City Council - Special Meeting

to our um April 29th, 2026 special council  meeting. I'll pass it to Clementine for Sorry, hold on one second. Let me just make sure before I actually go to Clementine. Um, a portion of this city council meeting  is conducted by teleconference with   council member Smith participating to  today by teleconference from Gilroy   in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.  His remote location has been identified in   the agenda for this meeting. Council  member Smith, can you hear me well? I can. Were you able to hear our  proceedings on I can up until now? I Yes,   I can hear you. Do you have a copy  of the agenda for this meeting? Yes,   I do. Was the agenda posted 24 hours prior  to this special meeting at your location? Yes, it was. Is your location accessible  to the public such that any member of the   public could participate from your  location if they wish to do so? Sorry, can you affirm that again?  I don't think we caught that. We know he is here. And Mayor Williamson here. And  public comment and participation information is   provided on this meeting's agenda which is online  at monteray.gov/aggenda. /aggendas in person   attendees, please keep your electronic devices  and phones. Yes, I'm here in Clementine. Yes. Yeah, that's what we were referring to earlier.  It's a different delay. I'm going to finish my  

little blurb and then you're probably going to  jump in on our end with the delay. So, just know   that we hear you. We're tracking Clementine's  in the middle of doing some announcements,   so we're going to go ahead and continue with  that. So, in-person attendees, please keep your   devices muted to prevent audio interference. And  consistent with the First Amendment and the Brown   Act, individuals have the right to speak at public  meetings, which includes the right to criticize   or support city policies or actions. The city  encourages your uninhibited and robust feedback   on public issues affecting the city. Thank you  for participating. Awesome. Thank you, Clementine.   With that, I will pass it to Dr. Barbara  to kick us off in the pledge of allegiance.   Everybody stand ready. Begin to  the flag of the United States of   America and to the republic stands one nation  indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Dr. Barber. All right, with that,  we'll go to our our one public appearance item   today is item one in the agenda, study primer for  the FY 2627 annual budget and provide direction   regarding alternative budget options. With that,  I'll pass it to city manager Dante to kick us off.   Thank you, Mayor. Um it's it's no secret uh we're  entering into our next year, the 2627 budget year,   facing a a significant structural deficit.  And as I was kind of reviewing things   um over my few weeks here um kind of what the  image that popped into my mind was really about   a a bridge if you can imagine a bridge that has  some significant cracks and those cracks kind of   developed over time and it's still standing but  not for long if we don't act. If we don't act,  

what'll happen is the the impact of those cracks  will um threaten the structural integrity of the   bridge and eventually it's it's it's going to  fail. And so balancing the budget this year   is almost like an emergency repair to that  bridge that keeps it safe, but not for long.   um in the next year what we we need to focus  in on or is kind of a full rebuild of that   bridge and how do we create solutions that are  sustainable that keeps us safe for for the long   term. So tonight um I'm going to focus in on um  an overview. I'm sharing this presentation with   uh Director King and also with um our um assistant  city manager. Um but can we uh next slide please.   So these are the things we're going to focus in  on. Uh some of the key drivers for the deficit.   Um we're going to talk a little bit about our  proposed emergency repair for this year. And   then we're going to finish out with a look at  some ways that we can build a sustainable bridge   uh for the city. Um these slides are really um  kind of a highlevel my presentation my part is   a highlevel review but like I said we'll get  into the details with Dr. King um and also our assistant city manager. Um but um I wanted  to start off by um talking a little bit about   the key drivers uh for the budget deficit. If we  can change slides and I should mention before I   get into that, we're not asking you to approve  the budget tonight. Um, we're asking you to   take a look at our proposal, provide comments,  and we'd like to be able to walk away with um  

some consensus as to what you'd like to see um in  the budget when we bring it to you for adoption.   So, in in drilling down and taking a look  at some of the key drivers to the deficit,   um I remember some of the questions I got from  the community as I'm going out and meeting and   talking with people is how do we get here? You  know, what what really happened? Um so, suddenly   we have actually a a $12 million budget deficit.  And so in working with finance and working with   uh the departments, we put together this chart  to kind of identify um what happened um and what   were the key drivers to the structural deficit.  Um rapidly rising personnel cost. Um and one of   the things that is important to a city is to make  sure that you're attracting good talent. Um this   is a very expensive area. It's very expensive  to try essentially to get good talent to to um   to locate here and and to provide good service for  the community. And so the cities need to actually   prepare and offer um a competitive compensation  or that talent will go go other places. And so   just like every other city does, that's what this  city did um in looking at competitive compensation   to retain our talent. Um, we had an increase in  cost of a pension cost, something that's that's   really out of our control, but that increased  about 48% over the last couple of years. We had   um other retiree benefits, something else that's  outside of our control that increased by by 62%.   And then um we had some overtime cost um  that increased and that could be a result  

of a number of different things. It could be  based on the reduced staffing levels that the   city has experienced over years from COVID  and trying to come back but still not having   the adequate staff to take care of everything.  Well, that taxes the rest of the employees and   causes overtime. I should say um we I know we have  the 79 uh percent increase but a portion of that   um is is reimbursed. I I our fire uh department  has contracts to provide fire services to cities   and and some area some other the airport  and other areas. But that is an increase.   Um what also could possibly increase it  is um special events. um because the city   um carries the cost of police or whoever needs to  be available for special events. But these are the   facts essentially with with the personnel cost.  Um there was also a a sharp increase in insurance   um liability and property insurance  increased 153%. Totally out of our control.   workers compensation based on the number  of employees that we have increased by 27%. Higher uh utility and operating cost, utility  cost, water, electricity, fuel are up 70% since   2022 and we still are experiencing some volatility  with with with fuel. So all of those increases fed   into um us really having our expenditures outpace  our revenues. Lastly, and this is this is the the   exact point, the revenues continue to grow at a  modest 3.6%. That's not keeping up with the cost  

of inflation and the and the cost of purchasing  things and um providing service service to people.   So when we say, you know, how did this start? Um,  in reality, I think the staff, and I I give a lot   of kudos to the staff of trying to be creative  and trying to resolve the issues. But if you look   back on the budget that was adopted last year,  it really already had a $12 million deficit,   $10 to12 million deficit. But what happened was  it it was masked by onetime money essentially. So   we were able to plug the hole, but the structural  deficit is still there. And that's how the budget   was was adopted. But that's how we got here.  That's just kind of a a a short story and we can   get into details and answer your questions based  on that. But that's probably the most succinct way   um of describing the drivers for thisruct  structural deficit. Next slide. So what are we   what are we going to to do and what have we done?  Um this is our proposal and again um this is an   emergency repair. This will not solve the problem,  but we need some time to actually figure out how   essentially to rebuild this bridge and get us  to sustainability. And so what we've done is   we are proposing to reduce cost by freezing 30  uh vacant positions um that will will save us   um um some some money here. 3.7 million actually.  I think this is the wrong number. $3.7 million   million dollars um of savings. And these positions  are a combination of positions that may have  

been vacant for um a short period of time or a  long period of time. In one or two instances,   um we've had trouble attracting, you know,  um certain technical expert certain technical   positions because there's a high demand. for  example, engineers. Um, and so we are proposing   not to cut those positions yet. We're proposing  to not fund those positions for this year,   giving us the opportunity of really drilling  down and really identifying how we live   within our means, how do we restructure our  organization um to be able to be resilient.   Um we did an exercise before we made this  proposal. We worked with the different departments   to really identify um what what what's going to  happen? What are the worst things that are going   to happen if this position were not here or were  frozen? So we went through are there federal or   state mandates that we we would miss? Are there um  additional costs hidden costs that we would incur?   you know, are there service level reductions that  would happen if this position weren't here? And so   we went through that entire exercise and this is  essentially um the recommendation of the positions   that are listed in your staff report. Uh we we're  proposing to reduce some contributions to external   organizations. We're proposing to delay uh vehicle  replacements. Um and we are we are proposing to   take an additional 10% reduction in operation and  maintenance. That is on top of the 7% reduction of  

O and M from last year. So in reality, what what  this the staff has proposed and what we've done is   we've reduced O and M 17% over the last two years.  That's all the fat, right? We're we're getting   to the muscle. And so my proposal is developing a  strategy of how do we um get ourselves again back   to sustainability. Um on the next next page, next  slide please. This is just a highlevel overview of   um the numbers of those proposals. So starting  again um our our anticipated revenue for 2627 is   4 um million. Our our expenses are projected to  be 125 million, which leaves a um 11.6 million   deficit from the savings from the hiring freeze.  That's going to get us about $3.7 million uh for   this next year. um other salary savings um that  are projected um because we we know that we're   not going to be able to hire for some of the  positions that are o that are open until mid   year. We're incorporating that savings to help to  help fill um the gap here. Um and other projected   salary savings. We're also incorporating some  of our some of the carryover from prior years   um into into the budget um to the tune of about  2 2.1 u million. Those on&m reductions uh this   year is an additional 1.1 million and then um the  one-time use of NCIP money um which is which is  

