would have to invest in order to not have PG&E request reimbursement. So I think we need a little more detail on that timeline and investment. Okay. Those are my questions. Do we have any additional questions, not discussion? Fantastic. All right. We're going to go out for public comment on this item. Do we have any members of the public? Please see raised hands for who would like to speak on Item 6B. I see two hands raised. That will be four minutes. Do we have any speak

Thank you, Ms. Esther. Next speaker. Seeing none in chambers, do we have any online? Okay, with that, I'll go ahead and close out the public... portion period for item 6B and return to council for additional discussion. I just have one more question. Mayor Pro Temp, go ahead.

So if we don't pick anything tonight, when did, when would, and we're looking at a possible timeline of six months for PG&E, right? Possibly the, when would we be brought back some information so we meet that? Do you have any idea, staff?

Before we go further, can you clarify what you mean by incorporating it into the incorporation now? Can you elaborate on that?

Essentially, you just stated that if we were to proceed with option three, that you would incorporate something into the negotiation.

Councillor Evans. Thank you, Mayor. So my two top priorities have always been public safety first and cost of living for our residents is a close second. As was noted earlier by Mayor Pro Tem, we have a PD substation that we've allocated funds for and multiple fire stations that we need to rebuild. that have had allocated funds as well, and I intend to protect those funds with every fiber of my being. From there, it's roadways, as we discussed earlier, and parks, et cetera. I understand we have a state compliance mandate, and I want to remain in compliance, but we have funds that we need to pr

NEW SPEAKER QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. THE WAY I'M UNDERSTANDING IT AND I THINK YOU JUST SAID IT, OPTION THREE IS A WAY FOR US TO ESSENTIALLY ALMOST LIKE RUN TWO TRACKS. GET MORE INFORMATION, THINGS STAY ON TRACK. THE EV INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENT STAYS INTEGRATED WITH THE CITYWIDE ENERGY Upgrade program. Does that sound right? That's correct. Okay. At this time, I would be supportive of option three. It's the one that right now promises more cost savings and gets us more information. It's what council is seeking to do, at least the majority. Staff, please shed some light if I'm explaining that

Just to clarify, on option three, you still are in the process of selecting a energy company to do the audit. When do you think that will be coming back for us to choose the company? Because that company is then going to provide the data of what cost savings and energy measures could be brought back for us to review to to make a decision on. So are we looking at this company being chosen in September? I think he said October.

Okay. With regards to my position, I agree with my colleagues that I think we would need the information from the audit prior to doing any large scale investments. With regards to this project, my priority is what we can do to bring costs down for Tracy residents. And I think those are going to be those large scale projects. However, I also want to make sure that the city has functionality. And I understand that we have already purchased EV vehicles. So I want to make sure those function and don't just sit in a parking lot. So to your point about having the infrastructure be a part of that, th

Mayor, can I ask a question? Yes. So I think we are very excited about moving forward with the energy audit. I think that will bring a lot of information to the table. That aside, and looking now only at your EV electrification program, You have an option to either purchase two portable that have eight ports each, is that correct? Or is it the two total have eight ports?

Each unit will have eight combined. Okay. Or the other option is to still explore VoltVault. I do believe they come as it's a mobile unit that comes with eight ports. And we could see what that price range is. So just and the fact that there is still grant funding coming open. There's some coming in October. There's some at the end of the year. We could still be exploring EV charging as we have either, as we have temporary EV present on site. Either a portable unit or we purchase, we rent a unit or we purchase a unit. And I, you know, that could come back to us when you compare the prices. But

Right. No, I understand. Yeah, I'm just... But in the meantime, if you're purchasing EV vehicles, if we had either portable or rentable, EV would help take care of the issue of having... EV charging available for our state mandate and transitioning vehicles. We're still stuck, though, on this timeline with PG&E because it does make it a little more difficult because we don't have all the data from the audit to say if that's going to help this issue or if we have other funding opening up with other grants.

