Orange City Council - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call the regular city council meeting of June 23rd, 2026 to order. Tonight's invocation, first of all, if you have not silenced your cell phones, please take the opportunity to do that now. Tonight's invocation will be given by Father Joseph Tran from Holy Family Catholic Church to be followed by Pledge of Allegiance led by Council Member Barrios. Please stand.

Let us gather ourselves and pray. Almighty God, we come before you today with gratitude for this community and for the privilege of gathering in freedom. We thank you for the citizens of this city and the diverse voices that make up our community. We ask for your wisdom, guidance, and strength to be with our mayor, our city staff, and the members of the city council. Grant them the insight to govern fairly, the courage to make difficult decisions, and the spirit of harmony and cooperation as they face the issues of our time. May all the work accomplished here today promote justice, peace, and the general welfare of all who call the city home. And in your name we say amen. Amen.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please join me by placing your hands on your heart. Ready, begin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Father Tran. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Council Member Barrios. I am here. Council Member Dimitriou.

Present.

Council Member Tavalares. Here. Council Member Gutierrez. Here. Council Member Gillenhammer.

Here.

Mayor Slater.

Here.

A quorum is present with Mayor Potempo-Ladeau excused.

Thank you. All right, we have three proclamations this evening and the first one is a proclamation recognizing july 2026 as parks make life better month and council member gillenhammer would like to present that

Thank you, Mayor. So this proclamation recognizing July 2026 as Parks Make Life Better Month. Whereas parks and recreation promote physical, emotional, and mental health and wellness through organized and self-directed fitness, play, and activity that foster social connections and provide safe and welcoming spaces for families, youth, seniors, and visitors. And whereas parks and recreation creates memorable experiences through youth and adult sports and enrichment activities, teen centers and programs, senior activity centers, adult fitness and enrichment programs and beyond. And whereas parks, recreation programs, trails, open spaces and community services play a vital role in enhancing the quality of life for residents of all ages in the City of Orange. And whereas the City of Orange is committed to preserving its parks, recreational facilities and community programs that enrich the lives of residents and contribute to the character and vitality of our community. And whereas parks and recreation services support environmental stewardship, conservation, economic vitality, and community resilience by providing access to nature, encouraging active transportation, and creating opportunities for civic engagement. And whereas the annual Parks Make Life Better campaign, sponsored by the California Park and Recreation Society, highlights the essential role that parks and recreation professionals play in building healthy, vibrant, and connected communities throughout California. And whereas the City of Orange recognizes and appreciates the dedication and service of parks and recreation staff, community partners, and advocates who work year-round to provide exceptional programs, facilities, and public spaces for all residents. Now, therefore, I, Dan Slater, and City Council On behalf of the entire city, do hereby proclaim July 2026 as Parks Make Life Better Month in the City of Orange. And encourage all residents to enjoy and support our parks, trails, and recreation programs that contribute to a healthier, happier, and more connected community.

And I think Emily Bustamante is here to accept that.

Thank you, Mayor and Council Member. So on behalf of the Community and Library Services Department, we want to thank you for recognizing July as Parks and Recreation Month and for your continued support of the parks and recreation services that strengthen our community, promote health and safety, foster connection, and enhance the quality of life for our Orange residents. We would encourage everyone to visit one of our city's 23 beautiful parks during the month of July and and experience firsthand the many benefits that these vital community spaces offer. If you don't mind, I'd like to invite our department staff, I think there's one in the room, and any commissioners from our Park Planning and Community Events Commission up to accept our proclamation and take a picture. And again, thank you so much for recognizing July as Parks and Recreation Month.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So a friend of mine approached me who does not live in Orange, and she said, you know that you have a resident that's turning 100 on the 4th of July this year? And I said, I do not. So she said, can we do something special for her? And I said, I think we must. So I'm going to read this proclamation honoring Phyllis Taylor on her 100th birthday. She's sitting in the front row right there. Wave your hand, Phyllis. Whereas Phyllis Taylor was born on July 4th, 1926 to Ray and Ruby Lane and was raised alongside her brothers Gerald and Theron on a farm outside of McCordsville, Indiana. And whereas Phyllis attended McCordsville Elementary and Indianapolis Metropolitan High School before graduating from Indiana University business school and launching her professional career as an office clerk. And whereas at the age of 21, Phyllis bravely sought a government position in southern Japan, where she managed administrative office work while coordinating training classes for residents taught by American farmers, doctors, and nurses. And whereas while working in Japan, Phyllis met and married the love of her life, John Worthy Taylor, a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army and traveled with him as they transferred to various military bases across Europe and the United States. And whereas upon John's retirement from the military, the couple moved to the city of Orange and shared many wonderful years in the community before his passing at the age of 92. And whereas once settled down in Orange, Phyllis raised her son, Steven, who is also here with the camera. while balancing a career with the Social Security Administration, owning and operating a small business and pursuing a degree at California State University Fullerton. And whereas to this day, Phyllis remains an active and independent resident of Orange, where she lives near her son, driving, shopping, gardening, and inspiring neighbors with her vibrant spirit and dedication to community life. Now, therefore, I, Daniel, our Slater Mayor of the City of Orange and the entire City Council, do hereby extend our deepest gratitude to Phyllis Taylor for her lasting contributions to her family, friends, and neighbors, and congratulate her on a beautiful century of life filled with purpose, love, and community. Happy 100th birthday from the City of Orange, dated this 23rd day of June, 2026, signed by myself and the entire city council. Council, would you like to go down and meet Phyllis?

Thank you.