3.5 million. And what that does is that closes the  gap for the next year with a little bit of room   um just in case our projections don't hold, just  in case there are um other things that we need   to do. And I might I I I need to say that we're  doing this all um tonight. Our proposal does not   touch the the reserve. It preserves uh the the  economic uncertainty reserve because for times   like this, we never know what what's going to  happen. If we didn't have that during COVID,   it would have been more traumatic and I know  that it was very traumatic for the community.   Um it would would be even more traumatic.  So, we're proposing to keep that keep that   uh intact. That is kind of a highlevel view  overview of what you're going to hear tonight. Um   I'm going to turn it over to Director King to talk  us through the details and then after that we'll   have our assistant city manager uh talk a little  bit about um the steps moving forward. Thank you. Thank you Dante. Good afternoon mayor councils.  So, let's just jump right into the details. Um,   Dante basically took all my thunder,  but I'll get into the details. So,   if your eyes start rolling in the back of your  head, just, you know, somebody kick somebody   and we'll be okay. All right. So, so let's  start with a little bit of background. Um,   our FY2526 adopted budget included $120  million in expenditures, 109 in revenues,   resulting in that $10 million deficit that we  talked about. So some of the things that we did,   we had that 7% reduction from um our on andm  services supplies from all departments. We   also had a reduction in city's contributions to  the reserve account. If you will recall, we did  

a 50% reduction in all accounts except for the e  economic uncertainty reserve which we left at 20%. We also did freezings well unfunding some  hard to fill positions um that gave us I   believe it was about another 2 million that  we had um available. We did some shifting   of expenses from the general fund to other  city um special revenue funds wherever and   enterprise funds wherever it was allowable and  it was proper we could do it. Um and we limited   um there's very little contributions to  CIP from the general fund. We took some   from certain reserves but from the ongoing  or current year revenues we didn't have any for 2627 our process budget process launched  in early 2026. I know you all are thinking that   we've been doing this since August and we have  but our official process has started is when we   um just like every year we talk to the departments  we instruct them to give us your projected   revenues and your projected um expenses and it's  based on what you actually need not just you know   your needs not just your wants. So, so once we  started going through the process, one of the   things in addition, we asked the departments to  go back and give us a 10% cut, which is where we   got to the 125.9 million. We did a moratorium was  placed on new position requests. So, departments   were permitted to request changes to positions as  long as they were costneutral um or they had very   minimum impact on the budget. um departments  were asked to limit their requests for new IT   products and services and um these long-term  costs were passed on to the general fund. So let's talk about the revenues  projected revenues for next year. So our  

um for the general fund 113.9 million plus the  facility maintenance fund 344 which is a total   is what you get for 114 million. um which  is 3.6% above um 2526 adopted budget and   the expenses is 1.5 million and um 1.3% above  the 2526 budget. I want you to know that the   that 121 that you see is after um the 3.7  million deduction for frozen positions. So, our top five, every year we show you what our  top five um general fund revenue sources are. Toot   remains at the top at 26.5%. But if you recall  um the TOOT has been ste at a u pretty steady,   but it's been declining every year. Um just  about 3 or four years ago was about 33%,   it's now down 26% of the total cost. So, you  know that that is um starting to decline and   flatten it out. Our fees and charges are at 22%  of our um total revenue sales and use tax at 14.2,   property tax at 15.7, and our utility user tax  at 4.8%. So, these are the top five accounts um   for general fund revenue sources, and it makes up  84% of the revenues that we get from general fund. our transient occupant um TOT allocations  just so that you have a um a more detailed   look at our TOT. So our projected revenues  for next year is 35.8 million. NCIP has   um 16% is 5.7 that will be um for that and that  leaves our general fund at 30.2 million and of  

that 30.2 6% contribution goes to C Monterey  which is caps out at a 1.8 8 million. So,   just to note that this is something um a  contract is over in June 20 um June 30,   2026. So, this is one of the things that's on  the list to be negotiated for next fiscal year. Moving on to our expenditures. This is just a  historical um background. So, if you look at the   not the the dark blue at the bottom, the largest  column is salaries and benefits. So if you just   look at the the the way that the graph is going  that every year that this increase has happened   whether it's um between the um the different  categories um if you can see for we're trying   to maintain from 25 26 you see that that's pretty  flatline. So this is what we're looking at um as   we make the stop gap basically to the next year  while we spend the time evaluating our services. Here is our general fund um projected  revenues and expenses. This looks like a   duplicate. Um 2627 expenditure stopline  is 121.6 million. It's 1.1% 7% above   um 2526 adopted budget and is 3.1 million which  is 2.6% below the amended budget for this year.   So note that the total projected expenses  is the amount after including the proposed   adjustment for frozen positions which  I just said a slide or two back. Um move on. So general fund expenditures by  department. If you look at the graph kind   of shows you where um the expenses go by  department. And public safety of course is   going to is our mo this is fire and police  together make up about 52% of general fund  

expenditures. Parks and wrecks is the next  highest one at 15.5%. Community development   at 6.9%. Public works at 7.7%. A lot of public  works is um in other special revenue funds.   Libraries at 3.3% conference center 4.7 and then  administrative which is the city manager's office.   um ISD, finance, HR, um city council,  those are all lumped together make up 8.9%. So frozen positions. So as Dante  mentioned earlier, we are proposed   um 30 positions to 29.5 basically 30  positions to be frozen. Of these positions,   there are 26 that are funded through the  general fund which reduces the top line of 3.7.   It was a 4.6 that was in the first slide.  That's citywide. So 4.6 total for all the   positions that are um on the list to  be frozen and 3.7 of that 4.6 is in   the general fund. And this is the list of  the positions. It's in alphabetical order. Sorry. I just wanted to give you guys time  while poopy came in so you guys can look at   the um the list in case you had any um questions  or concerns from that. Um I'll move on to the next   slide. Um the process so the positions that  are currently in the recruitment process um oh the positions that are currently being  recruited for they're not frozen. There   are positions that are not funded by the general  fund and re and or that are reimbursed by other   funding sources were not included and also  there are positions that are not vacant were   not considered. So all of the positions on the  prior slide are currently vacant positions. So  

there's no bodies in there. There are  other positions that were recommended   um based on evaluation that was completed by  each department that Dante spoke about earlier.   And the plan is to do a thorough analysis  of all the positions for next fiscal   year before we make any long-term  strategies or um um suggestions. So expenditure reduction. So we had our comm for  general fund community contributions. Um one of   the things that we um threw out there um rental  assistant to decrease in half by 125,000 is what   do we save it? So it would decrease by 125,000  from the prior year. Um citywide um Fourth of   July event um there was a discussion the ultimate  decision was not to decrease it. So it's still   80,000 first night Monteray um to reduce that  is $35,000 decrease from this year. And then   um the 20 26 27 budget still includes the 1.8  8 billion contribution to Cedric C Monterey. Um our rising costs, Dante mentioned most of  these, so just kind of an update. Um for 2425,   as you know, we went into a three-year  agreement with each of the labor groups,   which established a 4% salary increase for each  year included in those agreements. And then the   two years prior to there were um two years of 4%.  So compounded over the fi the 5-year period is   basically a 25% salary increase for full-time  and regular part-time positions. Um of note   um since January 21 inflation areas um inflation  in area is approximately 26%. um which is more   than still more than the increases and  it's also um in addition that for you to  

know or remember that most of the bargaining  groups took a 10% salary reduction during co we move on to the um unfunded actuary acruled  liability account um 2627 budget has 18.8   8 million in UAL um cost. It's a $1.2 million  increase above 2526. Again, this is stuff that   we have no control over. Of this amount, 14.7  million is in the general fund and um which is   1.1 million more than last year. Um the remainder  of this is throughout the city. Um since 2022,   this is the account that's gone up for um this  bill increased 4.7 million a year. That's the   48% increase we spoke of earlier for our OPED.  Our other post-employment benefits for 2627. The   total is 1.8 in OPED was $126,000 increase from  2526 of this amount. 1.5 million of that 1.8 is   in the general fund. $100,000 increase. So a 7%  increase from 2526 adopted budget. And since 2022,   OPED has increased 590,000 a year. So  that's the 62% in the general fund. We talked about overtime a little while ago. Um projected cost for um overtime 5.4 million in  overtime costs is 130,000 increase above 2526   across the city. of the amount 5.1 is within the  general fund. That's $130,000 increase from 2526   and the adopted of the adopted budget 22. Since  22 overtime increases has increased 2.9 million   a year which is 79% and as we spoke of earlier  some of the overtime is reimburseable like for  

special events. a lot of um special events that  come that has um police department presence. We   bill them out and get reimbured for those  special events. And for fire department,   they have contracted cities. So for their over  a lot of their overtime is also um reimbursed. Our liability and workers comp  insurance um liability insurance we project 6.2 2 million um across the city  um risk management for citywide. 5.1 of this   is within um the general fund. That's a  $800,000 increase above last year. That's   18% adopted budget. The 20 cent 22 3.1 million  increase 153% 3.5 um million since 2020. Um, of note, um, I've mentioned this a few times that the insurance  we, again, it's nothing that we have control over,   but we are at a JPA, so we really are  getting the best rates out there. Um,   we are anticipating that the liability and  workers comp um, insurance will continue   to rise 10 to 14% every year. So that's the um  direction or that's the instructions that we're   getting from our JPA from our brokers is that  it's it's st not I won't say standard but we're   in a pool with 13 other cities and everyone is  getting the same type of increases around period. Workers comp um that of course has gone  up as well. We projecting 4.1 million in   workers comp this year. um of the 4.1 3.3 is in  the general fund. It's a $300,000 10% increase  

above last year. Uh and that is a 27% increase  in the general fund since 2022. And of course,   workers comp insurance is along with  all other insurance increases. But   um as our workforce increases, our  workforce and our volunteers increases,   so does the workers comp because we pay  insurance for all our workers and volunteers. Utilities and fuels 2627. Our budget um is  4.1 in utility costs. $140,000 increase from   this year. Approximately 3.1 of that is  general fund. $75,000 is 2% increase. Um part of this is the city has been doing  a lot to kind of reser preserve all the   utility costs around the city. So, it's gone  while it's gone up, we're still maintaining.   It's not gone up as significantly as  some of the others, but since 2022,   the costs have increased 1.2 million a year, which  is 70% of the general fund. Um, and fuel overall,   our fuel cost this year is going to be level or  next year is going to be level with this year,   but as we all see when we go to the  pumps every day, it number changes. So,   um, we're watching that carefully, but as of right  now, we are projecting it'll be about the same. So, moving on from the general funds,  talking about special revenue funds,   um, a few of them enterprise funds  and, um, internal service funds.   So here are our basically our top special revenue  funds that comes out all the all the time that we   talk about the NCIP we're projected revenues  of 6.2 and 573,000 of expenses. None of this   includes the project CIP or NCI NCIP projects. So  that 573,000 is really just the admin cost that  

comes out of there. Measure S&P 12 million we're  expected in revenues. um Presidio 27.6 million in   revenues, 27.7 in expenses. Those should always  approximate each other. Um Thailand's funds,   we're looking at 4 million in revenues and 3  million in expenses. And all of these will be   reduced as projects come come up throughout the  year is those um numbers will come up be clearer   for the projected expenses for each enterprise  funds again does not include the CIP um project.   So sewer line maintenance fund projected revenue  is 4.5 million with 3.9 in expenses. Marina fund   is 4 million 2.5 in expected um expenses. Cemetery  fund is still, as you can see, upside down. We   are projecting revenues of 354,000 and expenses of  710,000. Um, parking fund, 13 million in revenues,   10 million in expenses. Our internal service funds  our vehicle maintenance fund projected revenues   2.9 projected expenses are 3.1 information our it  basically 7.1 in revenues 6.5 in expenses workers   comp 4.1 in revenues 4 million in expenses our  reliability and property insurance 6.2 revenues   5.6 six and expenses and then our employee benefit  fund um matches each other like it should 11.8 in   both revenues and expenses. Um another note um as  we talked about in previous budget presentations   funds um 715 which is the workers comp and  716 which is risk have negative fund balances.   So in 2627 we have implemented a plan to  start collecting so that we can reduce  