Okay so I would reiterate, so I essentially am, I think we have consensus on supporting three to get that information. However, is it three and? With regards to the purchase THE VEHICLES THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY PURCHASED. I ALSO HAVE A REALLY BIG CONCERN THAT WE ARE FUNCTIONING. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE UTILIZING THESE VEHICLES FOR DAILY USE. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THE LOWEST COST OPTION TO ENSURE THAT OUR CURRENT EV FLEETS AND THOSE THAT ARE INCOMING SOON WILL BE FUNCTIONAL. SO I WOULD SUPPORT EITHER THE MINIMAL COST OF OPTION ONE WHICH IS 500,000 OR THE VOLT OPPORTUNITY IF IT HAPPENS TO

I WOULD ADD MY SUPPORT BEHIND OPTION THREE AND THE APOLOGIZE, YOU JUST SAID IT.

Currently the lease option. Can I ask a question? Go ahead. Currently, is there any major delays of charging our city fleet vehicles? Or are we able to meet the needs with the transit and the city chargers here?

Okay. Yeah, I would reiterate option three and looking into all options, but my mind says the lease because it's the smallest initial and might kind of be like a for lack of better words, something that hold us over until we get a more permanent plan.

Okay. So I would be moving to move forward with option three and either option one at $500,000 or the lesser of a rental opportunity. Second. Does that make sense?

We say moving ahead with option three, we're talking about bringing back the information on option three for us to deliberate, make a decision. Correct. Okay.

Good. Are there any additional questions?

Why can't we get an engineer's estimate instead of actually selecting it? Well, we have the engineer's estimate, $3.6 million. Okay, I thought we were talking about option three.

That also negates the competitive bid process, which means costs would likely not be the lowest construction cost.

I still think we should follow the process. Council Member Nygaard, do you have an initial question?

If the energy audit does look at Boyd and the police station and say that they're viable for solar, the energy savings from PG&E on those buildings would then now be applied to help offset the solar cost. And then that solar cost, that solar would now be helping to provide the energy for your EV charging.

Right. No, I get that. But we would be having some savings.

So there is a motion on the table. My intention was to roll them in so that when we've selected the bid that they can do the complete evaluation. However, in order to maintain functionality for the city, that we have the short-term either $500,000 or less if there's a potential opportunity for rental, as Council Member Nygaard pointed out. So that is my motion to the table. Council Member Bedoya, was that also your understanding?

Yes. I just do want to ask, is there a way to basically fuse that motion with the ability that staff proposed where I understand it may hamper the traditional public bidding process, but in terms of being able to meet the goal, I like how staff is fusing and giving us more options. And my understanding, they're giving us a request to have some leeway when they actually get into the process to be able to get this done faster. Council Biamak, what was that? That was my understanding. That was my motion.

So you're making a friendly amendment to do a direct bid, direct award?

I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL SAYING EVERYTHING CLEARLY. I RESPECT THE PARTS OF 3 AND THE STOPGAP MEASURE THAT WAS PROPOSED WITH THE MOTION, BUT I BELIEVE DIRECTOR ANUJ RESTATED HIS SUGGESTION WHERE WE COULD HAVE SOME ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE. I'M STICKING TO THE WORD NEGOTIATE. CAN YOU SHED A LITTLE BIT OF LIGHT ON THAT? IS WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING DIFFERENT THAN Option three and the lease or the buying.

Perfect. No, thank you. I appreciate it. I guess ultimately I was just trying to decide like is there a difference because I don't want to brush off staff's technical expertise. Is there a difference in what was proposed option three and looking into option one? compared to what you stated?

I hear you. Okay. So if... Because right now what's being proposed is option three combined with option one. At least looking... That's the motion that's on the table, right? Because it was the option three and then looking into it.

It was rolling in the option two into three, which is what I heard from negotiation. Correct. Direct bid that is unlawful.