Can you stay there? Hi, Phyllis. I said hello earlier. I just, on behalf of Orange County Supervisor Don Wagner, want to say congratulations on a life very well lived. And what an inspiration you have to be for your family, your friends, and now me. I can't, I will hope that I look as good and have the energy you have at 100%. So I thank you very much, and so does Orange County Supervisor Don Wagner, for allowing us to celebrate this very, very important time of your life. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Perfect.

Perfect.

Thank you very much. It's quite an honor.

I've lived all over the world, and I chose Orange. I make my home in Orange, and I've been here for a few years.

Thank you.

Okay, our third proclamation is honoring the 2026 Housing Solutions and American Success Summit hosted by Chapman University in observance of National Homeownership Month. That will be presented by Councilmember Barrios.

And Mr. Mayor, I hope you will, I can beg your indulgence from our latest 100th centurion, resident. We have a temporary resident with us, our youngest resident in the chamber today, which is my cousin Brian who's visiting us from Hawaii along with his mother. So I hope it's okay that I asked him to help me do this proclamation since he's never seen me do any of this stuff before. So, all right. So this is a proclamation for the 2026 Housing Solutions and American Success Summit at Chapman University, which takes place tomorrow. And whereas on June 24th, 2026, Chapman University's Center for Demographics and Policy is hosting the 2026 Housing Solutions and American Success Summit in observation of the of National Home Ownership Month, and whereas owning a home is a fundamental part of the American dream and the cornerstone of strong, thriving communities, home ownership provides long-term financial stability, builds generational wealth, and encourages civic engagement, and whereas the summit convenes policymakers, industry leaders, and academics across the field of research, finance, development, community advocacy, to examine the vital role of homeownership in economic mobility and the renewal of the middle class. I'm halfway there. Whereas as economic, demographic, regulatory dynamics continue to reshape the housing supply The summit underscores the heightened significance of property ownership within the contemporary public policy discourse, helping advance strategies designed to broaden access to the American dream. Whereas Chapman university proudly rooted in the city of orange serves the region through education, scholarship, civic leadership with a George L. Arduous college of business and economics, emphasizing data-driven research that connects scholarship to real world outcomes. And I'm almost done. Whereas the Center for Demographics and Policy focuses on the expert research and analysis of global, national, and regional trends, exploring policies that foster thriving communities and favorable demographics result for generations to come. Whereas the 2026 Housing Solutions and American Success Summit ultimately serve to reinforce the foundational truth that every family deserves the opportunity to reap the profound benefits of home ownership for building generational wealth to creating lasting memories in a place of their own. You're about to get a place of your own too, aren't you? Yeah? You're going to get a new home. We hope so. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Daniel R. Slater, Mayor of the City of Orange, and the entire City Council do hereby commend Chapman University's Center for Demographics and Policy for its invaluable contribution to the National Dialogue on the Future of Housing, Wealth, and Opportunity, dated this date, the 23rd of June, 2026. You got through it.

Thank you. And I'd like to invite forward the Chapman representatives that are here to receive it.

I just want to thank the city for this wonderful proclamation. And as somebody who's been living in this area for about 10 years, I think that the fact that you have so many homeowners here is part of the reason why the city is so charming. And when I have visitors from all over the world, I'm very proud to show them Orange because I think it's a really terrific community and anything we can do to make it better, that's what Chapman would really like to do. So we consider us an asset for the city and I think this event that we're doing is maybe a good first step. So thank you very much. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Barrios, for bringing this forward. All right. Yes, you don't feel you need to stay. City Attorney, is there anything to report out from closed session?

Nothing to report at this time, Mr. Mayor.

OK, very well. Before we continue, does any council members like to request that any items be reordered on the agenda? Okay, all right, public comments. At this time, members of the public may address the council on matters not listed on the agenda within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city council, provided that no action may be taken on off-agenda items unless authorized by law. And we have five speakers.

Mayor, we have five speakers, oh, six speakers.

Okay, public comments this evening will be three minutes per speaker. I'd like to invite the first speaker forward is Dan Swoich, followed by Greg Aerosmith. Good evening, Mayor and City Council members and staff.

I was here, I want to wish happy birthday, 100 years is pretty amazing. But anyways, I was here last City Council meeting, and I was talking about the large sign billboard that Horton erected in Mayberry Ranch. And I pointed out at the time, It was against the zoning guidelines, Title 17, 17-36-150, where it said no sign shall exceed six square feet and no freestanding sign shall exceed six feet or five feet in height. The next day I had a conversation with the City of Orange code compliance person and they explained to me the reason that these guidelines are not being enforced is that there's apparently new guidelines coming out this week or next week and that they will enforce those guidelines. So one of the things I'm hoping that will happen and I'm hoping also that the new guidelines aren't going to allow them to jump 18 times larger or six times higher than the current guidelines. The other thing I want to talk about, which is much more concerning to me, is the 10,000 tandem truckloads of dirt that Horton says they're going to have to haul onto the property to create their dirt island, I guess for a better lack of term, so they can build up a high enough island to use the Mayberry Avenue sewer system. My concern there is They were supposedly, from what I understood, they were supposed to build a bridge across the Riparian Creek and they had Yellowstone as a backup in case there was an act of God. Well, I've seen what they did. They plowed over the creek. No concern for the creek at all. If you look on each side of the dam they built, it's a dirt dam. There's stagnant little ponds on each side of the dam. And I know they also, I don't know where we're at. I'm not privy to where we're at with the county talking to them about digging the toxic dump there. But my concern is, I mean, this road they built is big enough to drive two cement trucks side by side across this dirt bridge. What I'm worried about is that we're going to get some rain. And the first thing they're going to say, that rain is going to... It's going to have to flow over that dam they built, and it's going to wash out. And the first thing, they're going to come to city council and say, hey, this is an act of God. You need to let us use Yellowstone. So I'm here to hopefully preempt that maneuver and hope that you guys will keep standing up for the residents of Mayberry Ranch and protect us. We are our only hope to keep it out for these guys. Thanks, you guys. Appreciate it.