um more in revenue than expenses so that we can  eventually eliminate the negative fund balance   and those funds. Moving on to other cost um our  debt service our inner um interfund loans. This is   money that's coming from advance basically they're  called advances to and from funds. These are for   our the first couple are for fire trucks and our  principal payments are listed. Um if you in our   settlement funding along with the cemetery um so  we have 842,000 that's being transferred out for   um our inner fund loans. Um the payoff dates for  each is there. You can see um there are a couple   that end in 2027 and the next 2027, one in 2028,  30, 31, and 32. So these um the $800,000 worth   of debt service payments um goes down every year,  which is a good sign. And these are the payments   that actually go principal and interest that goes  to outside. So, what we're paying to outsiders,   you can see that the total loan, the 6.1  million is what we're paying out. Um, and our debt is going down each year,   but we still will have at the end of  next fiscal year $31.8 million in loans. And then our transfers in and out  as it relates to the general fund.   Um general fund is projecting $1.4 million  in transfers in and 615,000 in transfers out  

for net positive transfer in 789 789,000 which  represents more revenue to the general fund. Um and our reserves and CIP contributions. So because  of the situation that we find ourselves in this   year, we are um recommending that we um do not  fund um temporarily temporarily suspend the   contributions to the reserve accounts. We already  have 20% as um in the economic uncertainty and   because our expenditures are about the same  as they were last year, there's no need to   add additional to maintain that 20% as long as  we stay diligent with what we're doing. Um and   then we also recommend not to fund um into the CIP  directly from the unassigned fund balance. Um so   um we will get a CIP proposal in the next coming  meetings and I will turn it over to Nat. Great.   Thank you, Director King and uh city manager Hall  uh for your your comments earlier. And what I'll   be doing is providing council with an update on  where we are uh today and uh what the rest of uh   this year looks like as we continue down our list  of deficit reduction strategies. Uh you may be   familiar with this slide that provides an overview  of the index card exercise that council began back   in August and went through in August, September,  October, December and then revisited again uh this   year. So, uh, what, uh, we're here's a very brief,  uh, overview of the, uh, slides that and the cards   that directly impact the general fund. And you'll  see where there's a check mark means that we're   currently working on it or council has approved  or is considering that question mark means that we  

need to continue that discussion, which we'll have  over the next few months and several months ahead.   and then uh X shows that it's a strategy that  we're not pursuing based on council feedback. So,   we'll start and I I won't go into too much  detail, but the first card was to appropriate   or reappropriate NCIP funding. And this year's  budget uh to balance the budget, as Director King   mentioned, is to allocate the $3.5 million in NCIP  that's recommended for this year. The council,   if you may recall, last fall, uh, said that  you're interested in allocating between three to$4   million, and that's where we landed on the three  and a half. The position attrition conversation,   we've identified as as Mr. Hall mentioned, $3.7  million in funding in the general fund alone, and   that's by freezing the 26 general fund positions  that were listed earlier. the first responder fee.   We had a conversation with council about the the  first responder fee back in December, if you may   recall, and we'll be bringing that update back to  council. There were some outstanding questions,   but there is very limited cost recovery as as  you all know. The net projected annual revenue   by moving forward with the first responder  fee shows a net increase of $17,000 only.   And to go through that process, we're uh we're  not recommending it. And that's why there's a   big question mark in front of that strategy. Out  of the $360,000 in paused programs, council has   identified 50,000 which we discussed last year.  Council's interested in moving forward with uh   expanding options to increase revenue generation  for vetsar campground and our staff is currently   working on that effort that to go to onlinebased  reservation system and other strategies. Council   has approved switching our access providers and uh  we're now working with the Monterey County Office  

of Education. In terms of property maintenance, we  still need to have that conversation with council.   Are there opportunities for us to potentially  sell buildings and reduce property uh maintenance   obligations? Mills Act contract we discussed last  year, not looking to pursue that. Voters are going   to be voting on the proposed sales tax measure,  the 375% increase. that's on the June ballot.   That would bring in $4 and a half million dollars  annually. It should be pending voter approval,   not council approval on the slide. It's there's  an error there. Um unlikely to move forward on the   admissions tax. The vacancy tax, we have a hold  on that pending court decisions. Parking tax,   we're re-reviewing now for potential consideration  in the November 2026 ballot. future consideration   of a streaming tax, property transfer tax  for re-review with council in the future as   well. And then we're ongoing on an ongoing basis  reviewing partnership opportunities and contract   uh opportunities throughout all of our service  areas. And then we recognize that these payment   in le of taxes really isn't feasible legally  just because uh the nonpropy tax generating   uh partners that we have that are large property  owners that are nonprofits for example that pay   zero property tax. There's nothing that requires  them to provide funding to us but we do continue   to look for partnership opportunities with those  partners. So those are those are the items on the   current list. Uh other we call them the yellow  cards. We discussed a public safety bond we can   consider in future years. We think we can bond up  to $100 million to support public safety building   as an example. The renewal of measure PNS we  know council is very interested in pursuing   this November. That will help us continue the  current revenue funding but not actually generate   new revenue. Right? So that's that's critical for  uh maintaining ongoing uh projects that support  

street sewer storm water programs. Selling city  property will be discussing with all of you in the   near future. There's a number of underutilized  property that we're reviewing. We know other   agencies like the school district's going through  that process now. Measure G renewal by November of   2028 will allow us to continue the $6 million of  sales tax revenue. And uh again, not new revenue.   This just allows us to maintain the current  current revenue streams that we have. Storm   water fees council's council is pursuing that and  there's the ballot by mail that's taking place   now. The parking strategy council's interested  in pursuing and we are looking to implement many   of those efforts in 2026. But again, keep in  mind that's parking revenue, not general fund   revenue specifically. And then we're currently  going through a process regarding the aquarium   lease. And then as we've discussed before, other  types of strategies that indirectly address the   $10 million or the the large deficit that we have  through again one-time efforts. Uh that is we we   discussed defunding NCIP projects which uh we've  heard recently not supported by council. And then   as we look at our economic development strategy  and what that looks like, the VAF amendment, which   would could allow for the visitor accommodation  facilities to uh be reconsidered and perhaps spot   zoning areas for potential hotel development. That  would be more of a long-term strategy that would   generate increased TOT and property tax revenue,  but not necessarily help the city's general fund   today. So, those are some of the those cards uh  that wanted to give all of you an update. Many of   those strategies again all of you uh some of you  agreed to we still need to discuss with council   but are items that we're going to be ramping up  in the next months ahead and bringing uh those   issues to council for consideration. There's other  strategies too that our city staff are working on  

very actively. Uh again, these are long-term  strategies. They're not going to generate   millions of dollars to fix the deficit, but they  will add up and and help us uh get through uh the   next year and years ahead. Uh we're currently,  as you know, exploring a partnership with the   Boys and Girls Club of Monterey County. We're uh  exploring additional parking revenue measures. We   need to have a conversation about the future  of the Monterey Tennis Center and what that   lease review looks like and and uh whether  there's potential revenue generation there.   We need to have a cemetery operational review. We  have to come back and have a candid conversation   with council on what does the economic development  strategy look like and how do we staff it and what   are our key priorities with that strategy. There's  strong interest in pursuing pursuing that. We   talked about it with council in March. One of the  positions that we're not funding is the economic   development manager, but we we believe we can  move that uh that forward. that won't keep in   mind the economic development strategy isn't going  to bring in short-term revenue for the city. It's   the about the long game and the long-term strategy  for the city. And so, uh, we also need to review   joint use with the Monterey Peninsula Unified  School District. We are the only city in, uh, the   county and in the region, perhaps, uh, we don't  know any other, in California, where we provide   the primary ball field for a high school sports  team. And we we have continued to do that. So   what does that arrangement look like and how does  that partnership look for joint use facilities   agreements with the school district and then uh  other items we've been discussing you know are   there retirement incentives are there additional  service level reviews and what other partnerships   can we continue to pursue as we look in the short  and long term. So with that uh we're we have our   presentation that our city manager uh finance  director and and myself have presented and we have  

a recommendation for you to regarding the FY202627  budget. Thank you staff for the presentation.   Opening up to the council for questions. Who'd  like to kick us off please? Council Garcia.   Thank you staff for the uh the presentation and  and all the details and um uh thank you Dante for   uh putting all this information really in focus  in terms of the uh drivers and the and the propos   proposed strategy. Um so I have a few questions.  There was mention of the uh retiree benefit costs   other than pensions. Can you please remind us  examples of what that is or what that includes? Those could be things like um [clears throat]  health retiree health benefits. So like if say   if you retire at 60 and they get to your um  62 is it 62 now for social security I mean for   your your Medicare to um put in. So there are  certain um positions that have that contribute   into that and so those there are things like  that the medical basically. Okay. Thank you. Um suspending uh funding to other  reserve funds. Examples of that.   So we have the economic uncertainty, we have the  um pension obligation, um public safety buildings,   um the li um facilities, city facilities, um  library. So all of those we are recommending   not to fund any of those. Like last year,  for the last two years, we we funded them at  