I apologize. When you made a motion, I didn't hear that option two was rolled into that. Maybe I misheard. I thought it was in line with my original comments of option three and then looking into it. Are you understanding? I see that you might be.

I'm going to stop you right there. There's confusion. And staff, this has been incredibly confusing. For the future, this has not been effective. Option three states integrating the EV infrastructure deployment with the citywide energy upgrade program. That is...

So option three, there's an opportunity to roll in design build from two to see whether there are any cost savings or not. Correct. That's what my intent is. Okay, so I'm going to withdraw my prior motion because it has been too confusing. So my new motion is to move forward with option three and to include design build elements and then reevaluate at that time. I have a first and a second. Roll call, please.

Yes. As to my second motion, as it relates to option one, I would be supporting option one up to the amount of $500,000 or an alternate temporary option, if it exists. Second. We have a first and second. Roll call, please. Mayor Arreola.

Okay. Thank you, staff. I think we have some internal conversations to have, and then we'll... Mayor, can I just clarify?

My understanding is we're bringing this back to council as a whole for us to evaluate and give direction to move forward.

That was the first motion, not the second motion.

Okay, so can I withdraw my approval of the second motion? Because I would like the entire evaluation to come back before we make a decision. That's what I thought we were all discussing up here was I asked that earlier and that was the

I saw the head nod. So I guess I get are you asking is clarification council member Evans. So option the second motion the mayor made of option one is now telling staff whichever is if vault is less. We're just giving our approval to go with vault or if the 500,000 is less than going that and that would never come back to council for discussion. Is that what I'm understanding?

Or does it need to come back for council because you don't have vault on the agenda?

Is it clear enough for staff for the record?

Okay. So these were informational items that will have to come back from council for affirmation. Fantastic. All right. That takes us to items from the audience. Would any members of the public like to speak on an item not on tonight's agenda?

We see one hand. That will be four minutes. Please proceed. Was there a second? I didn't catch that. I think he's working.

Do you have any kind of time frame on that, Mr. Dubia, or not? October 4th. Just October 4th, but sometime during the day.

Thank you, Mr. Jimmy. Any additional speakers? Seeing none in chambers, do we have any online? Okay, with that, I'll go ahead and close out from the audience. Do we have any staff items?

Thank you, Ms. Lightbird. That brings us to Council items. Do you have anything on the side? Council Member Abadola.

Thank you, Mayor. I just have one. I want to say thank you to staff for the first meeting back after the recess. Good to see you all, and Council as well. and residents. Just wanted on the record, I asked staff for a return item for a sustainability action plan back in 2021. In 2023, the Environmental Sustainability Commission stood up as part of that groundwork. And it does matter because of the water energy access. What I always heard from staff when it's asked about up here is that the plan gets folded into the general plan update. And that's going through the committee process, as we heard

And it can be offline. It doesn't have to necessarily be today. I've heard, so it would be a good thing. Just get a rough idea. Okay.

Anything Mayor Patem? Council Member Evans? It's after 10, so I'll make it really quick. At least I'll try to. Two things. Once, real quick, just wanted to say thanks to everybody that came out and spoke their minds tonight. It's great to see residents coming in. This is your house. that helps us do our job, helps keep us also in check. And we need more people coming in. So it's nice to see you out there. Also, we did have a constituent make a request for consideration of Portuguese flag. And I don't know if, do I need to request that from the dais or?

Yes, under the flag policy. Is that for a particular date or event? I don't know. I think it is. I'd have to go back. I know I gave it to staff with dates. Yes. Maybe the month of June. Sounds right. Okay. So month of June or whatever we consider. You know, I guess my request is to bring it before council, discuss it, come up with, you know, what we think is reasonable and move forward.

I'll give you a second on that. Does he need three? Okay. So I'll get a second on that.

I guess I have concerns with June already having another flag up during the month. We have. And if there's not a particular, does staff recall what the particular event was?

Now, what did Council Member Evans provide you?

I think it's Portuguese month, isn't that? Or it's some, I think that's the recognition of, I think I saw.