Thanks, Dan. Following Greg Arrowsmith is David Farone. Maroney.

California Brown Act of 1953, forcing government agencies to be transparent with the taxpaying citizens. Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address phrase, government of the people, by the people, for the people, delivered on November 19, 1863. Email this presentation to the USDOJ. Focus, California's highest paid state workers see salaries grow even larger. William Melhado, the B, March 17, 2026, the most well- Compensated state workers are the investment managers and executives of this California public pension funds. The top 10 highest paid investment officers and executives of CalPERS and CalSTRS combined took home $15 million in 2025. Over 15 investment officers and other public pension executives. took home total compensation packages that exceed $1 million. Dozens more earned over a half a million dollars in pay. In 2019, only two civil service employees were paid more than $1 million. Over the last seven years, CalPERS and CalSTRS pays its 10 most well-compensated employees has nearly doubled. In the private sector, the top investment performers at JPMorgan, can earn total compensation of $623,333 per year, according to careersprinciples.com. Keep in mind, these folks are salespeople that have to fish for their own business. On the other hand, CalPERS and CalSTRS automatically signs up new government employees into their programs during the hiring process due to it's mandatory. Taxpaying citizens, today CalPERS and CalSTRS unfunded liability debt combined is around $265 billion and still on the rise. They, the anchors, are one of the reasons why our California cities, counties, and state are in a financial budget crisis. It is time to legally dissolve CalPERS and CalSTRS as well as to allow the fiduciary private companies to set up 401k millionaire packages for the new government employee retirement program. Furthermore, Natalie, I sent you an email today at 12.23 p.m. based on the smoke issue with the neighbor. Furthermore, my wife did see her medical practitioner. And when it comes to the oxygen saturation, down by two percentage points. Want to make that note? Record it.

Thank you, Greg. And following David is Rick Olson.

Good evening, Mayor Slater, members of City Council. I'm a new resident to Orange, but I've been in Orange County for over 50 years. And I've taken advantage of all the lovely amenities of your city, spending a great deal of time here at the Circle with my kids as they were growing up for our Sunday morning coffees. For me, not for my kids. So what I wanted to do here today is recognize the transaction tax measure of 1% that is being submitted for the ballot for this year. I think it's extremely important for the residents' businesses to know that the dire straits that the city is in, and this is not unlike other cities around Orange County, The transaction tax measure is a method that can fill the gap over a period of time that will allow for pension obligation bonds and the UAL, the minimum mandatory additional payment to CalPERS, speaking of pension, that will be paid. I think some of the challenges that I've heard as you guys have worked from the dais to try to establish a length of time, which I believe now is at 13 years, is what does that represent? Are we looking to get through the end of the UAL? Are we targeting maybe some additional pension trust obligations to where these monies can be used to pay the pension obligation bonds? Because I think it needs to be made clear to the residents that those items will be paid. And this year, that obligation in the 26-27 budget, which I think the finance department did an outstanding job of, is $25 million. Okay? The city is using funds from internal service funds, from capital funds, and EMT funds, totaling $15.5 million. Those are one-time types of revenues, and that money goes away. So it is critical that this measure passes. So I want to... I just extol with every fiber of my being the way that this is presented to the public, the way that it is being held accountable, the level of transparency of the uses needs to be something that is communicated over and over again to all the residents, the messaging. It needs to be understood that there is not another direction for Orange. This is the direction. But you need to do it with the utmost transparency and with goals, specific objectives in mind. No ad hoc type of business. It needs to be lined up through a and reviewed. I believe you're going to have an oversight committee. I look forward to applying for one of those positions on the oversight committee. But I think it is critical that people understand how important this sales tax measure is. The city will not be around in a few more years without it. Thank you.

Thank you, David. Following Rick Olson is Mary Oberschlake.

Mayor, can I just ask Mr. Ferron to give his information to the clerk? I'd like to have his contact information.

Mr. Ferron, does the clerk have your information? Thank you.

Greetings, Mayor, Council, city staff, citizens. My name is Rick Olson and I bring news to you of the American cause on behalf of the Continental Congress, General Washington, and the Sons of the American Revolution. Since my May report, things have moved very quickly and the push towards freedom grows exponentially. In May, the Baptist colony of Rhode Island became the first to officially renounce King George III and declare its own independence. On the 10th, the Continental Congress ordered the first real act of independence for each colony and community to establish local governments of the people, removing all royal authority. Virginia dissolved the House of Burgesses. In its place, the House of Delegates now speaks in the name of the people in Virginia. On the 15th, a week later, Virginia's House instructed their congressional delegates in Philadelphia to formally propose the independence for all colonies. Within five days, Congress appointed a committee of five to write a Declaration of Independence. The committee of five includes Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, John Adams of Massachusetts, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, and Roger Livingston of New York. We expect a final draft of the declaration to be presented on June 28th and a vote by July 4th. My July report to you will confirm or deny whether or not we are indeed a free and independent states. Not all this month was sunshine and roses. I regret to report that a Tory plot to assassinate General Washington was discovered. One of the General's own lifeguards was implicated and publicly hanged for mutiny and sedition. The British fleet has now moved in and arrived in New York City carrying thousands of British regulars and Hessian mercenaries. We can only surmise that King George will not receive the news of the Declaration of Independence warmly and that the presence of these troops does not bode well for our cause. All that to say, I want to congratulate this council and to thank you for taking up the cause of the people and acting in their name, no longer acting in the name of the king or of any sovereign. This council remains a microcosm of the American experiment. Our success, this city's success as a nation, begins here. This has been two minutes and 50 seconds of American freedom. Huzzah.