50% of what our policy is and this year we're  recommending not funding them at all. Got it. Do you have a sense and or  maybe someone else from staff   um in terms of the the uh the logic here for not  removing any funding for the Fourth of July event? I'm gonna let somebody else take that one  because um so [clears throat] we we we had   a discussion about this and um we really  try to understand you know there there's   certain events from what I understand  that create community here. Um this is   our recommendation um for for that. If the  council thinks differently and you want us   to fund that you're able to provide us  with that direction. Okay. Thank you. in terms of the loans um and there  was a list that was uh included in   the presentation. Would it be worthwhile  or or I is there is there value in looking   at the possibility of refinancing,  reamortizing that that kind of thing. There is value in it of course. Um most of these  we just most of them that are the fire loans those   things had just taken place in the last couple of  years and they're like only 5 to seven years. Um   but some of the older ones are probably be more um  beneficial to do that so that we can take a look   at that. Okay. And uh Ned, you mentioned uh in in  your slide that there's a partnership with uh in  

in in talks with uh Boys and Girls Club. Can you  elaborate on that a little bit? Absolutely. Um,   last last year we had talked about partnering with  the Boys and Girls Club to uh rent a a facility   from a private uh private party at 205 Monaceto  Avenue and uh potentially uh spend up to $800,000   in general fund dollars to make improvements to  the facility and then lease the facility to Boys   and Girls Club to operate it. uh financially it uh  just uh in upon re-review doesn't uh make sense to   us in our fiscal environment. Uh we know there's  a need and an interest in uh reopening the Castro   Okolo Park Center. And so we're in discussions  and we're we're actually getting pretty close   uh and uh drafting agreements with the Boys and  Girls Club to discuss uh their potential occas uh another clubhouse for them. uh as you may  know they currently operate a clubhouse in   seaside that's very successful and provides  programming not only after school but on   during summers and others and we think it'll  be a good partnership that doesn't compete   with our programming. Uh what's nice you know it  it's not necessarily revenue generating for us   uh but it provides that added service and reduces  our expenses in terms of us providing uh that   level of service to the community. Uh they'd  staff it with multiple full-time staff and   provide around the clock service. We met with the  Monterey Peninsula Unified School District. We've   figured out transportation options so [clears  throat] that we can get through that barrier   in terms of serving the Monaceto area and the  Via Delmani neighborhood at the Kona site. So,   that's an overview and you'll hear more  about it as we uh finalize and propose   a uh agreement with the Boys and Girls Club,  but they've been great partners with us. Okay,   thank you so much. Uh those are all the questions  I have comments. Perfect. I I just want to add one  

follow-up question to that that subject real quick  while we're on it. Um you said it's not uh revenue   generating. So there's no revenue coming in at  all like there there's no expectation for fees   to utilize the city's it would be essentially  a partnership where we in lie of us spending   money providing the service they would provide the  service. So it would be more of a netneutral type   of agreement than uh charging rent. So that's the  the difference in terms of the heart partnership.   That's what was proposed u earlier but at least we  the the original proposal at 205 monosceto would   have required improvements by us and us paying  rent on top of that which would have been a net   uh a net negative financially. So um this  is just an example of providing you know if   we've talked over the years about well can we  have direct staff in the space well there's a   cost to providing uh that service and so this is  a partnership opportunity there. Okay. Okay. Yeah,   more questions, but I I'll defer that for  another time. Um, Dr. Robert, did you have   and then I'll go to you next. I see your hand up.  All right. Thank you so much, staff, for all your   hard work. Uh, appreciate the the report. Just  had a couple questions. You spoke about the 79%   um from overtime. Um, what percentage of  that is reimburseable? Does anyone know? I don't know that off the top of my head. I  do have a a spreadsheet that has calculations   for the last few years that I can get to  you. Yeah, if you could get that for me,   I greatly appreciate it. Um, also when talking  about the debt service, um, I noticed like in   the next three years, there are four loans that  would be paid off and it totals around $432,825. Where would these funds go once this is paid?  Would it go back into the general fund? Yes,  

it's available for allocating elsewhere. Okay. And the cemetery fund. I know I've been talking  about this for the last few years. I know you   get tired of hearing me say this, [laughter] but  um and I know we've been keeping an eye on it and   and so we've been looking at it. So each time I'm  looking at it, the gap is getting wider and wider.   So, I'm just curious how we're going to stabilize  and balance this. I have a few We've had a few   conversations about it, different things that  can that can happen with the cemetery. I don't   think it's anything that can be done overnight. I  mean, there's an option of selling the cemetery.   There's an option of um increase in rates, which  is what we're doing, but I don't think that we   what because it's virtually full. there's not  a whole lot of increase at you know there um sure some of the conversations we're having on  with the cemetery is uh the level of service we   provide uh can we partner for example with the  uh neighboring cemetery the Catholic cemetery   that's run by the dascese of Monterey and  and so uh it's one of the items on the list   for us to explore that partnership whether it's us  providing the service to them or or uh other other   types of models. And how far are we along in that  conversation? We have not uh we're we're still   still in embassy within the team and then we are  haven't uh started initiating conversations with   the dascese yet. Okay. Thank you. Um, and I guess  my last thing I wanted to, and this has nothing to   do with what we can do, but it's just recognizing  with insurance is going up for everybody. Uh,   premiums. I mean, when I saw that, I was like,  "Yep, that that's what I'm hearing all over,  

no matter where you are, no matter where  you live, and especially in California."   um with the insurance commissioner. I know  we had the insurance commissioner here   um when we had um everything dealing with  the the the the defense um pieces and the   fire and all of that. We had the insurance  commissioner here when we did the everything   at the conference center. I'm just wondering what  type of of conversations or partnerships or or or   different initiatives that could be talked about,  you know, with elected state officials along with   the insurance commissioner. I'm just curious as  to if you think it's any uh, you know, value in   that and and if so, what what part do you think  the staff or us could be able to take part in?   One of the things that we talk about at our Excel  board meetings um is um a tort cap and getting   cities, city managers, city council on board with  also with League of California cities in order to   um to get a a tort um cap because there isn't one  in California. And that's one of the things that   ri that helps the um keeps the insurance rates  going up because you have one um um incident,   let's call it an incident, and you're the  the the payouts are enormous and you know,   you'll get a $35 million payout for a claim  um from a lot of different things. So since   there's no cap on that, the insurance rates  can't come down as long as we are continuing   to do that. So that's one of the things.  I know that RJPA and other ones I know our   prior city manager has come to one of our board  meetings and we've talked about that and even our   um our um [clears throat] our representative with  um Allian our broker has come to the city and has   talked with our um department heads about it and  he's offered to come to city council and actually  

have a conversation too. But that is one thing  that we are actually looking at. We're trying to   get all the other cities that are interested  in being involved with that too. But that's   one of the major things that's on the table  is um getting a tour cap. That's awesome. I   would love to see and hear more about that. Thank  you. Awesome. Thank you, Dr. Barber. All right,   Council Member Smith. Yeah, thank you very much.  Um I I wanted to go back to the conversation that   Gino raised was the the loans that are listed  um specifically under the fire loans. Raphaela,   as I recall, the loans for the fire trucks is  a very, very low interest. Um, and I know that   it looks like in that category that you've  listed for the firet trucks and the loans,   uh, then of course there's a settlement funding.  What What is the settlement funding for for the is   that under the fire truck um increases for the  work to have those units built? The settlement   funding is not firet trucks. is something  separate. Um, you you know exactly what that it's um an agreement between a general  fund and a risk fund which is paying off   um $200 a year of a settlement, a prior year  settlement. Okay. Um, so the interest rate for   those fire truck apparatus loans as I recall was  a very low interest. Correct. Correct. We have   a master service a master loan agreement with  um who is it? Not Wells Fargo. Bank of America   corporate corporate though. So yes, it's very low.  Yeah. And so just to put a placeholder in that,   I know that if we were in a position to pay  off those loans, that would mean we're taking   from reserves but giving us an exposure,  but when the interest rate is so low,  

it makes sense to continue on that track and  then uh keep a balance as high as we can on the   reserves. So just kind of a comment on that,  but I just wanted to see what the settlement   u funding was. Uh the other question I had was  when we look at the 30 listed vacant positions   that staff uh puts out for us to consider  that is it a savings and I believe it was   u just slightly above $4 million. Is that correct?  Correct. Okay. So of those total Yeah. I'm sorry.   Go ahead. I'm sorry. It's like 4.6 total and 3.7  of that is in the general fund. Okay. Okay. Um, so   if we look ahead at some of the positions, I know  they're vacant, but is there any implication from,   as an example, the police officer positions,  police services assistant or the technician?   Are there any of those that are vulnerable that  would actually impact us to a greater degree in   an overtime consequence? because we're always  trying to cut down at overtime, but is there a   consideration if we have two less police officers,  does that actually impact us in the overtime? I'm   going to let Dante take that one. Sure. And and  that that's a great question. Um that's why we   took the time to kind of drill down to see what  the impact of not having these positions would be.   The answer to your question um honestly is yes.  it. There may be some increase in overtime but   in this year um you know we have a choice between  fixed cost that we got to you know pay or there is   u a little bit of leeway in in overtime costs.  Overtime costs are potentially depending on the   activity could be less. Um it is a difficult  decision um or difficult recommendation. I've  

talked with um all of our departments. It's not  ideal. It's nothing. It's not something that that   anyone is happy with, but uh for the most part  um I was assured that we could potentially move   forward on a short-term basis, but we need to find  a long-term solution, and we just need some time   to figure out if the ballot measures come come  through and all the other things we talked about.   Great. And just a follow-up question. Um, and  Dante, it's probably back to to you to ask. So,   I know it's a moving number. Maybe a couple weeks  ago it was 68 vacancies. Don't know where it's at   now, but it's probably north of 60. Uh if we're  looking at this 30 that are um consideration   and and brought to the council of those 30 the  remaining vacant positions have we gone through   uh the deep dive to say that those are in the  category of essential or are there others there   that are kind of on the line that that we would  say well maybe we should go to 35 frozen vacancies   freeing have additional um leeway. So, were there  other positions that you're still examining? And   I know you've been here just 3 weeks. It's hard  to say how much time you've had to drill down   on all of those positions, but I'd like to hear  your opinion about the remaining positions that   are are currently available. um once you say  go recruit, what's the consideration of the   additional and those that might still be kind of  on the fringe of consideration? Right. And so I   I'll um let uh Rafella talk a little bit about  the entire list, but um when I when I came in,  

there were a list of positions. some were um in  the stage of of being of of being recruited. Um   so I'm not sure if that made up the whole 68 list.  Can you explain the 68? It's not the whole list.   Um we had the list that we've been working  from um had um certain amount that are being   um presented to be frozen. We had another group  that are currently in the recruitment process. So,   we didn't touch any of those. And then there's  um some we call them the yellow colors that are   what do we do about these? Um there's some of  those positions that we purposely pushed off the   recruitment for those until um until January,  so until next spring. And then the other ones,   some of them, you know, based on the studies or  the evaluation that departments did, some of them   were greenlighted to go ahead and move forward  and some of them were just said, you know, also   just put a pause on them for now and some some  were just go ahead and recruit for them. So that   number does change um um every year. I mean it  it changes. We get a weekly report on vacancies.   It changes as people come in and they leave.  Um, the number of vacancies changes. We are not   targeting any positions that currently have bodies  in them. And even if there are positions that,   you know, someone gives notice for them, we're not  targeting go, oh, now let's freeze it. We're we're   assuming that we're going to fill those positions  directly afterwards. So, um, some of the other   ones that are there, it it we're taking the time  because what we don't want to do is is basically   gut everyone's department without them having the  adequate time to like look at their operations in  

