City Council/Public Finance and Economic Development Authority/Parking Authority - Regular Meeting

Same thing since I was driving home and I smelled Aren't you desensitized? No, I was talking to I can't smell. I'm like, "No, I can smell it from the freeway." Just Yeah. Even driving by with the windows closed. You smell it? I have one word. Recirculation. What? All right. Mine's all right. Let's call the uh call the close session to order. Get in there quick. Okay. Agenda item a close session roll call. Council member Deont present. Tao present. Harris present. Smith present. Jeang. Mayor Promboy here. and Mayor Sado here.

Okay. Council will go into close session to discuss item B1. There is one person in the audience, but he does not look like he wants to leave a public comment. Okay.

All right. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I want to welcome everybody to the March 16th, 2026 meeting of the Merced Council. Thank you all for being here tonight. Uh we're going to begin with an invocation um from Pastor Caesar Johnson from Christian Life Center here in Merrced and then after that council member Tao will lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ask everyone to please bow your heads in this moment of prayer. Heavenly Father, we thank you for your presence with us this evening. We acknowledge that you hear our cry. You care for us. You have all authority and you are all powerful. Lord, we thank you for your blessings that you've bestowed on us in this community. The diverse and beautiful people and the resources we have here. Lord, as leaders in this community, Lord, we are called to be good stewards over it. And we don't take that responsibility lightly. So God, we pray for your blessing and direction over this meeting. Bless our council members, bless our city staff, volunteers, and families. Lord, as we are here today, Lord, there's many different people with many different ideas, Lord, but may we all stand united in a world that's increasingly divided. God, we may not understand your ways. We may not understand your thoughts, but you are the ultimate strategists, and we are facing challenging decisions day by day that affect the lives of ourselves and others. We need you. Our families need you. Those that are broken, that have lost loved ones, our youth are poor, needy, those experiencing homelessness, mentally and physically ill, struggling parents, elderly, immigrants, business owners, farmers,

ranchers, our staff in this community, Lord, we need you, Lord. We think of St. Patrick, Lord. And I pray, Lord, that before anybody today or this week, Lord, eats corn, beef, and cabbage, God. I pray, Lord, they look up St. Patrick and they look up what he stood for and how he sacrificed his life to help those around him. May we do the same in this community. Lord, we think of your word and you said in Isaiah 43:19 that you will make a path through the wilderness and water in the dry ground. That is a sign of your provision and your direction. So we ask that you provide for us today as we seek your direction and where to go in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right. Thank you, Council Member Ta. Thank you, Pastor Johnson. Some of your best work, sir. Okay. Agenda item D. Roll call. Council member Dupon, present. Tao, present. Harris, present. Smith present. Jean here. Mayor Pro Timboy here and Mayor Sorado here.

Mayor, I'd like to remind the audience that if they wish to address the city council, they must submit a green request to speak form located at the podium in the back of the chamber. Additionally, citizens can submit public comment to the city council electronically, no later than 1 p.m. on of the day of the meeting. Comments received before the deadline will be sent to the city council and will be part of the record and will be mentioned as part of the written petitions and communications portion of the agenda. and they will also be posted on the city's website. Material may be emailed to city clerk@ cityofmers.gov and any correspondence received after 1 p.m. will be distributed to the city council and retained for the official record. Also, for those audience members who wish to hear the council meeting translated into Spanish or Mong, please let our interpreters know. Columbia family. and I'm the Spanish interpreter. My name is Elizabeth and I'm with Healthy House. I will be back there if you need me.

Thank you. In accordance with government code 54952.3, it is hereby announced that the city council sits either simultaneously or serilially as the public financing and economic development authority, parking authority, and or successor agency to the redevelopment agency. City council members receive a monthly stipen of $500 by charter for sitting as the city council and the mayor receives an additional $100 each month as part of the adopted budget and resolution 2024-78. The public financing and economic development authority, parking authority, and successor agency to the redevelopment agency received no compensation. Agenda item E, report out of close session. There is no report out of close session.

Agenda item F, ceremonial matters, F1, Proclamation, Gateway Quilters Guild. All right. Thank you, Jennifer. Going to turn over to Mayor Pro Tim Sarah Bole for the ceremonial item honoring the Gateway Cultures Guild. So, ladies, if you want to come down, uh, everybody give him a warm welcome and we'll turn over to Mayor Pro.

How are you? Thank you. Well, good evening everybody. Today we're here to recognize the Gateway Guilters Quilters Guild that we have here. Uh March is National Quilting Month and uh Saturday, March 21st is also the National Quilting Day and so we are recognizing them today. Does one of you guys want to talk about what you do? Sorry. You're good. You're good.

Good evening. We would have had more members here today. The only thing is that we're also having our meeting tonight that we have on the third Monday of every month at six o'clock over at the Hoffs Mentor Center as well. All of you guys are welcome to attend. Um we do one main big fundraiser that we do yearly and that's our quilt show. It's done every other year. This year it's going to be done September 26th on Forest Length. I put a picture right there if you guys want to see what um we raffle a quilt and we're a nonprofit organization. So the money that we raise from that we give it back by quilts to the community. We do the guardian scholar which is at the UC Merrced for foster age children. Then we also do three of the combolescent homes. We do CASA, we do the Salvation Army, veterans, CPS, adult protective services as well. There's like seven or eight places that we go to quarterly and we give out quilts. These are some of the quilts that we give out to. This is an patriotic quilt. The patriotic this year because um our country turns 250 years. We're also doing at nine o'clock on September 26 at nine o'clock we're honoring veterans. So we're going to give quilts like this out to honor them. And it's going to be people from our community here in Merced. Everything is here locally. Nothing gets shipped out anywhere else. Uh we also do the dress a girl. the dress a girl are dresses for young girls

in Africa. Um when they do these dresses, they're done a specific way. So when they're in Africa that there people see them wearing these dresses, they're they know they're under protection. So no trafficking for these girls. So it's a big plus. Um I do if you guys Thank you, Sarah. If you guys would like to purchase a ticket, I do s I do have some here today. They're six for five or a dollar each. You do not have to be present to win. You can also buy tickets. I believe they're $10 for you go for you to go into the quilt show. And that's going to start at 10:00. The 9:00 will be for the veterans. There's not going to be no charge for that. Okay.

Of course, Lori. I'm Lori. I've u been a big part of the guild and uh quilters embrace for a long time. And um it's not just going to be veterans. There are going to be local heroes as well. Um medics and uh maybe fire u police and that sort of thing. So um we're going to have several quilts to give away in that ceremony uh as a happy birthday to America. And we give away about 300 or more quilts each year, possibly more, um, to 300 plus each year. So, it's a very thriving group. And if you ever want to learn how to quilt, join our guild and we'll show you how.

And will you guys be at the Mercy Fair this year inside the pavilion? Yes. Okay. And that's where you can buy tickets, too.

You can buy tickets there as well. That's so what we do is it's because we're a nonprofit, we only have one big major fundraising and that's to purchase all the material that we use, the material, the batting, the backing that we give to these people in the community that are in need. Um, sometimes when CPS picks up a child, they have nothing. So they have they give them a quilt so and they have a place for them to put their name on it so they know it's theirs and the guardian scholars also has a different label. So, um, the guardian scholar, can you No, Angie. The one that one, the flower one. They're different size because their beds are a twin size extra long. Can you Yeah, that's their label. And so, we have two different labels because these children also at UC sometimes they come and they don't realize that they don't have any blankets. So we do give out to them as well. This year we gave out 25 of them in October. Well, thank you for everything you guys do.

Okay, so the proclamation is whereas the National Quilting Association started National Quilting Day in 1991 and since then it has grown into a global celebration for all quilt lovers and makers. And whereas the the Gateway Quilters Guild was established in 1984 with the purpose and goal of promoting and perpetuating the art of quilting, the the work of the guild is designed to benefit and educate all persons interested in preserving, continuing and advancing this art. The guil the guild encourages a high standard of design technique and all forms of quilting and promotes the art of quilting by sponsoring workshops and exhibits. And whereas the Gateway Quilters Guild has provided 250 to 300 quilts each year to those in need, including CPS Veterans, UC Guardian Scholars, Red Cross, nursing homes, and continues to expand in their community outreach by adding new programs, said project being the address a girl around the world. And whereas each year the Gateway Quilters Guild offers two $500 scholarships for Mercy College. And whereas the Gateway Quilters Guild is dedicated to the art of quilt making and to serving the community. The combination of the two has made for many years of comfort to children and adults in need. The city of Merrced is grateful for the Gateway Quilters Guild for their service to the community. Now therefore, I Sarah Bole, Mayor Pro Tim of City of Merced, on behalf of the city council, do hereby proclaim the s the third Saturday of March of each year an asset to the city of Merced and declare March 21st as a national quilting day in the city of Merced.

Thank you. You're welcome. I was trying to get your attention. I can photo. Thank you.

Thank you, council members. Ladies, thank you so much. It's a really beautiful way that you show love to our community through this and it's it's a a beautiful thing. Thank you.

Okay. Agenda item G, written petitions and communications. Mayor the clerk's office received an email from Jerry Perez Chica regarding public comment. The email was received by the 1pm deadline. It was sent to council and posted on the city's website. Any emails received after the 1pm deadline will be sent to council. Agenda item H, public comments. Members of the public who wish to speak on any matter not listed on the agenda may speak during this portion of the meeting and will be allotted three minutes. The mayor may propose a further limit to the time available for all speakers at the discretion of the city council in order to accommodate as many speakers as possible. State law prohibits the city council from acting at this meeting on any matter raised during the public comment period. Members of the public who wish to speak on an matter that is listed on the agenda will be called upon to speak during the discussion of that item. And mayor, I currently have eight request to speak forms.

Okay. Thank you, Jennifer. We'll go three minutes each. And if anybody else wants to speak, please fill out a form now. Okay. If I can get the first four speakers to the podium to my left. Uh, Cindy Kelly, Rebecca Mandani, uh, Crystal Ramos, and Camila. All right. Thank you, Jennifer. All right. If your name is called, please line up. Miss Keller.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, City Council, City Manager McBride, and the city attorney Cornwell. Um, I promised you some stats. We had a really good year in 2025. Um, so we did finally do our end of the year report and these are just some of the highlights for Merced SPCA. Um, we prevented over 1,600 kitten bursts through our TNR program. We trapped 171 new strays. Um, we did trap some of our already trapped cats. They seem to like that trap when there's tuna fish or sardines in it. Um, we provided medical care and some surgeries for over two for 288 cats. We did the we rescued 18 of the cats from the Pasadena and Aladena fires back in January, all of which have been adopted. We um humanely euthanized 11 pets through our end of life program. We sent 69 cats and kittens to rescue. We spayed and neutered 575 pets through various grants. And we received 108,221 in revenue. of that 49,000 just over 49,000 was from grants over 58,000 was from community donations and at the end of the year we spent a hund almost 104,000 so uh we're a true nonprofit we don't try to carry anything over into the next year uh we participated in 26 community activities we welcome new 18 new volunteers and we added 20 new 27 new members to Merrced SPCA we also have um and it's not there because it just started In January, we've also started a business sponsor program and that has been quite successful where our business community is now getting involved in Merced SPCA and sponsoring our cat colonies out there. Um, I will tell you we are kind of cautiously optimistic at this point this early in the year. Um, we're in the thick of kitten season, but we're not seeing kittens. So, you know, I I always tell people in

a perfect world, people like me are not needed. Um, but we are definitely seeing at this time last year we had about 48 pregnant moms and a ton of kittens. And right now we have five kittens and one mother. So huge decrease in what's going on out there. So all the other rescues working in the city, we're we feel like we're finally making some headway. Um, we are losing some colonies. We had some that were stable and we are again seeing an increase in FLB in the colonies. Um, one of our colonies in one of the parks is almost decimated. It went from 33 cats last year, we're down to four. Um, and we're finding dead cats in that area quite a bit of time. So, we're doing what we can to address that. Um, it may be euthanizing the rest of that colony to protect the rest of the cats in that area, but we're we're again seeing an uptick in that. But, we've had a pretty good year and it's all because of everyone's support. The community, our council, um, you know, just everyone around us understands the value of what we're doing. and I would love to stay, but I just got a call about kittens in a bag on the creek, so I've got to dash out of here.

Get him. Thank you, city. Thank you for all your credible work. All right, next speaker. Hello. Good evening, city council. My name is Crystal Ramos. I'm the program manager at Youth Leadership Institute, and I'm just here to kind of set the stage for a few of our young people who have come to make general comments about affordable housing, especially here in Merced. I know a lot of them are going to be entering adulthood, adulthood rather soon, and they just want to say a couple of the important things on their mind as they're making that transition and that city council would hopefully keep in their minds and prioritize when they think about housing in Merced. So, thank you. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Who's first? Um, hello. I'm a resident of Merced and I'm also a part of Wild Lai. Even though I am still young, I still tend to think about what my future will look like in this city. Many teenagers will turn 18 and face their the challenge of paying for housing while also trying to go to school or start their careers. Public and affordable housing can help people in our community have stability while they work toward their goals. When people have safe housing, it helps students succeed, helps families stay together, and helps our community grow stronger. I encourage the city to keep supporting and investing in affordable housing in Mercedes so young people like me can have a future here. Thank you.

Thank you.

Who is our next speaker? We have Rebecca. Rebecca as in Aunt Becky. Yes, it is. Good evening, Aunt Becky. Good evening. Good to see you.

Good to see you folks, too. Yana Becky. Um, for 45 years, this is our 45th year, we've done Kiki Tahiti Fit at Golden Valley High School. Um, we have about 1,500 people that come into town. We fill probably four or five hotels, probably a quarter million to to half a million revenue for the city of Merced every year that we do this. It's very exciting. It's cultural, it's fun, and it's a happy event. And since we always have so much challenges here at city council, we love to come and we love to dance for you. This song is called Love Song of Tahiti. If I can get it on my I'm very not um technical. Tonight is the night for love and delight in love and play with me all the eternity. Oh, the moonlight will shine and then all you see in the night is come and play with be on.

Oh, light will shine and all divine. You'll see your sweep in. You're on my next. Oh baby, won't you come and dance with me to the rhythm of the rolling seasym?

Thank you. I'm sorry. I got to Thank you everybody. You're all invited to the Kikirina Tahiti Fet next weekend, Friday, Saturday, Sunday. Judges are all from Tahiti. So, we hope that you come and uh join us. Lots of fun. Mauru, thank you. Thank you as always.