Thank you very much, Rick. Great costume, too. Following Mary is James Cushon.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, City Council. Tonight I'm speaking on behalf of Ryan Johnson. He resides in District 1. And he writes, I, along with Indivisible Orange, have been researching the all-too-common violations of safeguards which are supposed to prevent misuse of flock and other automatic license plate reader technologies. I'd like to highlight the trouble in Ohio as reported by CNET. Dayton, Ohio had to cover their flock cameras with black trash bags because they did not have control over the technology. Even upon ending the contract, there were over 7,100 searches in contravention of city policy. City Manager Shelly Dixon said, our city commission went through great lengths working with community representatives to create thoughtful and intentional policy directions that put important safeguards in place to ensure the responsible use of technology within our community. And today, it is very clear that we failed to execute on that direction. The commander responsible no longer works for the department. Who will take the fall for data leaks here in Orange? And I might add, has everyone seen the daily pilot? Is everyone aware of what happened in Costa Mesa and the violation that occurred with their data, the breach? The city may be liable for that. And I urge you to reach out to the city council of Costa Mesa. They are putting it on their agenda to perhaps end their flock contract. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. James Gushon.

Good evening, Mayor, members of council. City staff, our first responders, and my fellow Orange residents. The belief that criticism is disloyalty is one of the most destructive ideas in public service because it turns warning lights into inconveniences rather than opportunities for correction. There are those who seem to believe that identifying deficiencies is somehow rooting for failure. I reject that entirely. I don't care if Colonel Yeager, Sully, and Han Solo are sitting in the cockpit. If an airplane has a landing gear that won't go down, fuel cells that fail, and warning lights are going everywhere, the plane is going to crash. The person pointing out the warning lights isn't rooting for failure. They're just trying to prevent the plane from crashing. Shortcomings around our 250th recognition didn't appear overnight. Something that happened. They exposed a systemic failure. Mr. Mayor, would you be surprised that out of the first 10 wet signed letters that I received to hand deliver, the envelopes alone were riddled with material mistakes? Not just typographical, they involved incorrect names, titles, addresses relating to longstanding city partners. More troubling, there was no meaningful donor tracking system, no visibility into solicitation activity, no reliable way to know who was calling on whom. Commissioners were largely left operating independently. These were not individual failures. These were systemic failures. What I'm finding hard to reconcile is that commissioners, this commission increasingly or lacks meaningful ability to evaluate deficiencies, examine shortcomings, evaluate concerns, or recommend corrective actions regarding matters that fall directly under our purview. Putting it plainly, not just park planning, but all of the commissioners in this city have lacked the ability to place anything on their agendas, including comments. Yet commissioners are still required to comply with ethics, financial disclosures, Brown Act requirements, mandatory training requirements, and other obligations of public service. For the better part of two years, I've found myself asking one simple question. If the role is important enough to regulate, why is it not important enough to utilize? The Park Planning and Community Events Commission includes decades of experience that in any other setting would command substantial consulting fees. Yet the commission established by ordinance increasingly lacks the meaningful ability to engage in many of the very issues it was created to address. This very council has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to our commission, yet I struggled to reconcile the commitment with the structure that leaves the commission largely unable to engage in deficiencies that now stand exposed. I joined this commission to work, to contribute experience, and to help make Orange better. I increasingly find myself wondering whether or not We are engaged to do that or to sit and watch. Thank you for your time. Thank you, James.

Okay, that ends public comments. Moving on to the consent calendar. Are there any items that any of my colleagues would like to pull for discussion? Questions? Anything? Okay. Any public comments on anything? Okay. I'll entertain a motion to approve the consent calendar. Motion made by Council Member Barrios, seconded by Council Member Gutierrez. Any further discussion? Honor Gutierrez, you keep coming.

Actually, it's me. For some reason, our things are flip-flopped. Hers says me, mine says her.

Now, I motioned, and it came up as her. Hence my speaking. And it came up. it could be worse

Okay. Council Member Barros, did you have? Okay. All right. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Please vote. That is approved with six votes. Dennis is not here. Six to zero, I say. Six to one. How would you announce that? One absence, okay. Thank you, council. Next item, four reports from Mayor Slater. I'm asked to make an announcement regarding some current board commission committee vacancies. Still have one on the audit committee, one on the CDBG committee, Council Member Gutierrez. Two vacancies on Design Review Committee. One is mine. One is Council Member Tavaleras, I believe. Design Review.

Is that you? Yes.

Okay. Two vacancies on Investment Advisory Committee. I think that I have someone that is going to apply for that. And we currently have one vacancy on the Planning Commission, which belongs to Mayor Pro Tem Bilodeau. Applications are available on the city's website. I have nothing else to report, reports from council members. Any council members have any reports to give? Okay. We'll move on to any AB 1234 reports. Any council members have anything to report? Okay, reports from boards, committees, and commissions. David Vasquez's term is expiring on the plan commission, but he has one more term to serve before he hits term limits. That appointment belongs to council member and he confirms that Mr. Vasquez would like to serve for his last term. So I'd entertain a motion to reappoint David Vasquez planning commission to a four-year term commencing July 1st, 2026, ending June 30th, 2030. Motion from Council Member Demetria, a second from Council Member Gillenhammer. Any other discussion? Seeing none, please vote. That's approved six yeses and one absence. Public hearings, 9.1. Continued public hearing to consider introduction first reading of ordinance number 04-26, adding chapter 8.38 of title eight, health and safety to the Orange Municipal Code. related to maintenance and security standards for unoccupied or abandoned properties and adoption of fees and fines for regulations, monitoring, and progressive administrative citations. This was continued from June 9th, the council meeting. I think we've probably, is there more to add in the way of the staff report? Okay. I assume you got together with the apartment owners association and resolve their issues. Okay. All right. Um, any questions of staff? Okay. Then a council member Gillenhammer. Okay. So I will open the public hearing and we do have a couple of speakers. Um, I'm sorry. Council member Bosch, did you want to jump in front? Okay. Um, um, First speaker is Reggie Mendicus followed by Laura Taylor.