their department is find out how can I restructure  my department to match what I currently have or   the service level. So that's the things that we're  trying to give that leeway to departments and so   that if there are things that they can come back  and say I can be more efficient with um doing it   this way or I can restructure my department this  way and the people and and um you know what they   have the services that they offer. So we're trying  to give that leeway instead of just making rash   decisions today. and and and just at a at a high  level, um I I think what I tried to do is not   necessarily harm the organizational structure more  than we need to, you know, um in ways that that we   couldn't repair without drilling down. Also, um we  allowed the positions that were up for recruitment   that were not funded through the general fund  to also move forward. And so that took some of   the positions positions off. Okay. And one last  question. Uh Raphaela, you mentioned um kind of a   color color examination assignment and I think you  were alluding to the yellow the yellow category.   Um, and if it was uh not recruit now, hold it  continuously to it's a vacant a vacant position   until where we see where we are after the June  election where we see um further into the first   half of the 26 27 budget. Those positions are  still in a funded but not filled position status.   Correct. So that that gives you additional leeway  and actually you'll have some funded but vacant   positions as an insurance for what a decision  at mid year or a decision u later in the end of   next year. It can be both and it also includes  like part of their we we are projecting that  

all the positions won't be filled and that  we'll still have salary savings from those   um vacant positions that are still on the list. So  we use $2.2 million to kind which is like 2.5% of   the salaries to kind of close the gap also. So we  are anticipating because someone may leave and it   takes 6 months to refill that position. Um and the  same thing with the positions that are actually   open and you know recruiting doesn't always happen  you know overnight. So we anticipate that. So   um at midy year we're looking at numbers that  are that are better. we know what our um what   our revenues are going to be. It's a good time to  bring back and at at our midyear discussion and   say what things that if we need to permanently  cut some things or wait till the next fiscal   year or if we need to um fill some positions  that um we can open up. Great. Thank you,   mayor. That's the only questions I have right now.  Awesome. Cushion. So, following in that theme, I'm   I'm sensing that the 30 that we've identified for  freezing are not necessarily going to be deleted   in the future. This is just a one-year pause.  That's correct. We need to do deeper evaluation.   Okay. Okay. So the expectation that we may save  permanently from trimming our employees may not   work out. I mean I I was kind of looking at that  list as I was surprised by it but I thought it was   a precursor to we we will delete these eventually.  the these are on their way to be deleted. That  

that that's not the case. Uh we still need to  do evaluation. Um I'm a big fan of I I I think   if you have a significant deficit, you need to cut  deep and not cut multiple times. The problem is we   don't know what the deficit is going to be because  we have so many things in play that could generate   um revenue for us. I'd rather understand  that, drill down with the departments and   cut once. Okay. All right. That makes sense. And  do we carry employee health insurance after 65? What am I looking at? No. Everybody. Is Brett  there? Yes. She said no. No. Okay. Thank you.   That's what I thought. Um but actually can I  interject? Sure. Once they once an employee   retires, we don't carry their insurance and take  them to 65 for Medicare. So that's a significant   difference. Our retirees when they retire,  if they retire at 65 and a half, they start   Medicare. [snorts] If they retire at 55, they're  on their own. So there's no continuing medical   Oh, okay. Thank you for that clarity. That's  helpful. Um, on the was on page four of the   packet, it talked about measure PNS and  it listed expenses of 1,375,000. And I   just wanted to understand what those expenses  are. because my understanding of PNS was that  

it did not cover administrative fees but  I could be wrong. So the numbers that are   um the numbers that are there for measure PNS  is um is the projects the new projects are not   um included on there because they come separately  throughout the year. I'm going to have Kyle tell   you exactly what the 1.3 [clears throat] is  there. Yeah, those are made up of professional   and contractual services. So before a project  is fully launched and implemented, there are   sometimes studies that need to be completed  or surveys that need to be done. And so these   uh those funds are intended to pay for those  things, okay, before a project fully. So a lay   person like me would would say that's we have an  oversight committee, so I know it's being done,   right? But an over lay person like me would say,  "Oh, okay. That's all in the cost of the street."   I would never suggest you're a lay person, but  absolutely. Okay. All right. Thank you, Kyle.   And then um the recommendation is to no longer  contribute to CIP and how will that affect the   CIP funding which I thought was available for  taking the dead fuel out of the forest. I think   there was a CIP contribution. I'm not sure whether  it was grants. Um, Reggie, is Reggie not here? NCIP versus No, CIP. Yeah. All of our fuel  reduction is out of NCIP funds and grants,   not CI, not actually CIP. And that's  just because we we don't have we don't   have that. So, that will not affect our  fuel reduction. Okay. Thank you. Okay.

And when when I see something on  the list like assistant fire chief,   but I went to the the badging of  Greg Greenley. Is it is that a   second assistant fire chief? Okay,  that's what Bill said. There's two. And on the 4 million $4.1  million in utility costs,   isn't isn't that an opportunity for for us  to really push into the future and and get   some solar and and bring these costs down? I I  guess I was shocked that it's 4 million a year   uh when when we should be leading on this.  We have a sustainability office. We have,   you know, 3CE. we should be able to fix that.  There any thoughts on that? Yeah, and and that's   a good strategy moving forward, but understand  there's capital outlay that has to happen before   you get the savings. But but that is a good  strategy moving forward that we can plan for   and I bet there's some startup grants and correct  available. And um on the 2013 financing agreement   um maybe we touched on it with the other  questions, but what what was that financing? It wasn't clear to me. It was the  initial loan amount of 7 million.   What were we financing? It was the sports  That was the sports center renovation. Y That'll feel good when it's over. And then the  the loans on the trucks, is that one loan on three  

different trucks? Is it three loans on one truck?  There there each of them have their own separate   loan because they were purchased at separate  times. Loans on three different trucks. Okay. All   right. That's it. Thank you. Um, I'll just make a  quick comment on the on the point that you raised,   Council Member Brash. Uh, as far as solar  projects, um, 3CE definitely has projects   because we're now a member of 3CE. There's,  um, opportunities available for us there,   though recognize that there's going to be that  initial investment that would be required for it.   So um the precid so the Presidio of Monterey fund  um has expenses that are outpacing the revenues in   the agenda report and I'm just kind of trying to  understand why that is if they should be paying   for their service those services to the city.  They're usually timing difference. They're usually   timing differences. Okay. So we'll be fully  reimbured for all the expenses. It's [snorts] just   a payment. Okay. Um, and then why is the facility  maintenance fund carved out with the general fund   table? The facility because it's still part of the  general fund, but that's from the parks and that   extra 5% that we voted on you guys voted  on several years ago for all the parking   um parking recreation things to give. So that  money that came in on top of the fees to go for   specifically maintenance maintenance for those. So  we separate those out so that it's easy to track.   Okay. Um and then I had the similar question that  Dr. Barber had in regards to that 79% increase in   overtime. Just kind of it'd be great to understand  how much of that was city of Monterey versus our  

neighboring jurisdictions covering that making up  that overtime increase. I can get that to you. Um, is there any department from the 10% O andM cuts  or the 17% if we're going to do the total amount   that feels an unduly impact of the sequestration  or the axe grind of the 10% across the board? Is   is there is there a concern from one department  say like police where that will have an impact   on services? I can say it's not ideal for  anyone. Um and so it's it's kind of this   uh situation where um you know you kind of have to  take the middle of the road. You have to split the   baby. Um I've had conversations with all the  departments about the hiring freezes. Um the   the on andm cuts actually happened before I got  here. Um but I can tell you that the departments   have told me that they can sustain this for a  short period of time until we we figure out a   a different solution. So nobody's happy um fully,  but I believe that the departments are understand   the issues. They understand that we're fighting  for the um sustainability of this organization. Okay, I part of me wants to push this a little bit more,  but what what I also hear is that at the director   level, there seems to be an acknowledgement or  agreement in regards to the short-term fix here.   um the positions that are currently being  recruited, we we're saying that we're not  

going to freeze those. Are there any subset of  those that say we recruit and the recruitment   comes out to be unsuccessful that we would move  those over to a freeze position potentially? We   we haven't made that decision yet. Um what  what we have said was certain recruitments   uh off the list we're we're not going to  start that recruitment until mid year,   right? That's where some of the salary  savings come from. And then just naturally   um certain positions that we are recruiting for  just take a long time um to fill. So we haven't   set a a a firm standard with that, but we do  expect to experience some savings. Okay. Thank   you for it. And then um I guess I just wanted to  press a little bit more too on the fuel budget.   I'm not actually quite understanding  if we're seeing a higher cost in fuel,   why are we anticipating a flat from last from  this current fiscal year's budget for it? I think the shortest answer is that we actually  anticipated we might be able to make a reduction   in our fuel costs for next year. The same time we  were coming to that decision is when geopolitical   events uh started sort of spiking. So we held it  flat for next year with the anticipation that we   may need to take a look at it. Um so based on  usage and last couple of fiscal years rates we   may have been able to see a decline but we  didn't feel that that was Could you speak   to the usage part a little bit more? So we're  seeing a decline in usage. Where are we seeing   that? Why are we seeing that? I'm I'd have to  defer to my fleet colleagues, I think, for that.