Okay, if I can get the next four speakers, um Jazelle Ramirez, Maximus Zong, uh Rosio, and Ashley Marie Suarez. Uh hello, my name is Jazelle Ramirez and I'm here for Merrcett. Um I'm here to speak and support of the public affordable housing in our city. Um young city, I mean young people in Merrcett are thinking about our future and housing is a big concern. Uh the legal age is to buy and rent houses at 18. But many of us at that age are starting college, working part-time, and trying to build our lives. With the cost of housing today, it's very difficult for young adults to afford a safe and stable place to live. This is why I support expanding public and affordable housing in Merrcett. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, who's next? Good evening, city council. My name is Max Jang. I am a resident of Merced and I am also a part of U Yi Youth Leadership Institute and I am also a member of the United States Navy. I'm here today to speak to you guys about affordable housing for young people in Merced such as young adults and young children becoming and going to the age of 18. I see in today's society that uh affordable housing such as apartment or just buying a house in general is nearly impossible for the youth and the young people due to the lack of jobs Merced and due to the inefficient amount of money that we have due to housing being so expensive. For example, a onebedroom is already around 1,500, which is nearly impossible for somebody coming out of high school that has no experience and they can't get a job because they have no experience to be able to afford that much. I understand that housing market is not where it needs to be right now, but I ask that you guys help to um support us young people and support the young adults in our generation in affordable housing. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Thank you for your service. All right. He's next. Welcome. Hi, my name is Rosio. Um, I live in Mercer for 21 years. For 21 years. Yeah. Um experience in

my experience in the housing um it's been a bit critical.

Our rent is going up. No kidding. Um,

and they do not want to make repairs in the house. Um, I am here. Um to see if there's options

or any apartments or houses for low income for um currently there's a lot of competition for the people who want to purchase homes or apartments. But when they rent out,

they don't want to pay for any repairs in order to rent the units. Thank you. That's it. Thank you. Welcome, Ashley.

Good evening, council. Um, good evening, council mayor, city manager, city attorney, and others. I'd like to uplift some priorities residents um that I work alongside would like to uh be considered in the upcoming budget as well as be included in the city's 8-year housing element plan. Number one, an eviction protection program. The city acknowledges acknowledges that retaliation for reporting habitability issues includes threats of eviction. Retaliation is unlawful and this repeat housing code violators program that will be discussed later today might result in increased rates of retaliation resulting in unlawful evictions. Currently, there is a gap in resources available to assist tenants who experience threats of eviction or there are requirements of the tenant receiving the unlawful detainer for them to receive assistance from legal service providers. An eviction protection program may assist in addressing these gaps by ensuring that legal service and assistance can be provided prior to receiving this unlawful detainer notice and guarantees that the tenant has legal representation when they are served an unlawful detainer. Partnering with local law firms, uh, legal aid providers and law clinics may bridge the gap that exists, especially if partially funded by local tax dollars to ensure that all tenants, regardless of immigration status, can be assisted. Number two, inclusionary zoning. Modifying the uh re regional housing needs allocation res resolution to closely align it with an inclusionary zoning policy will ensure that all development including infill will set aside a percent higher than 5% to be affordable housing throughout the city of Merced. Increasing the inloo fees will also ensure an increase in affordable housing fund money that can be used to support the facilitation of future or existing affordable housing and support affordable housing programs residents actually want to see without depending on state and federal funds. And number three, rental registry and rental inspection program. Although council did not move forward with this program. Um, and there has been a suggested alternative. Residents still

would like to see the city take proactive action to make sure that there's a baseline inspection conducted and that we can follow the footsteps of successful cities that have similar programs supported by an anti-slum ordinance like the one suggested for here. Without a baseline program that will support residents, we aren't really advancing a lot and there are still gaps that need to be addressed that will be required to be addressed in the future. Therefore, we are asking the city to strongly consider these budgetarian policy asks as the budget process is coming up and that the city gets closer to being found in compliance for the 8-year housing element plan by complying with housing element law and affirmatively furthering fair housing law. Thank you.

Thank you, Ed. Jennifer, anyone else? That's all we have, mayor. Okay, we'll move on to consent. Oh, wait. Hold on. I think we you have another speaker possibly. Do you have it for public comment or something? Yeah. Okay. Good evening. Welcome.

Hi. Um, I proposed a plan to hopefully get um essential health resources for our community and hopefully to um apply it in the T Street um rec center, the one that just got redone actually. Um, I'm opening a business for a Sovereign Harmony project so we can help the homeless and the low-income families to provide um I'm sorry uh to provide um sanitation and hygiene and things like that nature to that area.

If I could stop if you could pause it at 2:15. Um, this actually probably work out better for you, too. If you're talking about that, I think that that applies to our public hearing, which is our HUD action plan tonight. Oh, I'm sorry. That'll come relatively soon. Um, so you just got 45 seconds to practice right there. And we'll come back probably in about It shouldn't take too long. And that'll be the right time to give that comment. Sorry about that. No, not a problem at all. Not a problem at all. Thank you. So, for agenda, it's an agenda item. So, agendaized items, we take comment during that time. So, it'll work out. you'll end up getting a little we'll come back and you you'll have three minutes uh when we call the item pretty soon. Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Anyone else for public comment? Believe that's all we have. Mayor.

All right. Take us to consent. Okay. Agenda item I consent calendar. Any members of the council have any items on the consent agenda they wish to see pulled for separate consideration? And we have to pull six because that's a five vote item. So we'll pull that. All right. Anything else from the council? Council Jean, I would like to pull three. I three you said. Correct. I3 is the CMAC traffic synchronization uh item. All right. Anyone else? Jennifer, anything from the public? I do have one for I4. Okay. Four is the general plan uh annual report housing element. Okay. Nothing else. Jen, that was all we had.

All right. So, we're going to pull pretty much pull half the consent agenda. We're going to pull three, four, and six. Any discussion or a motion with respect to the balance. Motion. Second. Okay. Have a motion by Mayor Pro Tim Bole and a second by Council Member Harris. Mayor and Council, please cast your votes. Okay. And the motion passes unanimously. All right. Thank you, Jennifer. Takes us to I3. Council member Jean. Uh, I just had a few question here. Jeff, are you able to pull up the map, the location map? Do you have that with you? I don't have it with me. No.

Again, for the public, I3 is our traffic syn traffic light synchronization plan awarding a $ 1.3 million bid to St. Francis Electric to synchronize traffic lights in various spots of the city. Um and then just uh if you could remind me this project started in uh 2022, right? Is that correct? That is correct.

Uh could you remind me how the locations were chosen again? These locations were chosen in collaboration with public works in the different areas that have um traffic not necessarily traffic calming but uh traffic issues as far as um older signals, older cabinets, older software. So we're trying to upgrade all that to to modern software into modern cameras and what have you to increase the efficiency through those corridors. Thank you. Uh, so I I heard uh from residents with regards to how come G Street or MLK or 16th Street aren't part of these locations. Is there a particular reason why those aren't included?

I'm sorry. Could you ask that question again? Oh, so residents have brought up to me that G Street, uh, 16th Street and, um, MLK are not locations that are, uh, we're thinking to synchronize the traffic lights. Um, is there a reason for that? I believe just u numerically and budget-wise this corridor was chosen. It's not that we're not looking at others. We're be expanding this in the future and be looking at those as well.

Uh, for clarification, the last grant we received, we did synchronization along G and 16th Street. Uh, so those components are already synchronized from a technology perspective. Additional timings may need to be done to make them more efficient, but the technology is already in place to accomplish it on G and down G and through 16th Street. Awesome. Thank you, Jeff. Thank you. That's all my questions. It's a good answer. Additional questions. Councelor Smith.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Jordan, remind me. I feel like last year we had to pull back the traffic synchronization in North Merrced for lack of funds, but the council gave the green light to move ahead with the synchronization project in South Merrced. Am I recalling that correctly? That is correct. And where is that work right now in terms of uh synchronizing lights in South Merrced? We have not pursued any grant funding for that yet. Um but we will be looking at the entirety of the city throughout this next year for CIP projects for further synchronization. Um, but these were just the ones that we had brought forward tonight. So, all right. Thank you. Yep. All right. Anyone else from the council?

Okay, Jennifer. Nothing from the public on this item. Not for this item. Mayor, thank you. All right. Back to council. Further discussion andor a motion. Motion. Second. Okay. Have a motion by Mayor Pro Tim Bole and a second by council member Harris. Mayor and council. Please cast your votes. Okay. And the motion passes unanimously. Thank you, Council. Thank you. Thank you, Darl. Less stopping at traffic lights around town. All right. I forgive. I have Ashley Marie Suarez.

We have Ashley. Anyone else from the public on this item? Just Ashley. This is our general plan annual report.

Go ahead, Ash. Good evening once again. Um I'm going to take us to page 13, table A, housing application summary. Um I believe here it says that the um there was a couple of uh applications received 1,192 uh but only 521 units got approved um for to be built out and I was wondering why only 521 units got approved when the number of proposed units in all applications received was 1,192 units. Does the six cycle draft um identify the cause or the constraint resulting in less than half of the proposed units being approved or developed? And if not, the new draft should include a program addressing whatever is causing for less of the half of the proposed number of units to be developed. Um, going on to page 38, program H4.1.B, it states that the ongoing objective is to sponsor fair housing and tenants/landord relationships and rights workshops to educate tenants and landlords on their rights and responsibilities. However, the status of implementation regarding that item is does not provide any update regarding whether or not the workshops have been hosted for the public recently. Is this still an ongoing objective? And the city did include this in the six cycle housing element drafts program 14. So we continue to urge the city to ensure that um it takes actions to meet these objectives in 2026 and after the adoption of the six cycle housing element. We do also look forward to seeing a compliant housing element that includes programs and policies that residents strongly recommend such as an eviction protection program and inclusionary zoning as well as the changes to the repeat housing code violators program in order to address gaps in resources and services that we will later provide. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Ashley. Jennifer, anything else from the public? That was all we had. Mayor,

here we go. One more. Good evening, council members. Apologies, I came in a little late, so I was trying to catch up and then when I realized what you were talking about, I was like, "Oh, okay. Let me see if I can still provide comment." Um well I think uh just just to I think you know I've spoken in the past and um some of the things that we've mentioned kind of reiterating some of the things that Ashley had mentioned is definitely looking at an eviction protection program. Um, I know in the past we had brought in policies like, you know, a rental habitability escrow, rental registry, um, a a what's it called? The right to council. Um, but really something more for tenants that helps to protect them. And I know today in the agenda, we're going to be talking about the anti-slum ordinance, which I'm really looking forward to. And, um, I think that's a really good start. But moving forward, I think it's really important that we include some of these protection for tenants in the general plan. Um, as we think about housing expansion in Merrced, uh, making sure that the people that have lived in Merrced are able to stay in Merrced and including some of those pieces into it. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. All right. Well, back to council. Um, Mr. McBride, do we have the two questions that uh Ashley brought up on pages 13 and 38 of the report? Um, are there easy answers right now or should I know Leah could probably follow up with her offline or Leah's already coming up right now. She's ready to she's itching. All right. Good evening, council. Good evening, Lee.

Um, regarding the first question, um, the number of applications, um, this is a snapshot of 2025 only. So, some of them um are um getting approved this year and so they're proposed um applications. No applications for housing units were disapproved in 2025. I think that's the the key to it. Okay.

And then the programs are definitely ongoing and we work working very hard with HCD um to get across the finish line and we actually just got an update this afternoon. And so we feel very hopeful that the housing element will um be found to be in compliance and then we start the hard work of implementing all the programs. So programs are continuous and ongoing and it's nothing has been forgotten. It's just about implementation and there's some things that we'll bring back to you um for slight modifications um to um meet HCDA requirements. Okay. Thank you. No, I appreciate the answers.

All right. Thank you. Um, additional questions for Leah. Additional discussion or any uh I guess a motion from council. Motion. Second. Have a motion by council member Harris and a second by council member Dupont. Mayor and council. Please cast your votes. Okay. The motion passes with council member Jeang voting no.

All right. Thank you. All right. These are with the signs. It's definitely okay to have the signs, but just be careful when you lift them up high. there's people behind you. So sometimes um you know we got people um who they they're in back and they want to see. So just just be real cognizant and respectful of people other people in the audience. Thank you. All right. On to I6. Okay. This was pulled because it's a five vote item. Um this is purchasing um police vehicles with uh for funds for the Sanwaqin Valley Air Pollution Control District. All right. Any deserts? uh presentation. Chief, any you want to say something?

Mayor, I just want to first of all, I want to apologize for the clerical error. This should have never been on your consent calendar. It should have been an action item. Uh I take full responsibility for that error. I tried to reach out to some of you, but it's a five council vote. It's in combination with the police department and the purchasing department to replace vehicles. Uh the police department is trying to do our part to go as many clean air vehicles as we can, and the Central Valley Air Pollution Control District is willing to give us $20,000 in rebates for these cars. These are replacement vehicles. So, in partnership with our finance team, we went ahead and wrote those grants and we're looking for uh approval tonight on a five vote item to move forward with the uh grant application. Okay. Questions for chief Jennifer? Anything from the public? We don't have anything, Mayor. Okay. Discussion or a motion from council?

Motion. Second. Harris Dupont. Okay. I have a motion by council member Harris and a second by council member Dupont. The motion will include the adoption of resolution 2026-15, a resolution of the city council of the city of Merced, California to apply for grant funding and accept grant funding if awarded from the Sanwaqin Valley Air Pollution Control District's public benefits grants program. Merritt and council, please cast your votes. Okay, the motion passes with council member Jeang voting no.

Thank you, Jennifer. On to our public hearing for tonight. Okay. Agenda item J, public hearings. J1, first public hearing, introduction and preliminary review of project funding scoring results and expenditure recommendations for community development block grant CDBG and home investment partnership program home funds for fiscal year 2627 to be included in the draft US Department of Housing and Urban Development HUD program, year 2026 annual action plan and receipt of public comment during public hearing. Thank you, Jennifer. All right, Kim. Welcome. Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Thank you.