I'm looking for the Portuguese Heritage Month. Yeah, Portuguese Heritage Month. And if, you know, the request isn't to approve the flag, it's to discuss and discuss options and if it doesn't work for a month, maybe there's another possibility.

Yeah, I've received, I've previously received requests for day of Portugal flag, but it was a day event.

I'd provide a third for consideration of some raising.

That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Nygaard.

Thank you, Mayor. I am going to ask that we actually bring the climate action plan back to council and for an ad hoc committee. It has been, you know, we approved for an ad hoc a couple months back and then we decided that it would probably be more efficient just to roll it into the general plan. But the general plan can take up to five plus years. And I really think that, you know, the climate action plan is something that is critical. And a lot of the decisions we're making tonight, if we had a climate action plan and expelled out a lot of these sustainability actions, would already be defin

And also that we could still utilize De Novo as a consultant if needed, if that's possible.

I hear you. I think in our city we use climate action plan and sustainability action plan interchangeable, right? Yeah. Which is my way of respectfully flagging that I had asked for it in the past without, you know, beating down your guys' door to bring it to us before it may be ready? Does that kind of make?

It's in the email. Honestly, I'm not sure. If staff could just look at the email and... Okay. I want to say it's the Portuguese flag, but I honestly am not sure.

And if it's if it doesn't fit the policy, you know, you can let me know. I can ask the constituent to reconsider another option. And I think that's the idea. Bring it bring it forward. And, you know, I'll ask them to be here and.

Absolutely. Yeah, I'm not looking to change policy, so thanks.

I have two more. So I have another ask. I'd really like to have a discussion item come back to the council on looking at how we could address our general fund parks and what type of opportunities or funding mechanisms we could use to just have a more uniform park appearance. The general fund parks, you know, are not funded with CFDs or LMDs. And yes, they're on the bottom of the totem pole. So we'd like to try and address how we can have a discussion on that.

And my last request is, in our consent items tonight, there was an item about parking in downtown business district. I would like to, at a future time, be able to see if we could do a parking study downtown. Parking is really important. coming to a significant issue. We've lost two of our smaller unit or, you know, vacant lots and, you know, we're having more activities downtown and it impacts, you know, a lot. If we could figure out how we can improve parking, maybe it's just signage. I don't know, but I think we need to really look at how we can address our downtown businesses and our events

I will second that, but if I can make a friendly amendment to it, there's a parking lot that I've been meaning to ask staff about, the parking lot right next to the post office. And not sure what happened, but it was recently overlaid and striped, looked beautiful. Now there's weeds coming up through it because it was gated off, like chained off and Not used for like months. I don't know why.

I can share on that. That is a private owner. He owns the little strip mall where we have Chapter 2. And yeah, he's very strict. And it comes with the old Penny's building. That is that personal parking lot.

engage that property owner and see if there's anything we can do he did go through the expense i'm just not clear why he didn't well we asked that months ago about empty lots in the downtown business district that was one of the empty lots to see if there's a way we could possibly have conversations with all those parking lot owners and empty lot owners for leasing or whatever improving parking so um don't know if we include that and yes i don't know if we ever we didn't hear anything back i agree

And last, I just want to say thank you to FIRED, PD, and all of our community neighborhoods that actually celebrated National Night Out. It was an amazing evening, a lot of great neighborhood fun, and I just thank our PD and our FIRE for coming out and just making that a really special night. Thank you very much.

All right. As for my comments, I just want to welcome back to school our students, teachers, staff, and families. And I wanted to also take a moment to thank staff and this city council for their efforts in finalizing the stipulated judgment to resolve the Surlin litigation matters, which finally ends our final barrier to building an aquatic center. And I very much look forward to that moving forward for this community. With that, I will take a motion to adjourn. Second. We have a first and a second with Mayor Pro Tem. Roll call, please.

Yes. All right. We are adjourned at 1019. Thank you.