We've actually had a steady increase in overall  fuel usage amongst the city. Um, but I think like   we were like one of 109,000 in 2022. We're like  100 projected to do like 114 115,000 by the end   of 26. What is that calendar year? Sorry, that  that number that you're giving is that a dollar?   That's gallons. So then um so basically with this  with this uh what I figured out today was we're   probably looking at about right now if we stay  on the projected course of what we've been so far   this year, we would be about a $50,000 increase  from over last year's total um consumption cost.   Okay. Still a little confusing. And that's still  [clears throat] not equal to what we paid in 2022.   Believe it or not, we paid I think we paid 500  what was it? Five five I didn't bring it with   me. I'm sorry. But um 570,000 in in 2022 in total  fuel costs and then this year I think we're at   uh we're projected to be like 565. Okay. Okay.  So it sounds like there may be a slight increase.   I guess I'm just trying to clarify that. Then  also this comment around the decrease in usage.   That's what's weird is because we the first part  of this year fuel was a lot lower cost per gallon.   We've only had about a month's worth of sustained  higher cost. So, thus far. So, yeah, the question   is projectionists are predicting that the fuel  is going to go to $78 a gallon here. Time will   tell. Um, if we I you know, I don't know how you'd  figure that in there. I'm just figuring on this   highest dollar that we've spent thus far in this  four months that we've had going into on 26. So,   I don't know how you're going to I guess to  me the dollar I I'm I don't want to push this   too much further. The dollar amount and how much  fuel costs is different than how much fuel we're   actually using, how many gallons we're using.  So, it sounds like there's been a reduction in   the amount of gallons of gas, I'm assuming gas  that we're purchasing. So, what has caused us to   have a decrease in the amount of fuel that we're  taking in as opposed to the cost of the fuel? We  

really haven't had that much of a decrease. It's  actually been slightly increased. Okay. So, it's   more about the decrease. The gallon the gallonage  if I was to have a graph that was from 22 is just   steadily gone up by about 4,000 gallons per annual  year. And then um but the the cost is what kind of   fluctuates because it's the dollar per gallon.  You know, what we're paying at the pump. 22.   It was actually higher than what it is now at its  peak. And we've only had a month's worth of prices   equivalent to what we paid in 2022. So, we really  don't know what that detriment of that's going to   be by the end of the calendar year. Awesome.  Awesome. Thank you for that. That's really   helpful. When you look at it on a graph, it looks  really goofy the way it comes out because that's I   when I I was kind of shocked when I saw that we  actually spent more in 2022 than projected this   year, but it's just going to all it's going to  be very variant on the amount of uh what we have   to pay per gallon for the rest of the year. Yeah.  Yeah. So, yeah, absolutely. Thank you for say too.   So, no. Thank you. Um, and then my last question  is related to the firetruck loans. There's the   three loans and then there is also a line item  for the firetruck debt service. And if you could   just help me understand what that debt service  one and how that differentiates from the loans. Is that just the fees associated with doing  the loans? No, there was um the first one,   the debt service was a loan that was already  in place. These last three are new. So the debt   service for the first one is one that was already  here. So it's just got a different title. That   was a fire a previous firetruck separate. So it's  like that's really like fire truck that would be   firetruck one and then Okay. Okay. Exactly.  All right. That's it for me. I think we've   gone through a good amount of questions from the  council. So, thank you staff for answering those   questions. With that, we'll go ahead and open it  up for public comment. For everybody's awareness,   what we do is we capture those that want to  speak during public comment at the beginning  

of the public comment period. Once those folks  are identified, we then cut it off and then only   those folks will be able to speak. So, you  have to identify yourself at the beginning   of the public comment period in order to speak  during public comment. I'll start with folks on   Zoom. You can use the raise hand function. While  you're navigating your way there, I will check   with folks in the chamber. Anybody that wish to  speaks on this speak on this item, I just ask if   you stand up to the left of the podium where the  line is already forming or if you prefer to remain   seated if you just identify yourself by raising  your hand. All right, I see one spre I got you.   You're good to go. You're good. You don't have  to keep your hand up. You're good. Um, so one,   two, three, four, five, six, seven folks in line  and then Mr. Vega. So that's eight in the chamber.   Anybody else in the chamber wish to speak on on  public comment? All right, so we'll cut it off   in the chamber to those eight speakers. I'll do a  countdown for folks on Zoomed. Five, four, three,   two, one. And we have seven on Zoom. Um, we have  a half hour left before this meeting is supposed   to be over. So, I'm going to leave it to two  minutes. We'll go ahead and start in the chamber. Kevin Dayton speaking as government affairs  leazison for the Monterey Peninsula Chamber   of Commerce. Our board of directors discussed  the uh budget situation for the city on Monday   and it was great to see on the next day this  special meeting come up to do exactly what people   were hoping for which is as you proceed with your  proposed tax increases to show the the voters and   the businesses here that you're also seriously  looking at finding ways to cut expenditures.   uh what you're experiencing here, as you probably  know, a lot of other cities in California are   doing the exact same thing. And actually, you've  you've dealt with this before. I still have all   my files on this. You may remember in 2019,  uh uh the city declared a state of fiscal   emergency and then you did a sales tax and a  toot tax increase. And of course, uh you know,   this is just human nature. Once things were  were better, there wasn't the pressure to make,  

you know, the tough decisions and now you're right  back in here again. I'll mention one thing that   I pointed out in 2019 during the budget thing  is the authority for California city's excess   liability. Um when I noted the huge increase in  the amount of expenditures for that in 2019 the   city manager at the time said, "Oh, that's because  Santa Monica is in it and they had that accident   where a car plowed into uh you know a farmers  market." That was in 2003. And I said, 'You know,   I I don't know if it's wise for City of Monterey  to be in a uh fund that also has Santa Monica in   it. Maybe you should look at another one. Well,  you're still in it today, and Santa Monica is   now shelling out what is it, $229 million so  far for uh you know, new settlements. I think   uh the only time you ever have that on your agenda  is when it it comes up for an appointment to that.   you need to find out if there's a better joint  powers agency to put your your uh authority in   rather than that one. I'll also notice uh  economic development. I'd love to hear more   about that in the coming months. You know, you  need to think of long-term solutions. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Kathy Buy. I'm a  Monterey resident. I'll be quick. I You have   a lot of people that want to speak. Um, I kind  I wanted to speak about the tax uh increase. I   I have thought a lot about this and I've looked at  the numbers and I think it's unfortunate that past   administrations and councils haven't addressed the  repair on our infrastructure. So, that puts us in   a very awkward position along with all the current  events. I can see where we're having issues. Um,   I I don't think anyone wants to pay taxes yet. I  think this one is really important and a couple  

of reasons. One is I think that our kids and our  grandkids are already walking into a huge mess and   I don't think we have to leave more of a mess for  them. Um, like I said, nobody wants to pay more   taxes, but I think we owe a responsibility for  future generations to do that. The other thing   I think would be important is a consideration  of including the community as you move forward   and some sort of commission or just having a a  a opportunity to speak about what happens with   those monies that we're now, you know, working on  from the sales tax perspective to just be able to   have some insight and I think the community  um would appreciate that too. So, thank you. Good afternoon. Uh staff did a great job,  especially uh Mr. Hill was really got halt rather.   Um I didn't want to dwell on this too much, but  some of the other reasons I think we're were   in the predicament we're in is um unfunded state  mandates. I spent much of my time working for the   city of Monterey on unfunded state mandates such  as the storm water program. Uh so that's that's   a big cause. Uh reduction in property taxes due  to expansion of nonprofits and the city acquiring   properties over the years. Window on the Bay is  an example of that. I think we all love Window   on the Bay, but there were businesses there and  we were collecting property tax on that property.   Uh we've also taken on numerous historic buildings  since uh I moved here in 1988. the Ketchum House.   Uh there's the first I I forget the name of the  actual building, but it's the first son lumber   home house over here on the corner and Doc's lab  are just some examples in the old capital site   as the most recent example. Um I've I've heard  that there's no CIP, but I think uh what staff  

means by that is no general funded CIP if I've  if I understand that correctly because there   still is a CIP, just not general fund. Um I'll go  through these as quick as I can here. Um there's   a statement about that. It looks like revenues  are on on point for this year. However, when I   look at property taxes, it looks like we're going  to probably fall short. That's on page five. Um staff overtime, we've already talked about that.  I think there's some offsetting income that   uh accounts for that. When it comes to engineering  positions, many of the u at least when I was city   engineer, a number of the engineering positions  were being paid through through the NCIP. So,   it seemed like there is an offsetting revenue  source. It's the NCIP. So, hopefully you you've   been taking that in account. So, it wouldn't to me  it wouldn't make sense to to not fill a position   that could be funded through the NCIP because they  should be working on those projects. Thank you. Hello, my name is Chris Richardson. I'm the  treasurer of the Monterey Police Association.   Uh I wanted to uh provide some brief context on  proposed uh police staffing reductions and what   they might mean operationally, at least in my  opinion. Uh I'm going to start this in 2008   uh because that's when I started. Uh the  department has lost 90 sworn people since 2008.   Uh that includes about 28 that didn't make  some form of training whether it be probation   or FTO. 21 lateral to another agency. 27  retired. Uh six medically retired. Uh six   uh left for other reasons sometimes  out of law enforcement and two died   uh from cancer. Um today we're fast uh facing an  significant experience gap. Uh 26 officers have   less than 10 years on. 15 of those have under  five years. Only 20 sworn personnel have more   than 10 years of experience. And of those  15 though they are in leadership positions  

uh leading just five truly really experienced  mentor officers. Uh that means the majority of   calls are being handled by newer officers with  limited uh uh limited experience. Uh looking   ahead we have four confirmed retirements this year  with four more people uh at retirement age that   haven't announced retirement but they can retire  at any time. Um the proposed cuts I would imagine   are not going to be coming from patrol. They're  going to be coming from special assignments. These   positions are both critical for both operations  and retention. If those opportunities are removed,   officers may lateral to other agencies that  offer those uh experiences where they can learn   uh new things like being a detective, uh working  at a school, different things like that. Um and   uh in today's environment, experienced officers  have options. Agencies are hiring uh basically   everywhere. Uh so instead of saving money, we risk  losing trained personnel, increasing vacancies   and overtime, uh spending more to recruit and  and train replacements. Public safety is not   quickly built or public safety staffing is not  quickly built once positions and experience or   loss. It takes years for them to recover. It's  not just about numbers. It's about maintaining   a department with experience, stable, capable uh  of people capable of serving the community. I ask   that you consider long-term impacts when  looking at making reductions. Thank you. Hello, council. Uh my name's Dennis Duke, as you  probably all know. Um, one of the things I saw   looking through this, um, staff report was, um,  as Hall mentioned, uh, there's cracks. There's   cracks in our infrastructure and the fact that we  don't have budgetarity, budgetary additions to CIP   to help fix those cracks. We're going to have  to get to that overall over the period of time,   probably in the deeper dives in the budget. Um,  community contributions. Uh, I would recommend   that we keep first night. I think it's a good  thing to have. Uh, overtime. I agree with both  