So, we're here tonight for the first public hearing for the 2026 annual action plan. Um, the main uh point of tonight's meeting is to present the project funding uh for the 2026 annual plan uh and the scoring results. Um and again it's preliminary projects uh funding. Uh first off though I want to go through um what we did for a pretty robust um public outreach uh section of the annual plan. Um from December 24th, 2025 to February 17th, 2026, we had our public service organization application period. Uh we did public uh notices on January 14th and January 15th in Rashad County Times and Merced. Um January 7th through fe uh February 17th, we did an online community survey um polling the community on what needs uh they see in housing, public infrastructure, um public service needs and um we'll go over the results of that in a couple slides. uh January 20 and February 3rd, we did no um notice of funding opportunity workshops with our community service organizations. Um we also did two resident community input meetings January 6th and January 7th. Um we did a public agency consultation survey from January 14th through February 17th. Um and then uh on the slide here um on the upper section uh we are expecting our HUD allocations to be announced in early April not March um based on the appropriations act by

the US Congress February 3rd. Uh HUD has about 60 days to calculate the allocations. So that would be April not March. Apologize for the year there. Um, so tonight, March 16th, we're having our first public hearing. Um, in between, we'll have a 30-day public review and comment period. It's actually 31 days from March 23rd through April 22nd. And then May 18th, uh, we're expecting our second final public hearing. Um we would have if our submittal deadline um is truly June 3 based on our Congress appropriations, we would have a quick um meeting available for um a continued public hearing. I think it's the first day in June. So June 1st would be and then we can turn around and submit our annual plan after that. So the 2026 resident survey um these are our uh different category top three activities from the survey. Uh for housing needs um I don't know if I'll walk through every single one of these but um for housing um our first three needs housing opportunity for special needs person that could be seniors disabled domestic violence victims and homeless. Um second was down payment assistance of first-time home buyers. And then number three is vital safety repairs to homes. Um the last one um on public services down there at the bottom. Wanted to run through those. Um so top three would be services for persons with special needs. That would include again seniors, disabled, homeless, and domestic violence victims. Um number two, assistance for homeless services um

specifically and then youth programs uh which includes uh education and career training also just run through economic development there. Third one down. Um number one being job training for specific skills and areas. Um and then number two, helping small and micro business owners with low and moderate incomes grow and develop the businesses. That ties into our um scoring results or applications here in a couple slides. So overall greatest needs in the community with all the categories. Um the top five would be job training, skills development, money management programs. number two ranked um affordable home home ownership related assistance and that could be anything from homeowner rehab to uh first-time home buyer uh funding. And number three, homeless services prevention and housing solutions. Um that could be rental assistance, um tenant landlord assistance, and then um housing solutions such as acquisition with rehab. Um, number four, affordable quality child care and/or use centers and services. And then number five, services and programs for special needs persons. That's our top five overall community needs. Um, our survey, we had a total of 99 total responses, which is down a little bit from what we usually get. Um, our Spanish survey, we got one response from that. and our monk survey we had one from that as well. So our 2026 HUD applications um again our possible announcement would be midappril not March. Um that's based on the Congress's consolidated

appropriations act approval on February 3rd and then HUD has 60 days to announce allocations. um that would put it about April 3rd and then um 60 days from the announcement date would be our submittal deadline and that would be approximately June 3rd based purely on that February 3rd appropriations act approval. Uh I should note we have not received any communication from HUD directly. Um so again this is all just estimate dates. So um our 2026 funding requests and scoring results. This is the complete list of applications that we received. Um the top section would be your public services. Um and then we listed them banked on the scoring results. So, your top public service score was our Sears Giving Grace emergency subsistence program. It would be rental assistance, mortgage and utility assistance. Um, Project Sentinel with their tenant landlord mediation service. Uh, Harvest Time, the food for you program, Boys and Girls Club of Merced County, um, for their teen workforce readiness program. Um, fifth one, Youth for Christ Central Valley. Um they're proposing a youth services program and then Charvin Harmony project um would be the fifth one on or sorry sixth one on the list and for public services and then our economic development projects. We received an application from UC Merrced for small business assistance for technical training on uh for small business owners trying to get their businesses started. Um for CDBG funding housing projects, uh

we received an application from Sierra Saving Grace for their acquisition with rehab uh program. Uh for home funds, um this could actually be either CDG or home. Uh we received an application from Merced Community Action Agency for a weatherization program that's kind of like a homeowner rehab program. um they would need the funding for uh pretty much gap funding to supplement the program funding they get from the Department of Energy. And then for admin projects um we received an an application from the human services agency for um continum of care support for the point point in time homeless count, excuse me. and then project Sentinel for the fair housing services program. So the proposed budget um for CDBG public services um we are proposing for four public service programs to move forward from scoring um first one being Sierra Saving Grace then project Sentinel their tenant landlord program harvest time food distribution boys and girls club in Merced county and then uh housing division we've set set aside um some activity delivery cost funding to help us um with our costs of implementing the programs. Um these are purely based on estimates because our annual plan has to be uh put out there for the first public hearing on us because we don't have the allocation yet. Um these are definitely not final amounts. Um and so just to fill up the budget sheet, we did approximately 74% of their requested

amount. Um which is what you see on the right hand column and then we did I think it was 6% for our ADC. Um so again based on estimates our public services 15% cap is 167814 and so to make the numbers work we had to reduce those by the amounts listed for other projects for CDBG um saving grace the acquisition with rehab they're requesting 500,000 and we did an estimated 5% of ADC at 25,000 And um we do have some un applied for I'll just say um CDBG funds right now estimated amount is 286,844 and then we're not sure um at this time what our ADC will be. So we listed at TBD to be determined. Um total housing and potentially infrastructure or parks project um total is 811,844. Um and then uh economic development the UC Merrced application um they requested 38,000 and then we're doing about a 5% ADC on that for a total of 39,900. So for home uh projects, home funded projects, housing activities, we have a maximum available at 840,612. Um which is why we're putting the community action agency program into the home funds. Um again, it could go one way or the other, CDG or home. Um they requested 200,000 and we're doing 5%

project costs of um equal to 10,000. So 210,000 towards that and uh we don't have a use yet yet yet for our 2026 um remaining home funds. So with a 3% ADC calculation we have about 576,000 to go towards a TB determined project. Um and then we were required to set aside 15% um automatically towards community housing development organization or CHTO projects. Um and with ADC that amounts to 54,075. So for CDBG and home administration um CDBG at the top there um for our direct admin uh we've got budgeted again these are all estimates 131,000 um for our direct admin with indirect admin we um normally just go a straight 10% but this time just based on what we've spent the last couple years for indirect we're lowering that to 20,000. um continuum of care um for their uh point of time count assistance um that's actually raised uh from 38,000 to 50,000 for their request. So, total admin estimated 201600. And then for home funds, um, Project Sentinel and Fair Housing Services, um, they're requesting 35,000 this year, which totally uses up our estimated admin funding. In fact, they requested, I think it was 37,000, and our estimates are only at 35 at this time. So, tonight um we'll hold a public

meeting to um requesting you hold a public meeting to receive public comment um on anything that we went over tonight um with presentation and in the admin report. Um any council comments or uh direction uh regarding the public service funding and projects um we'll um we'll request and accept. And then um for finalization of the annual plan budget, we've got a 30-day public review and comment period scheduled for March 23rd to April 22nd. And then again, um May 18th, um we've noticed a public hearing and approval of final draft. Um we've got a couple meeting dates. Um April 6th and April 20th if you want to come back and talk more about project funding and then um May 4th also available. And then after the scheduled final public hearing, we've got the first meeting in June now. will come back and finally ask anything.

Okay. Thank you, Kim. Any questions? Questions from the council? Council member Smith. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Miss Nut, for an excellent presentation. A lot of work. Yeah,

I can only imagine. Um, and I think this council would be hardressed to really nibble at any of these suggestions. Um, I did have one kind of out of the box thought. I know some amount of these proposed decisions were driven by the 99 responses we got from the public outreach um, process. We also very recently took a larger poll to sort of gauge where the community was in terms of their priorities for us. And one of the things that tested really high among our residents was um not just public safety but reducing fire response times. Um I noticed that under the CDBG public facilities and improvements grant guidelines, one of the things that the government permits is funding for firehouses. In fact, the word firehouse is expressly included in the guidelines. Was there any thought or discussion given to, you know, having a line item here for some amount of funding that we need desperately for station 56 in district 6?

Uh, I don't know if Scott wants to jump in, but um we're currently talking about um an available funding source from HUD called section 108. Um it's basically a loan against our CDBG funds for future years. So um we started to do it for the child and be project five, six, seven years ago. Um and then we got a a lot of program income for CDBG and ended up using CDBG for it. So we could do the same thing for the fire station, but certainly the 2026 extra funding there we could put towards it as well. So that would be in addition to the projects proposed here or instead of um that's your final decision to make.

Okay. Well, fair enough. But I mean it doesn't necessarily need to displace one of these projects if there was a long-term loan for 56. Um yeah. Okay. Um we do the available funding for that's there in the section 108 um sort of pool of funding is to my understanding um the exact need that we need for the fire station for to fill that gap. It's like 5.4 million. Okay.

Well, I know there's going to be a later discussion about congressionally directed spending and we're making a request. Um, you know, that's a little bit like buying a lottery ticket, but I'm hopeful. But, um, you know, my voice would be to the extent that there's a way to use this funding avenue to get funding for station 56. Um, the absence of that station makes our community as a whole a little bit less safe. Um, so I'd really like to see that be a priority for discussion internally. But in terms of what's proposed, um I think staff did a very nice job and I appreciate the uh the value shown and the assignment of not just line items but also the the dollars uh assigned to them. So thank you.

Thank you. Additional questions

Kim. Two questions. one um the the program that um uh for youth at risk youth and addressing um you potentially gang violence that that uh yeah the youth for Christ central valley um for youth services uh can you explain um it says accepted preliminary preliminarily not recommended um amount request was $24,000 could you just explain some of the the reasonings or the reason behind there you know What was the what's that program about? How um you know effective do you think it could be towards addressing uh some of the issues we've had in our town lately?

I gathered some notes for myself um to possibly talk about that. So pros would be it's uh there's there is a need in the community for anti-gang programs. Um it does it would meet a national objective which is a requirement of CDBG. Um, the cons would be that the location they're proposing is not secured by the organization. Um, I believe they're requesting to use Lifeline CDC's lease. So, I mean, that's not obviously preferred. Um, they are an organization new to CDBG funding, so there would be a lot of kind of hands-on from housing staff. Um, that would have a high impact on us. Um, we're a staff of three. Um that would be a fifth program, fifth public service program for us, which is getting to be a lot. Um and then there's also kind of a question um as we were scoring of, you know, their ability to do the the income eligibility certifications. Um, I mean they could answer that and you know we can meet with them later and talk about that. But

that's a good point you make too where you have to monitor and ensure right this money is being spent wisely. You have to ensure people are following the terms of the grant. So the more programs you got to watch the harder it is on stress of staff CDG programs um for low 51% of the participants in the programs have to be low to moderate income. So they do have to do income eligibility for every single person that participates in that program and it's being new to CDBG. A lot of organizations don't know how to do that. So we there would be some hands-on teaching we'd need to do for them.

Okay. And last year we funded Joe urban improvements in part out of this. Is there any any other city projects be it you know park improvements um you could be sidewalk projects other things that have been discussed this go around? Um, regarding Johar Park, we've talked about this in our staff um for our CIP projects. We could potentially do kind of a phased funding um approach for Joer Park um phase two of funding with the 20 the rest of this 2026 funds. Um and that's one reason I threw it out there where there would be extra dates to talk about project funding. Um, we could I could show you how that would work or, you know, we can get with parks community services with Chris and see if there's anything else that he could use those funds for or if there's something else that we could use those for.

Okay, Chris, if you want to come up real quick, anything any ideas you have or anything on your wish list?

Good evening, Mayor, City Council. Chris Jensen, Parks and Community Services. Um, as Mrs. Nut said, we have had the conversation about additional amenities at Joe Herb. Earlier this year, um, we were doing some assessments on the electrical on the lighting system there. It's just as old as the rest of the infrastructure at that site. Uh, the current allocation, although grateful, is not enough to do the lighting as well, and it's one of the highest costs for operating there is the old H hallogen light system. So that would be our suggestion is to finish that project with that remaining need. Okay. How much is that going to cost? You know, uh the quote last year from a local vendor was about 250,000.

Additional questions before we open the public hearing. Council Jean. Um could you go to the survey portion of the presentation? Oh, this one or

um yeah, let me see here. Page five is not Yeah, that one's fine in the one above. Um but for the one above, if you go up one slide, uh so for this one, I'm just trying to understand. Uh so, for example, with the housing, the number one opt activity here was housing opportunities. Um and then when we go down to and then number two was uh assistance for home home buyers. And then when we go down to the greatest needs um I guess I'm just not understanding how number one here is job training and then second is related to home ownership and not related to housing opportunities unless we're saying that they're the same thing here.

Yeah. So this is overall um all the categories all all of these categories here housing neighborhood improvement economic development public services um this is the questions on the survey were asking for housing you know it's a it's a multi-choice we gave them all the potential funding or eligible activity type funding and they ranked the top you know they ranked them from from first to to last on what they wanted to see the survey tabulated and these were the top three for each of those categories. And then there was another question for this next slide that asked, "What are your overall greatest needs in the community for all categories?" And so these are the top five.

Okay, so they're two separate questions pretty much. Okay. Um I thought this one was compiling the one above.

Um just a quick note with regards to the survey here. Um, in regards to some of the comments that were made up here, uh, I think it's important that we don't circumvent community outreach. We pride ourselves in, uh, reaching out to community. And so, I think circumventing that and putting money into parks and reccks or putting money into, um, station 56, I think that circumvents the purpose of this survey. Uh but aside from that, if we go down to the recommended budget for CDBG for 2026 public services,

I believe it's that one. Um the very last number down there is $70,000. Uh could you explain what that number mean real quick? So the requested the the two columns on the right um second of the right would be requested that's the requested amount that they applied for. Um the total of that is 238,229. Our public services cap estimated is 167814. Subtracting that from the ask um would be an over request by 70,415.

Okay. Awesome. Uh, I think that's all I have for now. I'll refrain for later discussion. Thank you. Thank you, Council Jean. Any additional questions before we take public comment? I see no open public hearing. Jennifer, do we have any requests to speak from the public? I have one from Jalisa Lozano. Right. Thanks again. Welcome back. Thanks for hanging with us for a few minutes. Sorry, I barely got the notice like 30 minutes before and I have anxiety not. Sorry. No, you're okay.

So, I was like really

if you could uh just pull the microphone down so we could hear you a little better and then Yeah, you're Yeah, we can see you from there. Okay. Go ahead. Um, my name is Julisa Lozano and I'm creating the Harmony Care well sovereign harmony project. Um, it's to create hygiene supply kits for homeless and LMI people because it takes a great deal of our income. Personally, it's expensive just like um laundry soap and regular basic needs and hygienic needs. And a lot of people aren't aware of how much it takes out of everything else that we're paying for in California. But um I was hoping to propose um a place to distribute that as well as put the money back in to whatever leftover go back to the other um sorry uh noops I lost it. Sorry. But yeah, I was just hoping to propose to get hygiene kits for people and be able to distribute it right there in the LMI community on T Street.

Thank you. No, thank you. Thank you for Is that it? All right, that's it. Yeah, we um those public comments so we hear from you and then we can't discuss it right now. We have to take more public comments. Thank you very much, Jennifer. Anyone else? That's all we had, Mayor. Okay. All right. hear. No additional public comment. We'll close the public hearing um bring it back to council for discussion. Okay. And Kim, today we're just uh obviously we're not making any decisions today. We have future meetings. So you'll lodge some of the comments that we make, but we're not again deciding anything, right? And then we'll set future dates.

Okay. Just a couple comments I would have one um you know the the uh you the need for for youth intervention is is acute and so you know potentially I hearing your points loudly and clearly um you know just potentially not exactly no not completely saying no to that right now. Um and then two, uh the potential to as we have in recent years of of um you know, if we have the good opportunity to do projects such as Jover Park, uh you know, such as a fire station, I think there's a lot of value here in in um in funding some of those items as well. All right, Council Smith.