Hi, I support this item. I think it's good policy. It's been divided into tiers for the type of problems that you're dealing with a property, including a tier where we know that it's vacant, but it doesn't seem to have any problems. And we just know it's vacant, but we don't do anything about it because it's being taken care of by the property owner. and then there are two other tiers that deal with the problems. So I think that's a good approach, and I support this. It's a step in the right direction. Thank you.

Thank you, Reggie. And Laura Taylor.

Good evening, Mayor and Councilmembers. I'm here to speak in support of the proposed maintenance and security standards ordinance that is presented for your consideration tonight. As a homeowner living near the former Orange Mall site for almost 26 years, I'm appealing to you to approve this ordinance and will hopefully establish a better, more efficient and effective way of monitoring and finding property owners and property managers who consistently fail to properly maintain their unoccupied, distressed and abandoned properties in our city. crime offenders being the former Sears and JCPenney site. Aside from being unsightly, these neglected properties have sadly attracted homeless encampments, drug and prostitution activity, drinking in public, and human waste on the hardscape and landscaping. Not to mention the accumulation of trash, neglected dead landscaping, unkempt buildings, filthy, smelly sidewalks, and severely overgrown trees that present an imminent risk of huge branches falling on vehicles or pedestrians along Canal Street. all make the area a true health and safety hazard. The amount and degree of issues on those sites continues despite increased patrols by the police and code enforcement's continued efforts to elicit compliance from the slumlords who own or manage those properties. The wealthy landowners and their property managers have made it clear through the continued neglect of their properties that they do not care about the effects of their negligent or the surrounding community. But those who live in the community do care, and we are tired of it, so much so that a large group of neighbors living west of Canal currently spend one Saturday morning a month volunteering their time cleaning up the Sears and JCPenney's planters, the trash, drug paraphernalia, cases of empty beer bottles, and treachery along Canal Street in an effort to somehow make a dent in the issues created by the blight on those properties. Because the owners don't. And because we care about our community and we are tired of the blight and of our area becoming a dumping ground. For those reasons, I'm in favor of this proposed ordinance to streamline and increase the city's ability to effectively monitor and enforce regular maintenance of said properties to established city standards. And when necessary, swiftly impose progressive fines when they fail to do so. with less strain on our already stretched thin code enforcement and police departments. Hopefully this ordinance will send a clear, persistent, and if necessary, expensive message to negligent property owners that Orange will not tolerate the blight any longer. Thank you.

Thank you, Laura. Public hearing is now closed. I'll bring it back to the council for questions, discussion, and or a motion. Council Member Gillenhammer. Thank you, Mayor.

Rafael, questions for you? I guess first of all, I just wanted to commend you and your team on the ownership for going out and creating a solution to an existing problem. I had a chance to review this with you in detail, and I appreciate what you and your team have put together. I guess my first question is, it was just stated that you alleviated the apartment association's concerns. Can you tell me what the concerns were and how those were alleviated?

Absolutely, thank you, Council Member. So the matters that they were concerned with was the registry requirements. We have eliminated that element. The other is that if a rental property or a house for sale, certainly not within their purview, but nonetheless, any property that is listed for sale or is vacant as a result of some vacancy at a apartment or condo or something is excluded from this ordinance. Got it. So as written, do they support the ordinance? My understanding. Yes, I have not received any further follow up from them.

Got it. Um, and then this is specific for maintenance and security standards. Is there a reason why we need to identify that they're vacant or could we just say any property?

So certainly the state law allows cities to regulate a property differently from, let's say, an occupied property. We don't in generally have issues with occupiable properties. In general, we are able to make direct communication with a homeowner or a business owner, but a vacant property can be regulated at a separate level with a higher degree of fines if we apply general public nuisance laws then california has certain structured uh fine amounts which are 100 200 and 500 which are just become a cost of doing business for some of the business owners who are just willing to pay those fees and then let their properties remain unsecured unmaintained for for weeks and months at a time so this this would allow us to have a higher degree of penalty our goal is compliance our goal is maintenance and security standards. And to the extent that some individual property owner refuses or fails to comply, then this would certainly hit them in the pocket, so to speak. But also gives code enforcement the ability to take other measures, if need be, for the matter of public safety in that to secure a property and so forth.

Got it. And I think that's the intent of this, is to prioritize security standards for those buildings. Absolutely. Thank you. Yeah. Council Member Barrios.

And you might as well just stay. So I did have a chance to speak to ACCOC, or I think it's another acronym. But I spoke with them yesterday, and I did want to share with you that they were very complimentary of your care and going through the changes with them and how it was. And I think our two speakers illustrate exactly why this needs to be done. And my big concerns have been addressed by the updates that are here, the tiering of the ordinance, as well as an appeals process, which I was concerned about just in the real estate market, having worked with clients in that area where sometimes it's beyond their fault, but maintaining a decency in terms of the, public-facing standard, I think is super important, and it helps all of us. So I really appreciate the work that you've done here. They were pleased, complimentary, and I think this is the right way forward. So thank you for all your hard work on this.

Very good. Any other questions, comments? We do have a motion from Councilmember Gutierrez and a second from Councilmember Barrios. I would remind that the maker of the motion must read the ordinance title as listed in the recommended action. Is there any further discussion? All right, Council Member Gutierrez.