Tyler and Kim that, uh, we need an analysis  to understand whether or not we're getting   reimbursed on that overtime and probably available  to the public so that we don't say, "Oh my god,   that much overtime because 5.4 million, I  can't imagine we can't save some money there."   uh debt service I raised during the NCIP cycle.  Um taking the undergrounding funds that we are   going to have to have as matching funds for PG  when they're ready to do that project and have   that as a loan potentially to the city from the  NCIP program. Uh and finally, I was encouraged   with uh the new city manager's comment about  one-time take of the NCIP funds because this   is a 40-year program that has within it the TOOT  being set up with 16% a minimum of 16% going to   this program. Um and it's a well-loved program. I  think it's a great thing for the city to have. So,   I applaud the staff for a great first step  towards getting to fiscal responsibility.   I think you guys have done a lot of work and  probably have a lot ahead of you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Ellen Martin and I'm the director of  First Night Monteray. Most of you know me,   uh, mayor, council members, uh, new, uh,  city manager and assistant city manager,   and all of the staff. Thank you so much for  the presentation and the opportunity to speak.   You know, for 33 years, First Night has partnered  with the city to produce a really safe, inclusive,   alcohol-free New Year's Eve celebration.  It serves thousands and visitors and uh,   residents alike. I just wrote a few things down.  My heart is racing because to be seen as the only  

nonprofit that's been called off for zero funding  really like makes my heart stop. But First Night   is, I believe, an essential infrastructure, not  a luxury. A small investment for a large return,   public safety for community well-being and  equity that in equals access. We're really   surprised that uh we were seen in this budget as  the only long-standing community organization,   but specifically identified for zero funding.  We'd like to better understand that decision   respectfully, but we believe that the city funding  directly covers the cost of the conference center,   the police, the public works. And  while your contribution is modest,   it's foundational because it helps us allow  to build partnerships, secure sponsorships,   and um additional resources. The support also  makes possible year-round programming. We just   ended a week-long spring break for Monterey  and then in uh Pacific Grove, and we'll be   offering six week-long workshops at Archer  Park for young people. It's very successful.   It brings in um each week 25 at least children.  Um and you know, First Night's not a place in   the city that if we didn't have it on New Year's  Eve, what would be happening? You would be paying   a lot of money for public safety as Santa Cruz  did 22 years ago. Thank you so much. Thank you. Hello. Um, I'm on the board of First Night  30-year teacher in here in California. What   I have seen is in the days of Oh, first of  all, thank you. You're such conscientious,   realistic people looking at hard hard things.  I lived through No Child Left Untested and it  

what they did, they stripped the arts out of  the the low-income neighborhoods and it was I   think it's costing us. It's costing us lots of  ways. So the Mterrey brand is it's a beacon to   all of us that it's brings us here brought  parent my parents here to meet in Monterey   High and have seven kids that was bold and  uh so thinking of the underserved the arts   is healing phenomena. We you don't know how much  benefit we're getting for the intram folks the   people that you know come together one way or  another in an arts environment. And uh that's   probably pretty much what I have to say except art  saves lives. I just imagine how fulfilling it is   to have something and people to share with.  I'm going to stop bothering you. Blessings, mayor, council, um I I just want to mention a  few things because um you have some really tough   decisions and um the presentation u was really  quick. So, you really couldn't u keep up. And   unfortunately, she didn't realize, but you got to  speak up a little bit louder so we can hear you   in the background because we can hardly hear you  uh and make out what you were saying and you're   probably not even aware of it. Um but anyway,  um but it appears to me that most these cuts are   going to have to be somewhere in the salaries and  benefits because that's 70% of your budget. You're   going to have to get to that $10 million. And um  I myself, I'm against the the the sales tax we're   already up against. If we have an emergency and we  had to generate money for some catastrophic item,   you don't have any more money to get in sales tax.  You you guys are pushing the envelope. And so,   um, I would recommend that you, uh, look back  what previous city council did it when the sales   tax was only 3%, 4%. This this idea that we can  continue just going on and on and on and continue  

with these salaries and benefits and these  benefits is where probably where most that   money is being spent because if you look at the  total compensation at this at the state website of   what it costs per employee, you're going to have  a lot bigger number than what you see uh what you   have. I'm a big supporter of police and the fire  because I think they're essential for any any any   city. You got to have a safe city. You got to have  a safe place. But um from the public sector, we've   been taxed to death. We have literally been taxed  to death. And so I would be against any uh sales   tax, against any kind of tax that's not where you  guys can't learn to live within your means and   learn to cut fairly across the board and not take  it on just one group. Thank you for your time.   All right, with that we'll go to our callers on  Zoom. [cough] Our first speaker will be Lori. Lori, you'll need to unmute. All right, I will come back to Oh, so sorry. So  sorry. I was running to the computer. I didn't   know I would be first up. Um, good evening,  council, and everyone. Uh and staff, thank you   so much for the presentation. Um I'm I'm going  to just say a couple of things before I get to   the bulk and I'll probably run out of time, but uh  before I comment, I just want to say up front that   um I understand Dante just arrived, so I'm going  to extend grace to him while he gets his seal leg   sea legs, but really the bulk of us who've been  watching this have been here watching this kind   of train wreck in slow motion, and we're eager to  see more decisive action sooner rather than later.   And um just so that it doesn't become a rumor and  maybe we get some clarity. Uh Tyler was recently  

um at our neighborhood for a meeting a week or  two ago and he said after his uh first meeting   with the new city manager talked about a plan  that was going to take two years to evaluate   every position that's on this cut list and across  the city before cutting anything. And I kind of   choked when I heard that. Um is that true? And if  so, I just don't think we can wait two years to   make cuts. Um, and I have a few questions. Let  me get them out before I run out of time. Uh,   is there any reason why these slides  and presentations that Raphaela gave Nat   um are not included in the agenda packet ahead of  this meeting? And I would say the same for other   meetings. It would be so helpful to have all of  that information because I I think we could all   give better, more constructive feedback and  comment during public comment time if we had   those. Um I know I I'd like to look at it a  little more rather than a fleeting slide. And   uh when and why was the decision made to recruit  more than half of the 68 frozen positions? I   thought we were under a hiring freeze. And um uh  someone mentioned the workers comp insurance that   we didn't have to pay. I'm wondering if there's  significant savings in hiring contractors. Could   we look at a strategy of doing that rather than  recruiting a lot of these positions to fill the   gaps? Okay. Guess I'm not going to get to the  Thank you. Our next speaker is uh Rick. Let's see. Rick, you can unmute and go ahead. Yes, this  is Rick Hoyer, president of the Monterey Pensa   Taxpayers Association. I've made a lot of comments  in previous meetings. I think the challenge you   all are facing and in particular Dante as the  new city manager is lack of trust that you once  

a tax measure is approved, you will actually  do anything. The track record of the city of   Monterey in 2019 was we need two different  taxes. It'll solve all of our problems. We   had deficit then nothing was done to solve the  longer term problems. In our opinion, you need   to start showing action on that before you start  looking at raising taxes because there's nothing   guaranteeing that we're going to have reductions  once there's new revenue put in place. And I   agree with previous speaker, we're being taxed to  death in this area. It's a big part of why it's so   expensive to be living here. Uh we've indicated in  the past we're more than happy to engage with the   city and be involved in any kind of committee to  look at how do we start living within our means.   I think you need to involve the public in that  and just promises of doing it in the future.   Give me the money now, we'll fix it afterwards  isn't going to cut it. Uh that's it. Thank you. Next we have a representative  from the Monterey Firefighters.   Hi, my name is Philip Bazidiska. I'm vice  president of Monterey Firefighters Local 3707. Uh,   city staff's recommendation to freeze the  assistant fire chief, deputy fire marshal, and   three firefighter positions goes against multiple  findings and recommendations from the citygate   standards of coverage study published in 2022.  I'll read a couple of these points. Finding number   19, the administration division lacks sufficient  staffing capacity to adequately meet its emergency   management responsibilities. Recommendation  number two, the city should consider providing   an additional 4.4 to 7.7 full-time equivalent  headquarters staffing capacity as identified in   this report to relieve critical ongoing workload  capacity gaps, provide redundant capacity to   eliminate identified single points of failure and  provide additional chief officer depth. End quote.  

I don't think any more needs to be said about fire  department administration staffing. Moving on to   the three firefighter positions. While we will  always maintain readiness and emergency response,   freezing firefighter positions will increase  workload on line personnel as well as overtime   costs incurred by the city. Your firefighters have  been through turmoil at the hands of a previously   short staff administration, including a civil  grand jury investigation, voting no confidence   in our former firefight and our former fire  chief, fighting to retain the contract with   Monterey airport, losing a long-standing contract  with the DLI and a contentious negotiation cycle   which ended in arbitration. We've come a long  way since then. Over the last three years,   morale has improved. We have good relationships  with our contract agencies and [snorts] Monterey   Fire is once again a leader in standards  and training in the region. Any reductions   in staffing would wind back the clock to a  tumultuous past. We urge you to recognize   the improvements you have made and make a  decision to preserve that progress. Thank you. Next we have Kent. Hi there. Um Ken Planser. I'm an associate  professor of public policy at the Mberry   Institute and a resident of Oldtown. Um first  off, thank you everybody who's who have done such   um a lot of work on this. I really appreciate  it. Um Dante, welcome. Haven't met you yet.   I hope I do. Um you know, Dante started his  presentation by saying this is all structural.   I just really want to emphasize for you,  Dante, and for current council members,   it is indeed structural. It's um a little  disappointing. I mean, I understand you're   solving an emergency. I promise I understand  that. And there's almost nothing structural in  

what you're doing this year. Um that surprises me.  And I guess what I all I want to say is all right.   I guess those of us who've been here for a real  long time and know that the city of Mterrey has   uh had an incipient if not explicit structural  deficit for I've lived here for 15 years. It's   always been there and we keep kicking the can down  the road. So bless your hearts. Sure. I don't have   any personal problem with anything that's being  recommended right now. But Dante, when you when   you say next year is going to be different and  city council members, when you say next year is   going to be different, I'm going to be around in  a year from now to ask you about that. That's all. Our next speaker is Ken Hi, my name is Ken Peterson, resident of Monterey  and one of the founders of First Night Monterey.   Um, I appreciate uh city manager Hall's comment  about in the response to council member Garcia's   question about funding for Fourth of July, saying  that the budget wanted to support events that   create community. Um, I also appreciate his  comment in relation to staffing positions and   budgeting for those of the city of Monterey,  not wanting to harm organizational structure   and zeroing out funding for first night with all  that it contributes to building community would   indeed harm the organizational structure and  threaten the future of the annual celebration  

that has been going on for 33 years. The  amount of money budgeted for first night,   $35,000, if my math is correct, represents three  10,000ths of a percent of the city budget deficit.   And that seems like a very small investment  to make in a significant community event.   I would urge you to not zero that out and treat it  as you are treating the Fourth of July celebration   as something integral to building the quality  and character of the community. Apart from that,   I just want to add one additional thing related to  something that Council Rash asked about fuel costs   and and moving to a green future that uh gives the  city more energy independence. As you're looking   at revenue sources, I would encourage you to  consider uh submitting to voters a bond to   create the green infrastructure that will create  a city of Monterey for the future. And please do   continue to support First Night Monterey  as a community event. Thank you very much. Diane is our next speaker. Diane,  you can unmute and go ahead.   Good evening. My name is Diane DMS and the  last eight years I have been a volunteer   with First Night Monteray. So I've been able  to witness some of the joy that our families   experience when they come down to uh celebrate  New Year's Eve in an alcohol-free environment.   and I'm asking that you thanking you first of  all for the past support but I'm also asking   you to consider funding it again in the future.  Um Mon first time Monterey provides a lot of good   programs for our community. Um your art camps as  Ellen mentioned are wonderful. uh we're going to  