Thank you. you. So, I mean, like I said a few minutes ago, um to the extent there could be a pathway to get CDBG loan monies to help us fund Station 56, even if it's just a backup, I'd like to know from staff what that looks like so council can consider that and potentially give direction in the future. Right now, we don't have that information in front of us. And I think, you know, we've made it a top priority among priorities. I think we need to act like it. So, there's a potential funding source. I think we should know more and I would appreciate that. All right, Counc.

Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I would agree to that statement as well. I think it it has been a a large um policy decision by this council to uh look at different funding sources and if we can leverage our dollar in CDBG and and home funding, um would love to see that information for station 56. um doesn't mean we we we're not going to do it this cycle, but knowing for next cycle and being prepared for it um would put us in the best position uh to find that that funding for uh the fire station. And it that doesn't mean that we don't do other uh or we don't go for other areas of funding such as earmarks that we'll discuss later. But I think if we can find any funding uh for that station, it's important. Um mayor brought up Joe Herd Park. We had a discussion last year uh funding for that. Would love to see us obviously uh complete that policy decision by the council and move forward um and and that HUD funding. So uh appreciate the the good work. And you know, I I would like to see Youth for Christ. Uh I think we're it there is a need there is a a they do niche work in that area. Um and seeing more information on if we could may not work out this time but may be a further discussion with them on this what it takes to to do public services CDBG funding. So thank you.

All right. Additional comments. All right. See none. I think um casual your item for the buzzer.

Yeah. Um I I agree that we need youth services. Um I think we have seen in our community recently um the need to engage our young people and to ensure that they're safe. Um and so I'm definitely in favor of ensuring that we have extended youth services. Um, again with the comment I made earlier and what the rest se some council members up here has mentioned. Um I'm not in favor of using CDBG funding here uh for station 56 or for uh Joe Herb in this particular case um because I I believe that we need to center the voices of community and if their greatest cons greatest greatest needs are job training, affordable home ownership services, uh child care, youth centers, I think that's where we should really put the money for um what our community needs are rather than um putting it where we believe it should go. So I I'm not fond of potentially moving funds around.

Yeah. No, certainly note that. But yeah, we got to look too at the at the whole kind of uh universe of different government services and all the different government organizations that that do things. We you know we're within the city. We obviously are the ones that that do housing more than any other government entity. Uh sometimes there's very good opportunities for housing. Sometimes those opportunities aren't necessarily there. Sometimes there's good opportunities for city services. Other times or city projects, other times not so much. So, um that's it. Council member Dupon

Kim, can you remind us how much we approved last year for um a Joe Park and and home project funding if I if I recall is close to almost 700,000. Um I don't have that number with me right now. It's 7 something in the end. And I think it did include some activity delivery cost for us for housing division. Um I could get that for you. So it's it's a previous uh policy decision that the council has made previously in on on home funding. Yeah. And actually just to correct you on that, it's CDBG funding. Home Thank you. Home funds can only be used for home uh housing units. Thank you.

It's CDBG. Thank you. All right. No, all good comments. Um here anybody else? Okay, seeing none, we'll uh move on. Kim need anything else from us? It seems just those comments. Thank you. Discussion and we'll move on to our action items.

Agenda item K, action items. K1, adopt a resolution authorizing the police department to apply for grant funds from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Alcohol Policy uh Partnership Program Grant. Good evening, mayor, council, city manager, and city attorney. Uh Steve Stanfield, chief of police for the city of Merrced. Today, I have one of a couple grants before you. Grant applications through Alcohol Beverage Control Partnership Program, uh commonly known as the ABC grant. We requesting an application approval to on this five item vote to apply for $100,000 in reimburseable funds through ABC to do enforcement uh alcohol enforcement throughout our community to include inspections of alcohol sales per uh businesses, some minor decoy operations to try to prohibit minors from possessing alcohol. and then some uh social media and educational funds to help us educate our public and keep kids from consuming alcohol in our community.

Thanks for questions from council. Council member Harris. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, Chief. Um having seen in a number of uh my jobs both as a paramedic and as a deputy the effects of alcohol on minors, uh I fully support this grant which cost the city nothing. Uh, frankly, I can't imagine anybody not uh being in favor of that. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Harris. Any other questions? Jennifer, anything from the public? We don't have anything for this one. All right. No public comment on this item. Back to council for discussion and or a motion. Motion. Second.

Okay. We have a motion from Council Member Harris, second from Mayor Pro Tim Bole. Pending discussion. Council member Jean.

So, reading the staff report, it doesn't include um DUI checkpoints or saturation patrols. Uh both of which I I disagree with. Um but historically, this grant has been used to conduct both of those activities. And until I see it happens, I'm I'm not fond of getting this grant. Uh I know I spoke at the chief before uh the way I see how we uh reduce alcohol consumption especially with young people is we have like sober right we throw parties where we don't encourage alcohol consumption um and so I'm not fond of how this grant has been historically used and until we change the way that we um address alcohol consumption in Merrced I'm not in favor of this.

That's correct. Council member Zong, just to clarify, this is not a grant for DUI checkpoints or saturation patrols. This is not a DUI grant. This is an alcohol beverage control grant. And the focus of this grant is education and enforcement to keep minors from drinking and consuming alcohol. That's not part of this grant. So, uh, to your point, correct. This is not a DUI or a DUI saturation patrol enforcement grant. That is a separate grant. That's the OTS grant. That is not this grant. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Chief. Additional comments hearing no or seeing no further comments, we'll call for the question. Jennifer,

we have a motion by Council Member Harris and a second by Mayor Pro Tim Bole. The motion will include the adoption of resolution 2026-16, a resolution of the city council of the city of Merced, California to apply for grant funding and accept grant funding if awarded from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Alcohol Policing Partnership Program. Mayor and Council, please cast your votes. Okay, the motion passes with council member Jeang voting no.

Thank you, Jennifer. Item K2. Okay. Agenda item K2, approval of a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $5,549 from the unreserved unencumbered balance of fund 8503 asset forfeite transferring to the general fund and appropriating the same to the police department for the purchase of a TLK 100 wave two-way radios. Good evening, council. Welcome, sir. I want to introduce Sergeant Odum who will be presenting this tonight. So, he's going to be presenting this item, the sergeant of our gang unit. Thank

uh good evening, mayor, city manager, city council members. U like my chief said, my name is Stephen Odum. I'm a sergeant here at the Merced Police Department and I supervise the gang unit. I've been doing it now for three years. Um so, my request to you today is a purchase of these TLK 100 wave two-way radios uh through asset forfeite. Uh they're a pushto talk, just the click of a button. um obviously for covert encrypted uh radio communications. Uh just to give you a little example of what we deal with, I have a unit of four officers. Uh we're proactive street team. Uh many times when we see something or my guys sees something, uh we have to revert to good oldfashioned phone call, text message, and things are happening fast. Uh our unit is rapidly evolving. a lot of um situations that come out that have to act fast. And with these wave radios, it gives you that pushto talk next tell feature. And it connects to the cellular tower, so it's quick. Uh we've had the luxury of actually using these uh radios in the past. Uh when the California Highway Patrol came down and assisted us a few months ago, or excuse me, a few weeks ago, uh they have these wave radios. A lot of task force units, gang units um in our valley and in California are using these radios. They're encrypted, like I said. Um, and so they're going to help us do our job, obviously, safer, more efficient, and faster. And more importantly, whenever we leave the city, uh, we have no communication. So, if we a lot of times our operations take us outside the city limits, whether that be search warrants, high-risk, uh, search warrants or stops, probation, pearl, compliance checks. Uh, we have no communication with each other, let alone the sheriff's office, who we will have them help us out. So, by having these radios, I'm requesting six. Again, I have four officers. Myself is five. One spare. Uh that spare would be given to an allied agency who's helping us. Um

so, they could hear our traffic. Um god forbid someone takes off running, then we just hope that that deputy uh just standing in the right area because we have no comms. Um so, that's the the purpose of getting these radios. Um and again, they're encrypted. And lastly, um, the they have the ability to connect with other agencies. So, like I said, CHP, Department of Justice, a few other task force agencies have them, Modesto PD's task force. Um, so all we have to do is call the provider and tell them, hey, we're working with this this agency today. They can connect and now we can talk to their radio system, if that makes sense.

Any questions? Thanks, Sergeant. Any questions? Okay. Charge six for about $5,500. Uh yeah. So, it's a two-year uh subscription. Within that two years, you get all six. You get a charging station for all six and then the subscriptions. $35 a month for each radio. Um which again, two years. And that's after that. There's no reoccurring costs. It ends there. You own the radios. Uh from there, if we decide, you know, we'll cross that bridge when we get there, if we want to renew it or go elsewhere. What's their lifespan? Their anticipated lifespan. They last a couple years.

Uh from everyone I've talked to, from the people that actually use them, uh they're excellent. They I've heard one negative thing as far as telling me, hey, this, you know, can last you x amount of years. I haven't heard that. But everyone that I've worked with that have these, they're exceptional. One example is working with Department of Justice. One of their agents was in Southern California and this individual was in Merrced and simple push the talk, it sounds like a cell phone. It's as clear as day. Um, so they all go off the network. It's just cell tower. So they're pretty durable from what I've used. Council Harris.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Sergeant. Um, do you have any direct communications? If you're not in range of a cell tower, can you go direct from radio to radio? Yes. So, there's 10 channels on these wave radios, right? Thank you. Additional questions from council. Anything from the public? We do. We don't have anything for this item. Back to council for further discussion, additional questions, andor a motion. Move to approve. Dupont got Harris. He he got it this time. Dupont Harris. Okay. Have a motion by council member Dupont and a second by council member Harris. Um, mayor and council, please cast your votes.

Okay, the motion passes unanimously. Okay, thank you, Jennifer. Sergeant ODM, appreciate you being here and enjoy those fancy radios.

Agenda item K3, request to adopt inspection procedure policy for multi-unit residential buildings pursuant to California Health and Safety Code section 179970.7. Mayor and Council, uh, this item is coming to you, uh, as a result of state law. Um, it was Assembly Bill 548 and and now, uh, codified in California Health and Safety Code, uh, 179 70.7. And what this is about, it deals with multi-unit residential buildings. If our code enforcement officers or our building inspectors identify one of the units as substandard, there is a an OB objective list of of issues that could be identified. And if those issues are identified, the officer or the inspector is to uh document and take pictures and then to decide if adjoining units uh require inspection and then undergo the inspection or a reasonable attempt to inspect. So, we're talking adjoining units uh top, bottom, and size. And if it's um looks like it's an issue greater than that, then additional units as necessary. Uh we had a couple of ways to go about

adopting uh or proposing the adoption of this policy and we decided to uh bring it before you for the um most public way to get this policy on our books and I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Questions for our city attorney? Okay, Jennifer, any comments from the public? I do have one from Ashley Marie Suarez. Okay,

welcome back, Ashley.

Good evening. Although it's great that the city wants to comply with state law, the city has yet not adopted the municipal code um companion health and safety codes, including health and safety code 17920.3 and 17920.10 to make sure that the code enforcement has updated criteria for what is considered substandard housing. Before this policy is adopted, we urge that the city conduct outreach and meaningfully engage the residents of Merced to truly understand what these substandard conditions look like to ensure it can be prop properly captured and addressed by this proposed policy that has been presented to the public for the very first time today. Additionally, I wanted to highlight that on in the policy that was attached um exhibit or not exhibit A, pretty much all the pages say exhibit A. Um, under determination, it does have an non-exhaustive list of violations that could be reasonably affecting other units, including mold, mildew, pests, and or lead hazards. And I wanted to also make sure that things like plumbing leaks or unsupported or un un uh supported walls were also added to that list. Um, as well as making sure still under determinations that a definition for severe or widespread defects are included in the policy to really capture what exactly would qualify as severe or widespread de uh widespread defects for a code enforcement officer to inspect the uh remaining units of that building. Um, under C, notice of violation requirements, I also wanted to ask for the city to define reasonable time as it says that upon the conclusion of the inspection and within a reasonable time, the code enforcement officer shall draft a notice of violation. Um, and reasonable time to me sounds like 30 days, but it should really be specified or should point to any um existing policy that defines that clearly. And

for D reinsspection, the code enforcement officer building inspector must re must schedule a reinspection, but it is not defined uh what that time frame is. And so we suggest that it includes within 30 days. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Jennifer, anything else from the public? That's all we had. Mayor, thank you, Mr. Cornwell. Um any response to the comments from Miss Suarez?

Uh yes. One comment is um any delay in the adoption of this resolution is further delaying compliance with the state law. And uh two, as far as um when the speaker was reading uh the examples of issues to be determined, the exact list comes from health and safety code 17920 uh.0. There are 17 headings of what can uh justify a substandard uh unit. And if you'd like me to read that, I will request. I think we're okay. Request.

All right. Um, I think that's all the issues I want to respond to. Okay. So, your recommendation would be if we need to we need to move forward and and approve this to get into compliance, but then if there's any other addition issues, we can work on them in the future. Yes. And I'm willing to uh discuss additional issues, but this is for someone to a law and not yeah much flexibility there. Got it. Council member Smith.

Thank you. I think what the city attorney is saying is that he adopted the language of the state law. Um I wanted to sunshine something for my colleagues and for the community. Uh last Thursday afternoon, the city attorney and the city manager hosted a focus group on not just this multi-unit inspection ordinance, but also the anti-slumark ordinance that we're going to talk about a little bit. Um, participants in the meeting were Miss Suarez from Leadership Council, also Miss Blanco from Faith in the Valley, um, a local property manager, Aaron Ham, and, uh, Greg Dzakis, who's a local representative of the California Apartment Association. Um, I was fortunate to be there. I can say that it was a tremendous discussion with people who want to get to the same place of providing habitable housing, maybe from different perspectives. Um, and my thoughts were not only conveyed to Mr. Cornwall at the time, but I think he took some notes from the tenant advocates and the property managers and the landlord um, representatives in the room as well. So, um, folks have had a seat at the table, which is important to note, not and not just, uh, discussing this this evening. I want to do want to ask this bill kind of seems like it's codifying in statute what I learned in law school is probable cause. It would seem to me that our code enforcement staff and the chief can chime in if he likes. If they found a reason to think that one unit of a housing block was uninhabitable, they probably have a reason to inspect in a join unit or others. Um, does this proposed ordinance change anything about how code enforcement team might view and inspect a multi-unit housing?

Uh, it does not. And in fact, it is how code enforcement and and the uh building inspections go about their business. We're just required to have the policy on the books. So it will not change um their approach to the job. So we we're in compliance with state law, but also now we're sure we're sure that we're approaching these inspections in the right way. Correct. All right. Thank you.