This motion is to introduce and conduct the first reading of ordinance number 04-26, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange adding chapter 8.38 to the Orange Municipal Code relating to the maintenance and security standards for unoccupied or abandoned properties. Do I need to read adopt resolution? Very good.

Very well. Please vote. Approved with six votes and one absence. Very well. Second public hearing is a second public hearing to discuss and consider a draft city charter. And I believe we'll have a staff report for that as well.

All right, good evening, mayor and council members. So I'm gonna go to this next slide here. So on May 12th, the council had the first public hearing regarding the city's draft charter, which included nine articles covering areas of incorporation of powers and municipal affairs, form of government and city council structure, term limits and vacancy procedures, procurement, contracting, local control, city assets, public utilities, and eminent domain, and fiscal responsibility. After conducting the public hearing on May 12th, the council ultimately voted to continue the charters discussion at the second public hearing. Now as a reminder, the council needs to hold at least two public hearings before they can vote to place this on the November ballot. So this is the second of two required public hearings. So what I have here are six items of interest that were mentioned at the previous meeting. We had every, all the language that's included in the charter presented tonight is the same that was presented May 12th. However, there were some items that were mentioned at that meeting. And then there were items that were mentioned since then about things we want to discuss. So the six items here, we'll go through them. And those are some of the additional items that are included as I've been there highlighted within the document. We highlighted them knowing that the remainder portion of the charter is the same language that we saw on May 12th. So Section 1.204, that's open reserve protection. This has to do with the Soli Miller site. So as we have here, this is the language that you will see in the draft charter. And it's highlighted so everyone can see that additional language. Essentially what this does, it says that any portion of the Cillian Miller site that is acquired by the city of Orange for open space purposes, that the city will put in a property trust. A property placed in this trust must be used for open space preservation, passive recreation, habitat restoration, conservation, trails, equestrian uses, educational uses, and other similar non-intensive purposes consistent with the Orange Park acre-specific plan. The section clarifies that the property cannot be used for residential, commercial, industrial, or other urban development purposes unless approved by Orange voters. That will run with the land. And similar to what I just said, because it runs with the land, it could only be amended if Orange voters approve it. So this item is included in section 204. And again, specific to the Soli Miller site. Section 503 has to do with term limits. This came up at the May 12th council meeting, or the public hearing, I should say. It was wanting to clarify whether or not term limits would reset. So the language that's in the charter tonight makes clear that they would reset. So essentially what Section 503 says is that any previous or existing terms do not count towards the term limits that are detailed in this charter. The term limits will only count towards the section that commence after the effective date. So if you have, say, a four-year term, you've served two years, you have two more to go, THOSE TWO MORE TO GO, THOSE YEARS THAT YOU HAVE REMAINING, WOULD NOT COUNT TOWARDS THE TERM LIMITS AS DETAILED IN THIS CHARTER. IT WOULD ONLY BE THAT FRESH TERM THAT COMMENTS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHARTER. SO IT MORE CLEARLY STATES THAT SO THERE IS NO CONFUSION WITH THE ISSUE OF TERM LIMITS. Item three has to do with property rights protection measure. So this was something that was an item of interest that we wanted to evaluate. And so it follows along the same sentiment that we see with section 602 that has to do with eminent domain that really focuses on private property rights. And overall, what Section 603 does is it affirms that the city will not enforce or enact measures that mandates limitations on the price payable to an owner in connection with the sale, lease, rent, exchange, or other transfer by the owner of real property. Now this is exclusively holding the city back on that. So it's just saying that the city would not adopt any sort of measure that puts limitations or tries to control any sort of real estate transaction. It has nothing to do with anyone in any private parties that want to try to HAVE SOME SORT OF ARRANGEMENT. SO IT'S ONLY PUTTING THIS LIMITATION ON THE CITY. THERE ARE SEVERAL EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE LISTED. I DO NOT HAVE THEM THERE BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY THAT WERE LISTED, BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT THOSE EXEMPTIONS HAVE TO DO WITH IS IT COVERS SCENARIOS WHERE THE CITY'S AUTHORITY, ALBEIT TAXING, ZONING, OR EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY MAY INFLUENCE REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS. SO IT RECOGNIZES that cities do have authority, so say in a tax, it's going to be like a TOT, or zoning may determine, a city making a zoning determination may ultimately drive what the price of the property may be. It's recognizing that the city has that authority and those are exempt from the provisions of this section. So Section 604 and 605 has to do with sale of public utilities and sale of city assets. No additional language was added to Section 605 regarding public utilities. However, we are proposing, and I have it in red there, that we include language that affirms that the city will follow all noticing, hearing, and voting requirements in the sale of city assets. So what this is stemming from is that the previous public hearing, it was asked if a city charter could bypass voting requirements for selling the city's public utility. And that kind of follows along the notion of it's a municipal affair, so the charter could essentially do what it would like to do as opposed to following what the state is saying because we determined it to be a municipal affair. We looked at it. Overall, there's California constitutional and statutory law that have collectively created state entities and state oversight processes that really suggest that the area of public utilities is a matter of statewide concern. And therefore, a charter city would likely not be exempt from the relevant voting requirements. As written, it already says in Section 605 that voter approval is required. So that's going to remain there. But just to really reaffirm it, we then added that language to the section regarding the sale of city assets, just noting that we will follow all the laws that have to do with voting requirements and noticing before any sort of disposition occurs. Section 701 has to do with the temporary vacancy. So this had to do with if it's about removing a council member or appointed official who it may be where criminal proceedings have started or there's going to be an administrative review of some ethical violations. What was added and what's included on here, the remainder of the section is the same. This is added towards the end and this has to do to clarify the procedures for disqualification. And so overall this section clarifies that elected or appointed officers may be disqualified when it is authorized by law, more specifically when the actions include criminal convictions, judicial findings of official misconduct, conflict of interest violations, or other disqualifying conduct as authorized by law. The added language goes on to state that the council may adopt additional procedures by ordinance and that any action taken pursuant to this section is subject to city attorney review. Lastly, as we close the May 12 public hearing, some of the council members have mentioned, you know, really when we look at this, what are the biggest benefits of adopting a city charter? IT WE TALKED ABOUT HOW A CHARTER ESSENTIALLY YOU ALLOW YOURSELF TO GOVERN THOSE ISSUES THAT ARE MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS BUT WHEN THE STATE CONTINUOUSLY SAYS ALL THESE MATTERS OF GOVERNANCE ARE NOW STATEWIDE AFFAIRS THE CHARTER SEEMS TO THE AUTHORITY OF A CHARTER DWINDLES AND SO WE LOOKED AT REALLY WHERE IS THE BIGGEST BENEFIT AND SO THERE'S TWO KIND OF OVERARCHING AREAS IT'S GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND SELF-GOVERNANCE AND PUBLIC CONTRACTING AND PREVAILING WAGE SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT THE GREATEST BENEFITS IS IN THE CITY'S ABILITY TO TAILOR ITS ADMINISTRATIVE GOVERNMENT DESIGN IN OTHER WORDS is shifting responsibility or authority to different positions. If you're a charter city, for example, and this is usually with larger cities, you can adopt a mayor strong structure. As proposed in this charter, Makes very clear it's a council manager form of government, which is what we currently have today. But if we're more looking just generally about what a charter city can do, those are the kinds of things that where they can tailor it to those kinds of really, and again, shifting authority, who has oversight over the day-to-day operations. IT ALSO ALLOWS THE CITY TO MODIFY ITS ELECTIONS BY ADJUSTING TIMING. WE KNOW WE MENTIONED THE CITY OF WHITTIER HOLDS THEIR ELECTIONS IN APRIL, AS WELL AS A PROCESS. SO WE TALKED ABOUT YOU CAN, IF THE COUNCIL WANTED TO, THE CHARTER COULD GO THROUGH AND ADOPT A RANCH CHOICE VOTING PROCESS. It lessens the city's ability of CIP costs by removing prevailing wage requirements so long that the city is using city funds, for example, general fund, to complete a project. And finally, removing the city from the requirements of the public contracting code and drafting the city's own processes. um the charter city can do that but it has to make very clear what its process is going to be so that's not written into the charter tonight but it would be something that have to be established by ordinance if we were going to establish our own process and deviate from the california public contracting code So those are the two areas where you see some of the largest gains where the state is still recognizing these as being those matters of municipal affairs. So a charter has a lot of authority over it. So when we look forward, so we had mentioned May 12th, we completed that first public hearing. Second public hearing is being held tonight. And we have to wait 21 days after tonight before the council ultimately makes a decision to place the charter on the ballot. And that 21 days falls on our next council meeting, which is July 14th. And so ultimately what staff's looking for tonight is any feedback that the council would like incorporated into the final document so we can bring that forward for the July 14th meeting. And that concludes my overview. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Morgan. Any questions, staff, before we go to the public hearing? Would you, Council Member Gutierrez?