have a starting them again in a few weeks and it  builds so much confidence and creativity and forms   lasting friendships for the kids involved in the  camps and so I'm asking that you please consider   funding it again in the future um so that we  can continue this valuable program. Thank you. And our last speaker is Esther. Good afternoon everybody. Um, couple of things  I wanted to point out. Um, staff didn't remind   everybody that the sales tax in Monterey are  mostly paid for by visitors to the city. Um,   a lot of us do our shopping outside the city, but  most of the sales tax does come from visitors.   So that wouldn't necessarily be impacting  residents as much and the city needs the money   especially because we have so many visitors come  here and strain our resources. Um I also want to   remind everybody that most of the property taxes  that everybody pays go to the county. They don't   go to the city. I wish that um staff had put up  a pie chart showing that because that's very real   and the county is facing their own deficit and  I would imagine every one of you that are coming   out here to complain about the city raising their  taxes will go to the county board of supervisors   meeting also because they are in the same  predicament that we are in. And they they will be   getting a lot of your tax money even more than the  city. So, that's something to keep in mind. Um,   when everybody wants to blame the current council,  I want to agree with what Kathy said earlier that   this is this does have to do with previous  administrations lack of foresight. And I agree   with um what Kent said also. It's structural and  it's structural for a long time. So, why hasn't  

it been addressed by previous administrations  and now it's all turned into this debacle?   Um, I'm glad to hear that reserves don't seem to  be they're like they're going to be taken away   as long as more isn't given into them. That's  fine, but we do need to keep the reserves. Um,   I'm happy to hear that the Boys and Girls  Club um arrangement is still a possibility   because using Kona for that was one of my first um  suggestions and I'm glad it's not dead. And we we   need to have, you know, more staff to to filter  everybody who comes to council and complain. All right, with that, thank you for all those that  provided public comment. Um, we're running out of   time. Um, I'm going to ask that we do the same  two minutes that we provided to the public for   the council as we close out the meeting. So, um,  Clementine, if you wouldn't mind putting up the   timer for the council to see, who would like  to get us started? All right, Dr. Barber. So,   first of all, thank you again to everyone.  Um, all your feedback is well appreciated. Uh,   want to applaud First Night uh, and the work  that they do. I enjoy it every year. Uh, they do   a great job. Uh I'm hoping that the sponsorships  that you have procured um in the years before will   continue to sustain you and I hope that we can  look forward to uh funding uh in the future. Um   as far as sales tax concerned um that's something  nobody wants to see but um again something that   the last speaker spoke about is that in our area  because we are highly uh tourist area we do have a   lot of tourists that are paying those sales tax.  The other part of that is is that this is not   anything that's abnormal. Over 50% of the cities  in uh the state of California actually have used   the sales tax to utilize uh closing gaps in their  fiscal budgets. So this is nothing different or  

new. Uh but this is a tool that's being utilized  this point, but is also being utilized in hybrid   with deep cuts that are being made by the staff  and that are being made by the city. I think it   was a 7% cut before, and correct me if I'm wrong,  24, 25, 20, 20. Okay. Yeah. And then 26, we just   had the 10%. And so, it's it's a hybrid of a lot  of things. So, I want to make sure that, you know,   people understand that, you know, it's it's a it's  like uh uh the city manager was talking about,   we're building the bridge together. We're filling  the gaps together. Um, it doesn't mean that any of   us individually were making all the choices that  were made, you know, back before a lot of us were   in here, but we have to make the choices now. And  so, I feel that the staff have worked hard and   they've done a great job. Thank you. Who'd like  to go next? Please, Council Garcia. Thank you. Um,   so I'm going to say that in general, I do support  the uh proposed strategy. Um but I do have some   uh details to add from my perspective. Um I think  uh freezing the 30 positions um makes sense. Um,   I think from looking at the list of the positions,  it feels like the economic developer position   would be the only position that could support our  efforts for the long term in terms of addressing   the the structural deficit. So, uh, I would like  to see that position actually be at the front of   the line for recruitment because I think  it speaks to what we're, uh, talking about   here. Um in terms of uh O andM sounding like  um directors are not entirely happy but can  

make this work. If that's what they're saying then  I'll support that. Um reduction to contributions   to external organizations. I'm going to lump  in Fourth of July and first night into this.   um absolutely events that need to get uh support  um for community building and and I think they're   very important and very uh critical for our  community. Having said this, um I think that we   are in a in a very challenging time and I can't  in good conscious say yes, let's um not reduce   Fourth of July um or reduce uh contributions  to external organizations and in the same   breath talk about reducing the rental assistance  assistance program by 50%. So, I think we need   to take care of our vulnerable population. And  that's my time. Thank you. Who'd like to go next? Please go ahead, Council Member Smith. Yeah, thank  you very much. Um, first off, I I've never known   that we've had a timer ever imposed on a city  council member, and I don't I don't know what   the rush is because we've got some very important  things to talk about, and I don't know when we're   going to get a chance to be able to spend  more time hashing this out and giving staff   directions. First off, let me give my preferences.  Uh, I concur that first night is important to me.   think it's important to the community and we're  talking about $35,000. Uh that's not much. I   know every dime counts, but it sounds like we're  going to have the salary savings and at least an   additional and excuse me for the noise. I'm in  a public place and that's very noisy. Um yeah,  

I think $35,000 needs to be happening for uh first  night. Uh, and that's one of the things that it's   important to me. Uh, I'm concerned about the  reduction of the firefighters and the police   officers. I need a deeper analysis and I need to  be convinced that uh, that's not going to impact   the overtime or the emergency readiness  and preparation for what we need for uh,   responses and shift coverages. So, I think that  we need to bring this back uh and talk a little   bit further and deeper on these topics before  we we launch into our final uh weighing in. One   additional thing that's listed under um the the  external loans. I just wanted to point out that   the conference center um bond is listed. However,  that is fully paid by the CCF collection from the   room nights. So I just want the public to be aware  that that is there for accounting but that is   paid for by the hotel hotel guests that come and  several of them will come for first night as well   so we should keep that. Thank you. That's all for  now and more in a future meeting. Thank you. Um it   was so evident how hard staff worked and I know  how hard it was and it's going to stay hard. Um,   I too think we ought to stick with first night.  And the key for me is it's alcohol-f free and I   don't want to see the families and the kids on the  roads and I just want don't want to go backwards.   I'm very worried because I thought tonight I'd be  coming and saying the [snorts] 30 positions that   we think we can do without ought to be deleted  right now. We need to show the community that  

we're serious and that they can trust us with  giving us more taxes. And what I'm really hearing   is those are important. I mean, you can read  the list and know they're important, but that   they're just kind of temporary. It's just kind  of putting your thumb on the on the bleeding. So,   uh, we need to find 30 positions that we really  can live without, and it's not going to be fire   and it's not going to be the police. So,  um, from from the bottom of our hearts,   what we can as a community live without and  what we can't live without, and we have to make   structural cuts to programs and to jobs, and we  need to do it. We can't keep going on with this.   And I can see why the public is frustrated because  we haven't done the cuts that we were leading up   to. And I think perhaps out of respect for our  new city manager, give give him a chance, but   um we we've got a lot on the line here, including  the trust of the community with our taxes and   whether these taxes are going to go through and  the safety of our community with our fire and   safety. Thank you. Um I'm going to jump right into  it. Um I I want to be careful how we talk about   um the salaries and benefits of our workforce.  We, as Dante alluded to, we need to make sure   that we're retaining and recruiting good talent  within the city of Monterey. So, we have to be   careful. There are certain things within that  that we might be able to talk about, and I'll   jump to one of those in a second. Um, the sales  tax, um, I just would point out an an argument um,   in support of us moving forward with that. If the  county decides to come in and take that funding,   that's money that's not going to be coming to the  city of Monterey. that would still potentially be  

taken from um residents. So, we might as well take  this opportunity to get that sales tax revenue to   coming into the city of city of Monterey. I'm  concerned around the conversation around re   um reserves. I get it for this situation, but  um I see the reserves as a program that's like   any other funded project within the city of  Monterey. We need to continue to uh support   that so that we're not continuing to kick the can  down the road. CIP I'm also concerned about. Um   I [snorts] would like to see what's not going to  be done because we're not allocating that funding.   So I I look forward to that discussion. Um I it  would be interesting to see if the general fund   expenditures by department as it relates to the  revenue they generate and just kind of seeing that   comparison. Um regarding first night um I support  the current proposed project and I also appreciate   uh proposal and I also appreciate what council  member um Garcia said. Um, both great projects.   Um, but what are nice to haves and what are  what are musts? And the city of Monterey,   we are responsible for providing public safety and  and taking care of the infrastructure in the city   of Monterey. Um, I would also just point out that  we're not seeing a lot of support from the federal   and state government and if anything, we're seeing  a clawback of funding. So that we have a tough dis   discussion to have here. I I'll end with um I I I  agree with Council Member Rash. We need to figure   out the position piece and looking at what could  we actually truly cut. I think the community is   asking for that and it's not going to bode well  as we sit here and ask for additional funding. So,   some of those tough decisions I think need to  be made as part of this budget. Um all right,   with that that's time. Does staff have any  questions that might be helpful from the   council at this point or do you feel like you have  enough to move forward? I think we have enough to   move forward and when we present the budget to  you, we'll have those questions. Uh we heard you  

loud and clear. Um and we'll bring it to you. Um  the next meeting um looking at Rafella for budget   June 2nd for June 2nd. Okay. So the next council  meeting on the budget is June 2nd. I apologize to   the council that you didn't have we didn't have  more time to discuss this because I I know I have   more points. I'm sure you all had more points as  well. you have your opportunity to have th those   discussions directly with the city manager um  to help provide a little bit more color to that   discussion. Um thank you to the public showing  up providing public comment. We're all in this   together. This isn't the council figuring this  out. This isn't staff figuring this out. This   is us figuring this out as a community together.  The reason why it's taken so long to get here is   because these types of conversations are very  hard. They're very difficult and it's going to   be a very difficult and uncomfortable position for  the entire city. So, we need to be here for each   other to support each other, know that we all have  the best interest for our community collectively   together. Um, so with that, I'll go ahead  and adjourn the meeting. Thank you everybody. Get it done.