And there is one thing I wanted to add. Um, regarding the time to come back for reinspection and the time given, I would recommend uh uh flexibility for our code department and inspectors because all uh violations aren't the same. So, um they are uh quite uh competent and familiar with um approaching a reasonable amount of time pending the issues that they see and uh putting a specific number uh may not fit particular situations.

All right. Thank you, sir. Council her.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to go disagree with the county council and I think it's city attorney too much time with the county. Um, I think it's reasonable to put in um time frames that are subject to to modification, but I think if you don't put any uh goal in, then you haven't really set an expectation. And I think complicated uh inspections can be um accepted from that. But I think for the most part you can set a date if it's 30 days or not. Uh and if it's not at least have a vehicle where it's made um it's elevated to somebody who can say yes I agree you can you can extend that by two weeks you can extend that by how many days otherwise it just has the runs a risk of falling off into the void. So, I certainly don't want to delay the adoption of this tonight, but I think we should look at that in the future as a change. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Councilman. City Trey Cornel, your response on a good council. I agree with uh Council Member M. Harris here. I I think that it's important to include timelines. Um, I think that's what happens when our when our residents I feel like there's echo. Got it. You agreed with Harris, so it kind of threw the whole system out of whack.

Yeah. So the the issue that residents tend to see is that they tend to keep having to make reports and nothing happens and then in this resolution it doesn't give them a time of when what's the next step, right? And so I think uh adding in time frames here is actually very beneficial to our residents and I think that's something we should include. Uh with regards to the determination, are we able to uh reference that code that you're you're talking about for the city attorney or is that something that we are not allowed to add into the resolution in terms of determining determination for violations? It's in the It's It is in the policy.

I must have just I must have missed it. Oh, I can point your attention uh to the purpose section. Okay, I see it here. A unit is substandard as defined in section 17920.3.

Thank you. Um and then if we look at uh section C notice of violations um there's a the the word advice here. So it reads the code enforcement officer/building inspector shall draft a notice of violation to advise the owner/operator and tenant of each known violation. um for that advice. Does that mean that that they're not required to abate or is is that an advice or is that a legal term that I'm just not aware of? That's referring to bring their attention to the violation notice like put them on notice of a violation not advisory not like it's

required to uh satisfy. Okay. So it still means that they are required to abate whatever violations that they have. Correct. Okay. Yeah. cuz when I was reading the what AB 548 they use uh repair or bait rather than advice. So I was just wondering if there was any sort of differences in terms of the terminology used. Either is is fine.

Understood. Um and then are there so my understanding is that this is just outlining the process and procedure. Uh but are there any inclusion of penalties with regards to what's this this resolution is referring to penalty for not uh complying or not abating violations? No, this resolution is just ensuring the city has a policy.

Okay. So, as it stand, uh when we inspect a property and they have violations and then they don't fix it, what's the next step after that? That's been on the books for some time. find uh receiverhip, criminal complaint, those are all remedies at the city's disposal. Okay, that's all I have. Thank you.

All right, council Harris, I'll turn to you first to clarify what you're requesting. Is it it's under item C, donuts of violation requirements? Just want to be 100% clear upon conclusion inspection, comma, and within a reasonable time. Is that the the change that you're requesting? Setting a date. Yes, but it's not uh I'm not saying it needs to be changed before we adopt it. Okay. Council Jean, that's what you're saying as well. For example, the section you referenced C upon conclusion of the inspection, comma, and within a reasonable time setting a time frame there. Yes, that and and section D with

reinction. It doesn't it just say must schedule. So there's no time frame. Got it. What um council Jean, what uh time frames would you suggest in B and C? Uh I would believe 30 days for a reasonable time in section C. And then for reinspection, I would imagine that's after abatement. And so I would say within two weeks. So 14 days. Okay. 14 days. 30. Council members uh Harris, what numbers would you prefer? I would do 30 and 30.

Okay. All right. Any objection to those requests? Council member Smith.

Thank you. Um, I'm a little bit confused because there are at least two time frames stated in section C. One, code enforcement has a quote reasonable time in which to provide notice of the violation and then the notice of violation has to specify at the very bottom of the second page a time frame in which to make the corrective actions. Um, in terms of providing the notice, that seems like that could just be in the ordinary course of business. We don't want our code enforcement officers getting tied down by bureaucracy. But I don't see a problem with that. I think what we're really talking about is a time frame in which to make corrective actions. And this goes back to the city attorney was saying, you know, all violations are going to be different. It takes different amount of time to change out a light switch versus get a water recirculator versus take a unit down to studs and fix black mold. So I would suggest something more like in the commercial lease context which is corrective actions have to begin within 60 days and proceed with reasonable diligence something like that because I don't think we can be smart enough sitting up here to know all the context that can fit in a 30-day or whatever. I understand the intent and I agree with it, but I think we're just going to find out that this section of the ordinance is unworkable if we give it too short of a fuse. Plus, we're not the experts in buildings and code enforcement.

Okay. Uh Chief, just for my think uh 30 days does seem a little tight, especially you could have people who are out, someone on vacation, maybe they're gone for a week or two, and then you have a lot of other cases as well. Um, what do you think?

Thank Thank you, mayor. Um, I think one of the things we have to remember is we're relying on vendors that are not city employees. So, we have a we have a landlord that is trying to fix any number of these issues you bring up and we're subject to a third party contractor that's going to be doing that work. Um, I go back to uh last year and the trouble we were having in this community getting asbestous abatement because all the asbestous abatement companies were at the Palisade fires removing asbestous from all the homes that had been burnt there. So, we were on a very lengthy time frame waiting for that and it wasn't for any fault of anybody in this community. Um, I I understand everybody's intent as I sit here. The only thing I could think of is we're we're we're designating a policy that code enforcement is going to have to be subjected to a timeline that we're going to have to rely on a third party vendor to uphold. And that's that's what I'm having a struggle with over here is how do I hold a third party vendor to a timeline because they have no allegiance to this policy. So that's my only concern that that's the light bulb in my head right now. Like I have no problem doing it if we were doing the work, but we're not. If if that kind of makes sense, mayor.

Yeah, I think there's a balance. I mean, the point's well taken where you say a reasonable time, okay, you know, someone could lag for a long time, but if you set too tight of a time frame, then you're essentially setting yourself up to, you know, not being able to comply with your own ordinance, which then then that's a whole other can of worms as well. Council Dupont.

Thank you, Mayor. I think council members Smith's uh point um may bring a resolution to this of still providing the intent of a time frame but us not knowing obviously the intricacies of how to repair um you know the habitability issues and how long that may take. providing that reasonable time but still a time frame of either 60 days to show that they're reasonably working to mitigate the issues I think meets us in the middle. And so I' I' I'd support something like that.

Council Harris,

thank you, Mayor. Um, and I appreciate your uh view on this, but Brookdale Gardens is what I'm concerned about where the tenants never had any information. I don't see that it's unreasonable to uh set a time frame that if they can't meet it, at least get a status report and say this is why it's going to take longer because a vendor is uh either nonresponsive or a vendor is getting parts. Uh what I want to avoid is somebody a tenant just left in the dark when some time frame or no time frame is specified and the problem goes on and their view is nothing is getting done. So you can you can relax the uh time I'm proposing so as not to be an absolute time but a time that it's either uh resolved or a status report is given to the tenant.

Okay.

So I I believe we're talking about two separate things here. Um so the original point with regards to reasonable time um both of those that I mentioned are tied to code enforcement not tied to the third party or the homeowner. Uh so again as it reads here upon the conclusion of the inspection and within a reasonable time the code enforcement officer/building inspector shall draft a notice of violation. that time is to our code enforcement officer rather than to the third party. And so my thoughts are that we should be expecting our officers to make a notice after an inspection within a certain time frame, right? And that's all it's asking there is that we make sure that they get it done. And so this way we don't have uh violations just piling up and nothing's moving forward. So just ensuring that we go move forward with each of these uh violations. And then with reinspection again this is not tied to the repair itself right after the repair has been made. And so this reinspection is based on the code enforcement when they show back up after repairs have been made. And so that should be within a certain time period as well. Uh so once repairs have been made the code enforcement officer should show back up in my opinion within two weeks rather than 60 days. uh to verify that these these repairs have been made is I believe we're talking about two separate things u because what council me and Dupont mentioned are with regards to the repairs are actually being made by the owner rather than the restrictions of time that we put on our own code enforcement officers.

Councelor Smith.

Yeah. So at this point is when I get confused um with if we're going to look at Brookdale Gardens as the model, the the issue is not that the residents are not getting notice from our code enforcement officers. I think that's happening actually very quickly. The issue is the owner is almost refusing to repair the property. So if council wants to overprocess and set limits on our officers timeline to give a notice, I mean, you know, okay, we can turn to the chief and see what's reasonable, but the one that matters is the time frame in which to make corrective actions. And every every violation is different. And we have to trust our officers that are doing a good job to know better than us sitting up here today what that time frame is. The the point is that it has to get fixed. It has to get fixed reasonably quickly given the circumstances. So, um I think we're focusing on the wrong part of the of the ordinance quite honestly. I think they both matter. So it we should have a standard for ourselves as well as a standard for we'll get we'll get back to you in a minute. Council member Harris was before. Council Smith, was that it?

I was just going to reiterate. I mean I you know the point is that the the property owner proceeds with reasonable diligence to correct the the action and they have to start within a certain time frame. So, I'm not giving them 60 days for everything, but they have to get started. And we don't know sitting here what what any individual violation is going to require, but they have to act with reasonable diligence. And if it takes 12 months because we're waiting for a boiler to get off of a ship somewhere, then that doesn't mean they aren't acting with reasonable diligence. Everybody's involved. Everybody's getting notice. But I think if we try to overlegislate the time frame, we're going to end up with an ordinance that is well-meaning but is not implementable. And that doesn't help our residents or attendants.

What if we before we take on council member Harris, council member Jeang, you're you're next and council Je after that. I mean what if council Harris you made the suggestion earlier we approve it as is tonight and then we can have you know if any council members want to work on it with staff you know come back maybe in 90 days or something if there's any recommendations as a time. I think a lot of it too, as we're saying, is going to depend on the specifics of how our code enforcement officers work and, you know, we're not in the best position sitting here to be able to determine that. Council Harris,

thank you, Mayor. Um, two items. Uh, Council Member Jeang is is correct. Uh the draft of the notice of violation isn't isn't dependent on anybody else. And I would ask the chief uh is it reasonable that that notice of violation could be drafted within 30 days. I think that's very reasonable.

And the second point um which council member Smith brings up which is valid is the time frame. And that will vary. That will depend on a lot of things. But what I what I'm advocating for here is uh a certain amount of time where reports have to be given and progress reports so that residents are not left in the dark.

Counc agree. And then I guess I have a question for uh our city attorney. Uh you mentioned earlier that the the penalties are already we're already following this uh procedure. It's more like just putting into writing and then there's already penalties. Um and so as it stands right now uh does property owner do they provide any sort of updates? Are there any sort of time frame? um what's been going on relative to are they being penalized and they're just not doing as council member or paying any fines or making any sort of of uh repairs as council member Smith kind of mentioned. Um I'll start with that. Thank you for the question. Uh, Councilman, um, my earlier point was that the penalties you referring to is outside the scope of this policy, but that they are on our books. So, city c uh code enforcement identifies violations, provides times to repair. Uh owners comply or don't comply um as the specific situation and unveils itself. I'm I'm sure there's not a 100% compliance. Uh at times they get more fines and the

price goes up. Uh other times it's referred to my office for a receiverhip and we put in place a temporary ownership to fix the uh the issues. Uh so it varies the remedies. Uh but my my point was just that it was on the books. Further discussion, questions or a motion. Councilman may have another question, I think. No, I mean that you kind of uh I retracted earlier because I responded to uh council Smith out of order. So that was just another question. Thank you.

Okay. No, thank you. All right. Good discussion. Mr. City manager Brad want to lay in sir.

Yes. Thank you. um appreciate all all the good dialogue on this tonight. It's important to get these types of conversations correct and so I think it's important to kind of go back and review the document as it's drafted. So on page five, it's very clear that part of the notice that's going to be provided includes a time frame from the person providing the document back to the tenants which is going to go to you know who has to make the uh the repairs with a time frame to make the corrective actions. Right? So that information is going to be included in that in that notice that goes out. So I think it will be representative represented in the document that goes out. So I think that uh information is provided and so um I think the question comes up if what happens at the end of that time frame if it's not addressed is there a subsequent uh time or a process to prov provide an update. I think that I don't know that we need to have it in this policy, but if you want to have a informal uh response from me or direction from the chief, we can work through that. If we get through the process and we haven't made progress, we can work through subsequent documentation to the tenants uh to address their needs so they they're aware of what was happening with regard to the repairs. All right. Additional questions, discussion, or a motion.

I'll move to approve the draft as presented. Second. Have a motion by Council Member Smith and a second by Council Member Dupont. The motion will include the adoption of resolution 2026-17, a resolution of the city council or city of Merced, California establishing the inspection procedure policy for multi-unit residential buildings. Mayor and council, please cast your votes. And the motion passes unanimously.

Okay. All right. Thank you all for good discussion. And again, if there's any issues, uh, would welcome a return to council for more, uh, okay, taking us to, uh, item K4, Jennifer, the UC Village, UC Villages annexation. Agenda item K4, approval of a first amendment to the deposit and reimbursement agreement with UC Village LLC, relating to the annexation of approximately 37.2 2 acres of land at the southwest corner of Belleview and Lake Roads called the UC Villages annexation project to the city of Merced and approval of a first amendment to the professional services agreement with Denovo Planning Group.

Thank you Leah. Good evening, council mayor, city manager, and attorney Cornwall. Leah Brown, management analyst um in development services. And tonight you have before you um a couple of amendments to um some documents that we u adopted back in November of 2023. This is in regards to the 37.2 acres of land being annexed um called the UC Village LLC project. Um, this project is on the southwest corner of Belleview and Lake Roads. So, uh, K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K Kitty Corner from UC Merrced and, um, back in 2023, you approved a, um, deposit and reimbursement agreement to pay for environmental services and you also approved a professional service agreement with Denovo U planning and, um, over the course of that time, there have been a lot of back and forth. Um, additional work was required for a traffic study. um there's a lot of biological um uh changes out there in that area and so the contracts just require a little bit more funding and so um you have before you uh a first amendment to that deposit and reimbursement agreement to pay for the environmental services. This is no money that the city's fronting. This is paid by the developer. Um, so there's an amendment to the professional service agreement to increase by I think it's 11,000 and then um the deposit and reimbursement is 11,000 plus 10% for staff time and we need a five votes for this.

Thank you, Leah. Any questions for Miss Brown? Jennifer, anything with respect to public comment? We don't have anything for this item. Okay, back to council for further discussion and or action. Again, it's a 37.2 acre project, potentially 922 dwelling units right across from UC Merrced. Um, great dense multifamily housing, fourtory, five story, twotory. So, yeah, it's a great project. A lot big project, a lot of housing. Okay. Um, questions, comments, discussion? Motion. Motion. Second.