Okay.

No? Okay. All right. I will open the public hearing and call Kurt Peterson to come forward, followed by Mary Oberschlage.

mayor, council, and city. I would just like to reiterate my support for proposing that Orange join the 126 other cities in California, representing, I believe, 23 to 24% of the cities who have already become chartered, have a charter in place. A few weeks ago, there was, in the first reading, there was a comment made that no residents asked for that, and That's not exactly accurate. I know several people I'm associated with who are for it. And actually, in May of 2025, I spoke before this group, not knowing that something was already in works, but proposing adoption of the charter. When we look at some of the benefits that have been taken away recently by Sacramento and including the Supreme Court of California, Huntington Beach has still been the local canary in the mine shaft. They're going after everything they can and they've lost a few suits lately, but they're not done trying and I believe some of these cases are gonna be progressed through higher courts. And I'm hoping so. So as far as that goes, I think any control we can take away from Sacramento and put back at the local level to take care of the residents and the city is a benefit worth fighting for. Thank you.

Thank you, Kurt. Following Mary is Reggie Municus.

I'm standing here in opposition of becoming a charter city. I mean, the history of this town, come on, this was a sundown town. What are we about here? What's actually happening? Siding Huntington Beach as an example of what we want to be is pathetic. I mean, it's awful. We don't want to be a Huntington Beach. Why can't we accept things the way they are? You mentioned you know a couple people that want to do this. I have a list of 600 people that don't want to do this. Why? It makes no sense. Leave it as it is. There's too much potential for abuse. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. And Reggie Mundicus. Yes.

Hi, I continue my previously stated objections to this charter. Thank you.

Thank you, Reggie. Okay, the public hearing is now closed. I'll bring it back to the council for further discussion and or a motion. Council Member Gutierrez.

Thank you, Mayor. And I just have some concerns. And I know I read these before, and I don't know why I didn't speak on it last time. So I wanted to make sure that I expressed my concerns, and especially in regards to what Jack just said, that the shifting of authority and being able to modify elections. When I read this, I need to go back and find it here. When it comes to being able to fix the number of districts and the elected, the mayor and city council members, can be elected either by district at large or through a lawful combination thereof established by ordinance and in compliance with states and federal law. If district-based elections are used, the city council shall establish and adjust district boundaries. I just need clarification, Jack. Does that mean if you're a charter city and the fact that we now have shifting of authority THAT IS ONE OF OUR BIGGEST BENEFITS. DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE, THE CHARTER CITY, CAN WRITE A NEW ORDINANCE THAT NOW ELIMINATES DISTRICTS OR MINIMIZES THE AMOUNT OF DISTRICTS? I WANT THAT CLARIFIED FOR ME A LITTLE MORE.