Harrison Ford. We have a motion by council member Harris and a second by mayor prom boil. Mayor and council, please cast your votes. And the motion passes unanimously. Thank you, Jenner. Onto our reports. Agenda item L reports. L1 report on 2027 congressionally directed spending earmark funding request submissions. Thank you.

Good evening, mayor, council, city manager, and city attorney. My name is Jennifer Blackman. I'm the senior management analyst and I'm here to report on our fiscal year 2027 congressionally directed spending or earmark requests and we submitted three um to our representatives um for federal funding consideration. So, in order of um importance, which they asked us to do, project one is fire station 56 and the emergency operations center. This is a $14 million project. We requested 5.4 million. Um we are also as part of this submission, we included that we're exploring the HUD section 108 loan program. Our representative asked us to include that. The project will support the construction of fire station 56 and a coll-located emergency operations center. Um, project two was our regional public safety communications interoperability um project. The funding request was 3 million or is 3 million and those funds will be used to acquire communications equipment compatible with the county sheriff's system so that our officers will have connectivity when they leave the city of Merced. And our third project um is Bear Creek Infrastructure and Flood Protection Initiative. This is a $14 million project for which then assembly member Adam Gray um secured six million in funding and then recently secured 3.15 million in funding. So there is a funding um gap of 4 million and so request we're requesting that to um complete the mitigation projects. So all of these projects qualified

as economic development initiatives and they were submitted under what is referenced as thud which is transportation housing and urban development and so they're all competitive projects um guidance for 2027. Are you laughing at thud? Yes.

Yes, we did too. Um, guidance for 2027 has not been released um by the appropriations commission. So, we're relying on last year's guidance. Um, the submission window was very brief. They opened it at the beginning of March and closed it on Friday, March 6th and Friday, March 13th. So, I'm bringing this to you as a report and um if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Okay. Questions for our public information officer? Anything from the public on this, Jennifer? It's just information only.

We don't have anything there. Okay. Back to council for questions, comments, anything. All right. Need nothing from us. Information only. So, thank you. Thank you. And we appreciate it and good luck. Agenda item L2, Housing Successor Agency annual report for fiscal year 2425. We'll invite Miss Brown back to the podium. Lee, you don't have to rush. That came up really fast. You do enough work. You don't have to You can take your time.

I'll run over here. Okay. So, Okay. So, tonight you have before you um the Housing Successor Agency annual compliance report. Um you've probably remember this from last year. It covers um the fiscal year 2425 and it is a compliance monitoring report um otherwise known as SB 341. Um it's part of the health and safety code section 34176.1. Um back in 2012 with the dissolution of the redevelopment agency, the city of Merced chose to become the housing successor and um this report was prepared in coordination with our associates at RSG Inc. So just to give you a little summary of the finances, um the housing asset fund balance at the end of June 2025 was 9.6 million with 1.9 million in cash. Uh we received 147,185 in revenues, interests, and investments uh loan repayments. We had um a little over 316,000 in expenditures. Approximately $116,895 was administrative. And remember, we had a $200,000 grant for Veterans Village, which was the 20 unit affordable um veteran complex that opened in um November 2025. Um the the city is meeting all housing asset fund requirements and we have no excess surplus to date. We do have five successor agency properties that are all committed or sold and um that is for one affordable project. Um that is our link project which I've talked about over the years. Um they do have an approved um disposition and development agreement and we funded um we have a funding commitment for permanent local housing allocation funding. They have a 365day

escrow but we are well over that with that um the escrow needed to close um within 365 days of the DDA or upon um their completion of their funding package. And so we are near funding now. Um they have an application going out for a 4% TCAT credits in April and then a 9% application going in June. So we're hoping that that will cross the finish line and and get um building permits going by the end of the year. Um the housing asset fund also has approximately 7.3 million in loans receivable from firsttime home buyer loans and developer loans for multifamily rental projects. Um future expenditures of course will be monitored for compliance. So for tonight um we're just looking for um direction to go ahead and file the housing successor agency annual report for the fiscal year and send that off to HCD.

All right. Thank you, Leah. Questions? Jennifer, anything from the public? We don't have anything there. Back to council discussion or a motion. And here we're just uh all we're doing tonight is just uh approving the report. Council Harris. Thank you, Mayor. I move to receive and file the housing successor agency annual report for fiscal year 2024 2025. Second.

Okay. Heading any discussion, seeing none, Jennifer will call for the question. You have a motion by council member Harris and a second by council member Smith. Mayor and councel, please cast your votes. And the motion passes unanimously. All right. After 8:00, we've been going for a little over two hours. Quick break. Okay, we'll take a quick break and then we'll return for item L3.

Not. All right, we will bring the council chambers back to order. We'll resume with our meeting. As soon as you're ready, Mr. Cornwell, uh, we'll be ready to proceed.

Agenda item L3, presentation and discussion of proposed repeat housing code violator program ordinance adding a new chapter 8.53 to the MRSA municipal code. Mayor, council, community members, I am very pleased to be able to discuss uh this proposed ordinance uh that we have titled repeat housing code violator program. The city's uh rental unit stock is uh of significant importance to the city and of substantial interest, substantial government interest to ensure its habitability. And the issue that I was uh confronted with is how to address our more egregious offenders while not layering bureaucracy on uh the majority of rental owners that only come into contact with government when they are renewing their business license and otherwise their um great stakeholders in the community. So over time

uh rental housing can deteriorate due to age. Uh deferred maintenance. Um various issues can address uh the uh can bring it to a substandard condition. And again, uh, we have a small percentage of actors that are consistently, um, on the other side of a notice from the city to, uh, repair their property. So, we came up with a repeat housing code violator. And the basic um the basic rule is that um three unresolved violations within within a 12month period. um get you a notice of determination of being a uh repeat violator and the violation can be municipal code uh state housing fire code California health and safety code that affects habitability, health or safety. So, we're not talking any code imaginable. We are focused on substantive um serious violations that address health, safety, and living conditions.

Um, one of the comments I received uh regarding this proposal is that um other similar ordinances place the standard u at the California Civil Code 1941.1. Um while that is true, I wanted to bring in uh the municipal code and other um codes so that it encompasses all health and safety um codes that could be applicable to a given situation. So, let's go to the owner's uh rights first. The owners uh have a right to be notified of the outstanding violations. Um they're also required to be notified which property um and given a time to uh cure. We'll we'll get to that point shortly. We can talk about the right uh time frame. And then the way um the ordinance is currently prepared uh the owners have a right to appeal to city council the city's determination of um that they are a repeat offender. And I'll get into that further later on in the presentation.

Um, okay. With the appeal, we wanted to make sure that the subject of the appeal is the determination that they are a repeat violator. It is not to revisit the underlying citations. So an appeal uh could look like whether there's been three citations in 12 months or like it's written in the ordinance after two years violations fall off. So maybe the owner is arguing that uh this particular violation is um shouldn't count because of the uh time lapse. Uh so it would be those type of issues but council would not uh be in a position to determine um particular citations and we wouldn't be turning council into code officers to see if that particular code that particular citation is valid or not. The owners do have appeal rights to those um citations, but that would be separate. Um, Councilman Smith, you asked about the standard, and the standard would be um based on substantial evidence that's not arbitrary or capriccious.

Uh from what's on the agenda, we made a um a slight change that the uh position that prepares the administrative hearing packet for the appeal is the city attorney and not the uh city manager. tenant rights. uh any displacement under this ordinance whether it's determined to be substandard or uh one of the remedies is uh revocation of a business license. If either of those two issues occur, uh, a displaced tenant has a right uh to tenant relocation assistance and that is u pursuant to state law again uh California Health and Safety Code 17975. Relocation is defined as two months of established fair market rent, utility service deposits determined by the city and refund of any security deposit held by uh the owner if any. Uh the tenants and prospective tenants are notified of owner's designation as a repeat housing violator.

Oh, I'm sorry. Also, the uh tenants are uh have a right to be notified of the designation of the notice of designation. It's to be posted um near the entry of the rental housing property and also the tenants are to be provided um a copy of the notice as well within 30 days of owner's receipt. We had discussed whether the city should um be the responsible party for notice in this situation. But we're proposing to leave the um onus on the owner and the city to uh check the property to see if that had been done. If it hasn't, it becomes a violation of the ordinance subject to um another um notice of violation and and fine. The city manager or his her design shall maintain and make publicly available a repeat housing code violator list including um including of the list would be

owner property address um list of the violations and that can be updated quarterly. um which was a suggestion that we received. We would maintain an annual list that comes to council. Um but the city manager lists can change uh much more frequently uh as names go on and and come off. penalties. So, we're creating a list. List will be um on the website. So, there is a um a public notice aspect. Uh again, there's tenant relocation if there um is displacement because of uh the violations and um the owner may lose the ability to operate while the uh violations are outstanding. Aside from that, uh the violations are I mean the remedies are what is um in the ordinance and also on our books. Criminal complaint receiverhip uh actions uh and any other remedies at law. Um

so to uh summarize uh this ordinance is about addressing habitability and uh standards of living conditions for tenants in Merrced. We have attempted to shape this in such a way that it doesn't require um additional rules and regulations on all um rental owners in the city which was a comment last time uh this was discussed. And we are trying to target the more egregious owners in the city and come up with uh significant remedies that would deter uh deter the um their behavior of operating in a substandard uh fashion. Uh I will stop there. I know we have um comments and questions from the audience and dis so I'll be back shortly. All

righty. Thank you Craig for all your work on this. We appreciate uh all your hard work in drafting this ordinance. Okay. Do we have any comments or any questions at this time for our city attorney? Okay. Council Jeang, you're first. Oh, Craig, for um the properties, the rental housing units, do they encompass any units that are under section 8 or section 8 housing excluded? It would it would encompass all owners owners in the city? Yes.

Awesome. Um and then you mentioned tenant relocation. Um, is that for permanent relocation or is that for temporary relocation during construction? During repairs, uh, relocation assistance. Okay. Uh, as a result of displacement from the issues.

Awesome. Um, you mentioned receiverhip as well. Uh is that a potential solution when um if the owners are not in compliant with resolving violations? That is a current option. Uh now with something like this on the books, uh what we're adding is the ability to revoke the business license um as an option as well.

Are we able to do both or does one take priority over the other? I imagine you could uh there'd be a situation where there's violation, there's a repeat violator, and then we also go to court to get a u a temporary owner because we've lost confidence that this owner is able to uh um facilitate uh the required repairs. So it doesn't there's a situation where we could take both actions. Awesome. Thank you. Council member Smith.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, city attorney Cornwell, for all your work on this, not just the presentation, but the the thought and effort that went into taking council's direction and crafting actual words on the page. I appreciate it very much. Um so just to to recap I mean some of this is coalescing other authorities in one place some of these are new innovations. Um as I understand it a property owner who's found to have 12 habitability violations sorry three habitability violations in a 12-month period will be a judge by the city to be a repeat housing code violator. Correct. Yes.

Okay. Is there um is there any language in the draft ordinance that would apply to existing code violations? Meaning is there any retroactivity provision or are we talking about from the date of enactment on forward? That's when the three strikes would start acrewing. um as as how it's currently drafted, it's 30 days after enactment, the violations start counting towards the program.

So I know in in the law the bar to have a ordinance apply retroactive retroactively, excuse me, is pretty high, but do you have any thoughts on whether it would be advisable to include that kind of backwardlooking counting of strikes, so to speak? I so for our uh repeat offenders, I really don't think it'll be hard to get or take much time to get uh three violations to be quite candid. I think it could be forwardlooking and still work well.

So, a bad property owner ends up on our list. The list is made public, right? Yes. the there's the potential for the rental um dwelling unit operator to lose their business license. Yes. Right. Um they're going to be subject to all the the remedies of the city to abate the property. Right. Yes.

And tenants have the recourse of mandatory assistance from the property owner if they need to be temporarily relocated to fix their dwelling unit. Yes, we've heard some comments about the potential for retaliation. So, how does how does the draft ordinance um provide a safeguard for tenants against potential for retaliation? Um, I would consider um rental policies um to be a separate lane from the repeat offender ordinance and have that take on its its own um path and discussion. I would I have envisioned this one focused on habitability and accountability. Okay. You've got here in section 8.53.060 tenant safeguards. Subsection B talks about a rebuttable presumption that if a tenant if there's action taken against the tenant within 6 months of them filing a complaint for a violation a code violation that they'll have the benefit of a re rebuttable presumption that the termination of the teny was it for retaliatory purposes. Doesn't that give our tenants who are living in these substandard apartments basically the upper hand in any legal proceeding to get things like for example the relocation assistance?

Well, it c it certainly takes the landlord tenant uh fight to civil court. um how that how that dispute resolves itself. Um I'm not sure. Well, sure. We can't predict how judges are going to rule, but for for the non- lawyers in the room, what what do you mean here by a rebuttable presumption that the retaliation was caused by the fact that the tenant filed the complaint

uh within the time period? Um, the judge can can assume it was retaliatory unless the owner has proof that it wasn't. So, we're basically giving the tenant the high ground. Yes. If they have to go to court. Yes. Yeah. Um, a property owner gets on the list, they want to get off of it. Am I correct in understanding that the property owner either fixes the three violations or they come to city council in a public meeting and try to explain why they shouldn't be on the list? Yes.

Okay. Um I'll just say I like the fact that a bad property owner has to come to council and not some subordinate um commission that doesn't have all the lights on. So part of this is more of a program. you know, making folks stand up in front of our community, I think is important to this. Um, and you said that in an appeal, the standard by which the council would review the property owner's um position as substantial evidence. Can you explain a little bit more in regular terms what that means? So the law is um hesitant to come in between um council and their votes. So if you're however council members want to vote, as long as you have sub substantial information before you to come up with that determination and it's not just on your own, arbitrary, not based on what's being presented in front of you, you're fine. If after the appeal, the owner wants to go to civil court and have your decision uh undone, so to speak.

In a sense, we're council is deferring to the city's determination that the property is substandard. We're not up here trying to make our own determination for the first time. No. No. And it won't be um that was another issue we discussed it. will not be a um a new hearing where you're trying to u uncover whether there's a violation at the unit. Yeah. No factf finding up here on the council das like in DC. Yeah. No.

Um one point of feedback and then I'll pause. Um I maybe I'm misunderstanding the proposal. I would prefer that property owners not be able to wait out their time on the list, meaning they have three violations in a 12-month period. Then they have another 12-month period where they don't have any more violations, but they still haven't fixed the original three that landed on on the on the list. Um, you can correct me, Mr. Cornwall if I'm wrong because it's not unheard of that I am. But I mean I think the path to being no longer on the repeat offender list should either be that you fix the three or more violations or you stay on the list and incur fines and enforcement from our police department. I would agree with that. I know you're referring Oh, here it is. Okay. You're referring to subsection E on 8.53.040. And I can uh revise that section. It currently reads that um if no new serious or uncorrected violations have occurred for a continuous period of 24 months, but I can revise that to include and prior issues have been resolved.

Yeah. If if if you think that's legally permissible, that would be speaking for myself, my preference. All right. Thank you very much for answering my questions. Uh okay, additional questions. Council member Jean. Uh piggybacking off of what council member Smith brought up with regards to the retroactivity. Um so as of whenever the ordinance is implemented um or enacted, everybody starts with a clean slate. Is that my understanding? Yes.

Okay. And then so that means that um as of right as of right now like Brookdale they're considered clean and then residents would still have to make complaints after the ordinance is enacted.

No, that wouldn't be the case. No. And I I say no because this this wouldn't be the only ordinance that would cover the issues at that apartment building. We have current laws that address that issue. So I'm we're not giving them a clean slate for whatever they're doing right now. We have laws to address it. This is a particular program that will be enacted in the future.

I understand. Well, what I mean is that there in terms of they're not considered uh a repeat housing code violator yet. until more complaints come in after the ordinance have been enacted. Correct. Yes.

Okay. Um and then for those violation or those complaints, um do they have to be new violations or can they be repeated violations of the same thing that hasn't been resolved? They can be a that would be a new violation. So an unresolved violation can be cited again at a at a future date if they've gone past the time frame that that code enforcement has given them to resolve it.

Thank you. Um and then you mentioned um addressing retaliation separately from today's ordinance and you mentioned that as a renter kind of ordinance. Is that my understanding?

I thought the question to me was um um a renter protection program or some separate program. And I was I was just saying I didn't put a separate program in here. If that interests council, I could address it at a separate time. Do we foresee that there will be um retaliation either like rental increase or harassment that could be a result of this prior to um a rental ordinance being drafted? I haven't even gotten direction on on that policy. Um the only thing that's in this policy is that time frame we talked about the 6 months um that presumption if the tenant uh is in a subsequent civil dispute over it.

Okay. Um, yeah. I think that's all the question I have for right now. Councilor Dupont.

Thank you, Mayor. Just couple questions. Um, there's reference to fines and fees uh throughout the proposed ordinance. Um, but no necessarily a a fee section in this ordinance. So, I'm assuming these are being related to the current fines and fees that we currently have on the books. Correct. And just for um the audience, it's I believe it's 100 200 300 first violation, second violation, third violation in the enforcement action actions section 8.53.070 subsection A. The last sentence references the owner shall pay tenant relocation assistance and references the health and safety code section. And this may be an IT question as well, but if there's a reference back to the subsection C to 8.5360C that could tie in all of the requirements of tenant relocation assistance, not just health and safety code section. Okay, thanks.

And then my la my last question is uh to that same section enforcement action subsection B. Um there's a a may that is used may refuse to renew or revoke. Is there an intent or an a idea of what causes it to not be renewed or not be or to be revoked? No, I um I typically write may for city um just to give flexibility for particular situations. But I the only may that I mean we have a list of tools.

Mhm. Um we may not want the revocation tool but we want um receiverhip or a criminal complaint. So the may is which tool the city wants for a particular situation. Understood. Thank you. Councelor Smith.

Thank you. I wanted to circle back on the retroactivity point. Um emotionally I want the existing issues that have identified to count. However, as an attorney, I know that the bar, the due process bar is pretty high for us to figure out a way to make past violations violate an ordinance that doesn't yet exist. Um, but my understanding though of the of the ordinance is that when code enforcement goes to reinspect a property for an existing problem, if that problem has not been ameliated, then the old problem becomes strike number one. And I my suspicion unfortunately is that for some problem properties we talked about a lot that the city attorney is right that it's not going to take very long for that list to self-populate. So I I would I would be more comfortable going that route than implement an ordinance that ends up in l litigation because we tried to overreach on retroactivity. Just my thoughts on that.

Okay. Council Dupont.

Thank you. I appreciate you bringing up that point. It I was reading section 8.53.05. 050A and got I would say I almost got to the retroactivity language because of shall evaluate rental house housing property unresolved violations which I was interpreting as retroactivity. Um, but understanding council member Smith's point of code enforcement re-evaluating and seeing if there is an unresolved violation serves as a new violation and serving as violation number one. Um, and it's good that we're ensuring that we're clearing that for the record. Okay, additional comments, questions, council member Jean, uh for the re when if and when the city revokes um a business license, uh could you walk through how that may or may not impact tenants. So that would impact tenants. Yes, there would be an impact. Um during that time the owners out of business uh and their business is renting units. Um so yes they could not go forward with their business without our business license. So, just reiterating here, um, if there's an apartment complex and six units are have multiple violations,

it could potentially be the business license could essentially be taken away and everybody else would need to uh leave as well. Correct. And if that occurred, the owner is uh responsible for tenant relocation assistance. kind of going back to receiverhip. Uh is that something where we could as a city step in and um and abate the the or make the repairs and then um and then seek compensation at a later date from the owner.

Uh that's not that's not how it works. uh receiverhip, you have to get judicial authority. You recommend someone in the business of bringing up uh issues at a property. They get appointed. they get paid off of uh the equity in the property or they sell the property um under judicial oversight and payment is made including the city's uh time and effort spent um is how payment happens in that scenario. Well, I guess my question and excuse me for the definition being wrong, but is there any way or mechanism in which the city could make repairs and ensure that that tenants are able to still stay in the apartment complex? City cannot make repairs because it's not the city's property. Okay. Thank you. All right. What else? Jennifer, anything from the public?

We do have four request to speak forms. Call the speakers, please. If I can get Ashley Marie Suarez, Irma Adame, um Blanca O'Hada, and Pastor Maline to the podium, please.

Harris, you say you want Harris can hold the sign if you want. We're going to use them. Okay. As long as you're not blocking anybody's view. That's why the You can stand behind me if you'd like. All right. Go ahead, Ashley.

Good evening. Before I speak on the repeat housing code violators program, I wanted to uplift new California government code section 54953.4 4 passed in 2025 that requires local jurisdictions to update the means that the public can participate to these meetings under the Brown Act to ensure that the city meets its goal of transparency and accessibility. We urge that prior to critical ordinances and policies such as the ones being discussed today um that impact the quality of life of your constituents are being um approved or denied the city updates its mean of accessing this public meeting including by two-way telephonic service or two-way audiovisisual platform. Now to the topic at hand. Thank you to Councilman Smith, city attorney Cornwell, city manager and development services staff who made the repeat housing code violators program roundtable we had on Thursday possible. It was a very productive uh session even though it was attended by only a handful of guests to speak on citywide housing issues. I would have loved the opportunity to speak on the multi-unit substandard buildings policy during our conversations if given the opportunity. The following are recommendations on the repeat housing code violators program residents who were not invited would like to see incorporated. Number one, a weekly published PDF list of all properties that meet repeat housing code violators definition available in person at the civic center and on the city's website, similar to what health inspections uh and inspectors do. Two, a fee schedule tied to each of the subsequent inspections that result from unresolved violations or reference to the municipal code that code enforcement follows to avoid any confusion. Three, for code enforcement to provide a notice of determination to all current tenants to that property at the time the owner's notice of being designated a repeat housing code violator rather than trusting the negligent landlord that will provide the tenants uh the notice to the tenants themselves. Four, a fund to be established to ensure that if owners do not pay for relocation when an order to vacate uh the property is issued, the city can cover the cost of relocation for the tenants and then the city can pursue reimbursement from the owner however assessed. Five, a clear definition of serious violations as referenced in item E under section

8.53.050, designation of repeat housing. Um, number six, ensure that all sections that state reasonable period of time or an equivalent are defined by a time period such as 30 days or less, especially considering that it is not often code enforcement would provide a cure time longer than 30 days. Seven, that the city takes an action to support an eviction protection program to support item B under section 8.53.060. 06 tenant safeguards to address the gap acknowledged by city attorney Cornwell that would result in a judge finding the owner acting in retaliation. Since this is not civil since this is a civil court case or would result in one residents currently are not legally entitled to legal representation although very necessary such as in the case of retaliatory unlawful detainer cases. If you have any questions about these suggestions please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.

Thank you Ed. All right. Next speaker. Sorry. Um, do we have interpretation for Spanish or did she leave? I think she's Yeah, she just left.

Is there a way she can come back because we have a Spanish uh comment? Um, I don't have her contact information. Okay. Try if you guys want to go for fun, if you want to go ahead and then we'll um we'll try to get her back.

All righty. Well, we work on that. Um, good evening council members and I want to say first of all, you know, thank you so much for for this ordinance. Um, I want to start by saying that because this means a lot to the tenants that have been struggling um that have been feeling the impact of uninhabitable conditions that they are constantly having to live under. Um, and I also want to say that this is the beginning. Um, I'm really thinking about this as the beginning of something that we'll continue to work on hopefully over many years to come. As we know, nothing is perfect and some things always need fixing um or improving. And it's been a year now since tenants at Brookdale first brought their stories to you. Um, and a lot has happened during that time. Uh, I know council member Shane Smith, you're familiar with some of what's happened, but to the rest of the council, uh, folks at Brookdale, uh, were retaliated against after they spoke up at some of the council meetings. They were hit with three-day notices, um, for various different reasons. um things that they they they' uh had never uh had they had never been hit with 3 days notices before. Um aside from that, a couple of folks were served with unlawful uh detainers. Um and due to code enforcement being on their tail, uh they did enter apartments without prior 24-hour notices to fix the apartments. and um tenants were told that the fixing needed to happen whether

they were there or not. So these types of actions um definitely felt retaliatory after they spoke up and this is the reason why many tenants stay quiet and don't speak up. Um, now a year later, I'm very glad to see that things are being uh these stories and these situations are being taken seriously where we're seeing something come out of that. However, um during last Thursday's conversation that we had with uh the city attorney and Mr. Shane Smith and a couple of other folks. Um we did realize again the need for continuous tenant protections um specifically representation for tenants uh in the courts right in case these situations happen things such as retaliatory behavior on behalf of landlords. Um so I leave that for you to continue to ponder on. Um, we are happy to continue thinking about additional tenant protections and thank you for your time.

Okay. Thank you, Blanc. I think I'm pause there. Jennifer, if we can't get the interpreter back, Blanc, I saw you providing interpretation back there. Are you potentially comfortable doing so? If I don't know if we know if we can do that, but well, Venus might be able Venus. Yeah, Venus has done in the past. We could Yeah. Okay, perfect.

Go ahead, pastor, if you like. Good evening members of the city council. So I want to first acknowledge that yes uh in reference to the discussion on item K.3 there is no human way to account in law for every contingency that happens in life. I recognize that. And yet we must remember that housing policy is not a matter of abstract rule and the economy. Housing policy is a matter of life and death. As such, I strongly encourage if it is if it is beyond the purview of this ordinance, then in further work in enforcement or in further law to consider to consider strongly strict yet reasonable time frames provided for repair as as we don't want tenants living in unsuitable conditions to continue living in them for longer. than is necessary to get procedure done. We don't want pe We're passing this because we don't want the citizens of Merced harmed or further harmed. That's the goal. I believe housing is a matter of life and death and tenants living in unsafe conditions need to have recourse with their elected leaders and feel safe in that recourse and feel like they can trust that there will be action and compassion in that response. Housing is a matter of life and death.

It is not abstract. It is up to you as elected leaders of this city to make it enforce policy that supports the life of its citizens and permits their dignity and thriving. And I have faith. I am choosing to have faith that you, the members of city council and city staff are perfectly capable of doing so. And so I wish to thank you for listening especially to listening especially to listening to the stories of Brookdale tenants and further tenants who bring stories of unsuitable living conditions and an unjust relationships to their landlord or property managers because this is not because this is not an abstract thing. This determines the quality of people's lives. And let it not be said that there was lack of political will or lack of trying or anything of the kind that inhibited the city ensuring the capacity to live and thrive with dignity of its citizens. Thank you.

Thank you. Last speaker. Thank you, Miss Rodriguez, for stepping up to interpret as you have in the past.

Good evening. My name is Are

regarding allowing the owners of uh that are violating the ordinance um up to a year. I think that it's too long of a time uh to make the needed uh the the needed u fixes in order to be able to live. So if the refrigerator breaks or the air conditioner or the plumbing, what would happen in the time frame that someone would need that to live? Those are things that need to be uh fixed immediately in order to be able to live in the home. Uh she would uh I would like to speak about an experience that I had in 2008. So, there was a lot of um moisture and wetness in the in the bathroom. And so, I would speak consistently to the manager about fixing that.

And the only thing they would do was uh to paint over it to to fix the problem.

I I lived that way for several years and they never actually fixed the problem until I moved out. I would like the mayor to uh use the power that he has in order to make some change.

To protect the dignity of the uh renters in our city. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you everyone. All right. Jennifer, anyone else? That's all we have. Mayor Okay. Bring it back to council for additional discussion and action. Any additional comments or a motion? Question. I think Craig Craig wants to take more questions, too.

Sure. All right. Council member Tat um city manager unless I missed it on the ordinance here. Um just to clarify the three violation is it u let's say man uh property owner has multiple properties throughout the city of Merced and they have two violation in one properties and then another vi two violation on the different property that's considered as a four or they have to be in the same property. uh do not have to be at the same property. Long as it's in Merced is the only requirement. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Additional questions or motion council? Just just a report. Just a report. Oh, shoot. All right. Customer Smith, he's caught me now.

Hey, I was just going to say that we're I think we're slated for discussion and Mr. Cornos to come back. Um, I would be in favor of revising the the cure timeline language along the lines of the conversation we had about an hour ago on another item. I think it makes more sense to require the property owner to begin repairs and proceed with reasonable diligence. and they need to start repairs or begin that process within 30 days. But again, I think it's dangerous for us sitting up here to think that we can pre-legulate what our code enforcement officers are going to be seeing and um making recommendations about in the future.

Council member,

I could agree with Council Member Smith as well, uh fixing the language with regards to timeliness. Um, on top of that, I think we should look at other ways to escalate rather than I, again, as you mentioned before, it's 100, $200, $300 for violations. I think, um, we should add in other fee structures in which would encourage property owners to actually make repairs before we not just threaten, but do take away u business license. I don't want us to um force anybody to leave their units without really putting the pressure on owners to make those repairs. Um and then on top of that I think um it's important to include ant tenant protections in here with regards to retalatory actions uh with and that is for example rent increases harassment um yeah so I think I think those things need to be included as well.

Thank you councelor Dupont. Thank you mayor. Uh I would agree um in having some time frame a reasonable time frame 30 days expectation of starting um abatement action or working on the abatement of issues. Um as to the fees um I think that is a discussion that we need to have maybe not at this point but um bringing up at a later date to review the fee structure. Uh I'm open to that discussion as well. Customer Smith,

I was just going to jump in on the I I see the discussion about the fees, both the amount and the structure as a separate conversation, but I I agree with um Council Member Jean, Council Member Dupont. You know, we want this to hurt, and I'm not sure the current fee structure does, but I'd like to see this get in place, and then we can talk about the the remedies. Customer Harris.

Thank you, Mayor. I don't know if this bothers anybody else, but the tenant relocation assistance, um, a landlord that has a property that has 10 tenants and loses his license has to provide relocation benefits to those 10 tenants, which is two months of the established fair market rate. So that's 20 months of fair market rate plus deposits for utilities plus any um security deposits held. What makes us think that this landlord who has been unwilling to do anything else is going to cough up all this money? And what remedy do we have for the tenants who can no longer live there? You mentioned that the city can't provide assistance like that and I'm not sure that we really can't under some circumstances just like we can we can go in and mitigate uh fire hazards, things like that. Um but it it's for discussion what happens if we have landlords that won't or can't provide that relocation assistance. So, um, first I thanks for the question. I want to clarify that I didn't mean to say the city can't do anything if I did say that. Uh, the city the health and safety code does allow uh does have a provision that allows the city to um pay uh the relocation and and seek reimbursement. Um but the question you raised is a good one. Um

we can't uh go into this with the belief that all owners are certainly going to do the right thing. Um and that leads to another issue and I invite the audience as well as uh the dis to uh think about the issue of tenant representation in this city and that is um that's a significant issue and and tenants um are entitled to advocates there. Uh they should have access to legal representation. I firmly believe that um and I also believe it can't be a 100% government issue. Um, we need nonprofit nonprofits, the private industry, um, that need to step up for for our tenants. Um, the city's issue, as I see it, we have a relationship with the owners because of the business license. We've given them uh ability to operate a business. They say we're going to comply with all uh codes and and laws while we operate that business. Uh and there are times when they fall to a level where it's uninhabitable and that will have an impact on tenants. And um that issue is is a concern uh for me and one that I can't

guarantee past or or uh scribe language that um won't have that impact. Um but what I can represent is that um the city will not tolerate substandard uh properties and we'll do all we can to ensure its habitability. Thank you. I appreciate the clarifications. Okay.

So Greg, in terms of next steps, just looking for suggestions tonight. Do you have enough direction or seems like the council's coalesing around certain ideas but the next uh well one question I have is would council prefer a presentation like this or uh once I do the revisions come back for the uh first reading.

What do you guys think? I think pro I mean probably a first reading I think get right to it. I mean just given the amount of effort put into it already. Thank you Governor Smith for your work and and staff I think uh just out of efficiency too. I think you know we'll get right to it and if there's any issues that need to be addressed then okay just my two cents but you know getting right to it we can you instead of having that midpoint we just get right into it and hopefully um No, I agree. I mean it's it's taken a bit to get to this point. We need to get on the books. If there's any other minor suggestions we we can reach consensus on, you know, any motion adopt and could make the amendment.

Figure it out then. Yeah, it's been been working on this for a long time. All right, Cer. Just on that point, I think we should move forward with the first reading. Uh I would love that the draft to be uh sent out to us earlier in advance if possible and to community for review as well. Um, it's a good idea.

And then on the previous conversation, um, I agree that the city should be advancing the relocation, um, amount. If if the landlord can't do it or if the owners can't do it, the city should advance that. Um, and we should look at how do we do that either using the affordable housing trust fund or going about it in a different route. And on top of what you mentioned, uh, Mr. Cornwell uh we should be uh as part of the city and as you mentioned with government we should be taking that first step in providing uh legal aid to tenants. Uh so as you mentioned it shouldn't all be government but we should be practically doing that on our behalf. Um even if it's a small step it's something that we should start working towards.

What what do you mean by that? Well, you mentioned that that tenants should have legal uh um advice, right? Or be represented, right? And that it's not solely the role of government to provide that. It's also on nonprofits or Well, what I mean is like I as city attorney, I can't represent tenants. That that's that's the issue. I I represent the city.

I understand. But we could have programs in which we uh provide tenants legal counsel, right? It doesn't need to be through us in terms of of uh you providing that counsel, but we could work with other groups and provide funding to provide that counsel.

Okay. I mean, council's discussed this in the past and council's ruled against um, you know, providing tenant legal services, but there's Yeah, obviously not Central California Legal Services, that's that's their charge in a big way to to handle those cases. And anybody else? Okay. All right. Anything else, Craig?

Uh, I just want to close by saying uh thank to council and their leadership and um to allow this workshop without a vote. Let the uh citizens uh contribute to the process. Uh this is over and above the Brown Act and um I just thank you for the opportunity. No, thank you sir for all your all your hard work. Appreciate everything you do. Jennifer, on to our business item.

Okay. Agenda item M. Business M1, appointments to the citizens typen setting commission with six members to be appointed by district and one member to be appointed at large. Okay, I guess we'll just go district by district. First turn to council member Dupont. District one. Uh, one applicant, Amanda Estrada. Is that acceptable uh to you, sir? Yes, mayor. Okay. We had no one from district 2. No one from district three. We'll come back to that later. District 4, Council Member Smith, Belinda Bernett, and Nicole uh Baron or Baron. Um do you have a preference between those two?

Yeah, these appointments are always the hardest part of the job. Um they are both exceptional people. Um, I'm incredibly impressed by Miss Baron Abrron's um, resume. I'd urge that she be considered for an atlarge appointment, but Miss Bernett has served on this commission. Um, she's done a nice job, so I think she should be uh, rewarded with a second term if that is in fact what she'd like to do. Okay. Mayor Pro Tim Bole, Jeremy Jenkins, is that acceptable? The only one from district five? Yes.

Okay. And council member Jeang, you have Steve Kaikindall and Lee Pevzner. Do you have a preference between those two, sir? Yeah, similar to Council Member Smith. Um, having to choose between two people is always difficult. Uh, but my preference here would be Steve. Okay, Mr. Kikondle. Um, Jennifer, with the vacancies in two and three, what are our timelines to fill everything? Is it the kind of thing where we can go back out or do we we got to move relatively quickly? Uh well, we do kind of have to move relatively quick. Um according to the charter, we have to hold two public hearings between March 1st and June 30th. Um so we got to move.

Typically what happens though with those is we hold we end up holding more meetings. So we'll hold one meeting to kind of do an introduction, an overview of what they're going to be doing, all the information that they need. Then we'll hold the two public hearings. Um when we did this in 2024, we ended up holding I believe three or four public hearings. Okay. So um and then also keep in mind that we are also trying to prep for SB77. Yeah. Um so we're on a very tight time frame of doing this meeting and also prepping for SP77 in our office and with it. So

so long way saying you don't want to go out to recruit. I mean, we we can keep it open and see if anyone applies, but I would still like to move forward and try to get these meetings done um as soon as we can. Okay. Could we take one of the uh I guess with the two and three vacancies, is it can we appoint someone uh from another district to two and three or is that I believe we would have to amend a resolution to allow us to do that because right now that there's nothing that I can find in any resolution or ordinance that says that we um can do that. Okay. Can I speak to that, Council Smith?

So, Miss Bole and I were there in 2019 when we crafted this charter provision. Um, charter says that the council will appoint from the electors of the district. Um there was discussion amongst the charter review committee that if nobody applied to serve on this stipen setting commission from a particular district that the council could appoint from other eligible applicants to fill the vacancy.

Okay. Um Craig can disagree or not but I mean my my view is you know maybe leave it open another week or so see if somebody applies and if not then I think we should fill from those who are willing to serve and you know let this uh process move forward. Okay. Um we do have an atlarge position that we can pick from from either district six or district 4. Yep. All right. either council member Harris or council member Tower. Are either of you interested in either uh Nicole Baron or Lee Pedler?

Mayor, I'd like another week or 10 days to see if I can recruit somebody. I really didn't think this was going to be a problem in three, but Okay. And Council Chow, you're either one of those two, sir, or else uh would you like a little more time? Yeah, I will agree with Council Member Harris. just another we so we can uh see we can recruit someone.

Okay. Um I will request uh Lee Pezner to the at large seat and that leaves. Okay. So motion for um Amanda Estrada, Belinda Bernett, Jeremy Jenkins, Steve Kikendall and Lee Pevner. That's the one 456 and at large. Um and then leaving two and three uh vacant for how long, gentlemen? Probably roughly Well, their next council meeting is April 6th. So, Jennifer, how would that work? Uh potentially.

Um so, we close out the agenda will be this Thursday, which means we're not allowing any more items to get onto the agenda after Thursday at 4:45. Okay. Okay. Yeah. And then we would still need to verify um the applicant if they are a registered voter in that district that they live in. Okay. With the registar voters. All right. So we have uh have until then. So applicants have to apply by then and then um if not either yeah the seat will remain open or or we have uh uh Miss Baron as well. Sound good? Okay.

Is there a motion to that effect? So, we're going to do Miss Baron as a provisional. I don't think we get there yet. Um, we could, but I don't think we get there yet. We if if there's no one uh applies for the other two then on April 6th, then she'll be the only one bring it back. Okay. We'll come back April 6th. Um, that's it. All right. So, return April 6th. appoint those five right now. Um she's still in the mix and then the other two have until Thursday at 4:45.

Yeah. I mean, so um the way we posted it was um we kind of already set some dates up that way people were aware of when we were going to have these dates. So we have we have them tentively scheduled for April 2nd at 5:30 as like the initial meeting. Okay. And then April 16th and April 30th will be the first two public hearings. Okay. So, all right. You got that schedule, gentlemen. Knowing that schedule, would you prefer to appoint Miss Baron or you still would prefer to reach out to other folks? I think um I'll take those couple days to go look for someone. Okay. Yeah. All right. Same. Council Harris. Okay.

All right. Yeah. So, the first we just have to miss that first meeting apparently. Okay. I'll move to approve the slate as presented by Mayor Sorado. Is there a second? Second. Okay. I have a motion by Council Member Dupont and a second by Council Member Smith. Mayor and Council, please cast your votes. All right. And the motion passes unanimously. Okay. We'll be back April 6th for the remaining two spots. Okay. Agenda item M2, request to add item to future agenda. Start on my left. Council Tow, anything for your future agenda, sir? Nothing. Council member Smith? Nothing for me. Thank you. Council member Harris? Nothing tonight.

Council Jean. Um, I would like to bring back the inspection procedure policy for multi-unit residential buildings. I'll bring that back with modified language. And that's the item we just spoke about earlier with regards to uh reasonable time. Okay. Craig, did you have that date? Was it coming back? What date was it coming back already? No, it was approved tonight.

Yes, that was a resolution. So, that was adopted. If we want to add uh the time frames, uh that can just be the process to bring something back. I'll be ready whenever council decides you want it back. Are you asking in terms of what day do I want it back? I don't need expedited. There's a vote if it's expedited or within Yeah, I don't process is what I'm referring to to get an item on the agenda.

Okay. I think we're all confused. Council member John, are you just talking about adding a standard to the time in which the repairs have to be made? Yes, it from my understanding from our prior conversation was that we could bring it back to modify that language. So that's the only thing we're talking about. I'll give you a second. Okay. Is April 20th okay or a later date? Or do you want I just I want to clarify for Council Smith. Uh, and it would be reasonable time within with regards to the three times that time is brought up in the resolution. So, it's brought up three separate times. Yes. Yes. Come back April 20th, if that's okay.

Hold on, Mayor. Good. I think I think they're still discussing if he's clarification of what the the motion is and what the second's going to be. Yes. I was trying to do Oh, Mr. might solve the problem. I agree that we should put a standard on the time to repair. I think reasonable notice to provide notice is the way it should be in the ordinance. We discussed the 30 days for the violation to be issued, which is strictly code enforcement, nothing to do with any vendors. Then there's reinspection. Correct.

So I think that's what council member Jeang's request is. Correct. Yeah. So it'll be with regards to three of those. So one will be with regards to when code enforcement will issue that notice of violation. I think discussion prior was 30 days. Um and then the update from um the property owner. Uh I think council member Smith mentioned previously on 60 days or however much uh work has been done at that point. Well well let's do this. This is a really important issue. Um, I would like to say let's send it to committee, but we've all promised not to do that until July. So, um, I will I will second it. We can look at a draft and then we can make a final determination as a council. Is that fair?

Yes. Okay. All right. Good work. All right. What day do you want to come back? April 20. I don't think it needs to be expedited. So, whichever data that works best for staff. Okay. That's the first date. that's not um that's available without being expedited. Is that okay, Craig? Yep. Okay. So, April 20th, you'll come back with a new draft. You and Councelor Schmid can can work on it. You guys will present on or you can present or both of you can present on April the 20. Okay. Okay. Cool. Thank you. That's all I was trying to do. Councelor Dupont. Nothing for me. Mayor Proton Bo,

nothing this evening. Uh I had one thing sir you mentioned actually in a casual convers you mentioned um all the America 250 stuff that's coming. Did you is that something you wanted to do formally at a city level or do you think that's something more that would be done uh you know what can we do? I'm open to all suggestions either it's a city level or not. Okay. Yeah. So I don't know if it's one if we want to have a discussion of what we imagine or and not imagine. Yeah. Okay. We can I mean we can talk or other people can talk. Yeah. Let's talk first and then Okay. Yeah.

Um I have one item. My favorite all longtime item is um downtown parking uh 18th Street. Um potential ideas on how to uh improve uh parking on 18th Street. Um if anybody would uh be willing to give me a second on that. I'll do it. Thank you, Harris. All right. Come back. Uh, bald eagle to you. All right. Come back. Um, either April 20th or first meeting in May. Be ready. All right. Council comments. Item M3, city council comments. We're starting on my right. Mayor Pro Tim Bole.

Nothing this evening. Council member Dupont. Uh just want to uh congratulate Olafito on their one-year anniversary. It was well attended. Um and very excited that they are here in the city of Merced. Council nothing tonight. Council member Harris. I also went to Council Member Dupont's second office and he was uh very well attended. Council Schmidt,

just to say out loud what I think everybody knows, last Wednesday, um I along with Mayor Bruten Bole, Mayor Sado, city manager McBride, and uh continued from the county and MCAG spent the entire day in the capital. I'm talking about highspeed rail related issues with legislative offices and the governor's office. Um, our subcommittee, I keep saying that, our committee is going to be talking, I think this week about how to raise the issue again for the full council. I look forward to doing that. Sir, council tap. Nothing tonight.

All right. Nothing for me either. Again, thank everybody for all their work. It's been a very busy first couple months of the year. We now get a get a little uh break. We got three weeks till the next meeting. So, everybody enjoy it and uh appreciate everybody and keep up with the good work. Agenda item in adjournment motion second. I have a motion by council member Deont and a second by council member Harris. Mayor and council, please cast your votes. Okay, the motion passes unanimously.