SO WHEN IT COMES TO REDISTRICTING, THAT WOULD HAPPEN EVERY 10 YEARS ANYWAY, WHENEVER WE HAVE A NEW CENTUS. EVEN AS A GENERAL LAW CITY, THAT WOULD OCCUR. When it comes to removing districts, I think that is written in there because there has been recent court decisions that kind of bring up the subject of whether or not districts are required. But I'd have to defer to the city attorney to see if when the City of Orange went to districts, if that was mandated, if that's something that could even be removed.

So regarding the history as to the city's districts, there was a consent decree. And I know that there's been recent Supreme Court decisions that have, I think, brought forth questions as to the districts themselves. And I'll speak for our city of orange at this time. The way that the charter is crafted is that the district boundaries are simply going to be established. This is this language that has been included in the charter is simply to ensure that if if the law were to change in the future, that we, the city, would be able to, by ordinance, be in compliance with state preemption or federal preemption if necessary.

So it's not necessarily, we no longer want to have districts. We believe everybody should be at large the way we used to be. We want to change our charter to make everybody be at large.

The current charter as drafted keeps the consistent six districts with the mayor elected at large structure for the city of Orange.

Because when I read that, they may be elected. Just for me, being from Orange, ALMA DINA, WE'VE NEVER HAD ANYBODY SIT ON DIAS FROM ALMA DINA, AND HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR DISTRICTS, I WOULD NOT BE SITTING HERE. SO I APPRECIATE DISTRICTS, AND I DEFINITELY DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS CHARTER WRITTEN WHERE THE FUTURE COUNCILS, OR BECAUSE WE ARE A CHARTER CITY, WE ARE GOING TO change the number of districts or modify the number of districts, because it clearly says that, may modify the number of districts or method of election by ordinance subject to voter approval were required by law. So again, I'm understanding you're saying if the state law changes, then we could modify our ordinance. But would it still have to go to the voters or not?

The way that this is written, it would be modified by ordinance by the city council at the time.

Because it clearly says there, though, modifications then would be subject to voter approval or required by law.

Only if required by law. Subject to voter approval only as required by law. But if at the time the law does not require voter approval, then it would be updated via ordinance.

Okay, I guess to me it's very ambiguous and I would like that kind of cleared up that it would stay as is and I don't know, I don't like that language in there of it being very much it could be this, it could be district, it could be at large, and it could be modified. And I understand what you're saying, it's because of state law, but It makes it, it could be interpreted in many different ways.

We will be happy to craft language for you to consider that includes protections to ensure that it is not ambiguous and that it is clear as to what circumstances that situation may come into play.

Great. I would appreciate that. And then I'm still on the terms, and I know Mayor, you had expressed concerns with the terms that the mayor having two four-year terms and city council members having three four-year terms. And the only reason why I bring that up is, you know, Councilmember Barrios is going to be terming out. I'm very sad to hear that, too. And I myself, in two years, and so would Councilmember Demetrio and Councilmember Tabalares. You know, to say that we have the opportunity, myself, Council Member Tavares, and Council Member Dimitriou, to run again if the charter does get voted on and does pass, get to run again, meaning that potentially we could serve an additional 12 more years. And I kind of believe that it's time to pass the torch along and let others in the city serve. And I have a hard time with increasing the term limits for council members to three four-year terms. I think we're fine with our current term limits. So I would just like us to think about that in our charter. Because I think it's important that we have new minds, new fresh ideas, new people from the community to come in and be our successors. And for us to stay on here potentially three, four-year terms, 12 additional years, and two years from now is a lot of time of the same thinking and not new ideas. So I would appreciate if my colleagues would entertain maybe keeping the same current terms that we have in this charter instead of extending them and making it more. So I still have a little angst about that. So those are my concerns.

Duly noted. Council Member Barrios.

I had many of the same concerns and I'm so glad you brought up about the districts because that was not one of them and it should have been. And I'm kind of embarrassed. I think you and I both feel the same way that the Kalei decision was probably just one of the single most awful pieces of jurisprudence in our lifetime. And looking at that, it begs the question in terms of districts, in terms of at large district voting, the difference, and there is a very big difference now between the Federal Voting Rights Act and CVRA. We ended up following the CVRA, which is a stronger piece of legislation than what the federal one was. So I think that that needs a great deal of clarification because we not only went to districts, we went to two districts specifically that were minority-majority, which I don't know. I don't know because I'm not the legal person to know if that can be preserved and memorialized in a charter such as this or if that goes against federal law, but that's still the state law right now. Our state law has not been challenged for that. So what is the superseding principle? So that's one question about that. And the second is... If you keep and protect the districts, you know, are you equally safe or would you be safe? Because I don't think Kalei decided whether at large versus districts was necessarily good or bad. I think it was more about the race issue. Could you at a minimum protect districts? and if they were balanced just by the census when we go and balance them again. So those would be my first two questions in terms of how are we gonna deal with that specifically.

Great questions. My office is currently in the process of evaluating the implications of the Calais case and will be providing a thorough update to the City Council as to how that court case decision impacts the City of Orange's district-based system, if at all. That is something that I am currently working on.

Okay. So thank you, because that would be really important. poison pill for me. So then following up on what Council Member Gutierrez said specifically about the term limits and the effective date. If this were to pass what is the effective date?

The effective date would be when it's filed with the Secretary of State after the voters have approved it. So I would probably be more like January 2027 if it were to go to the voters and be approved. And so if you had like if you had two Additional years left on your term. Those wouldn't count. But if you are termed out in November, then it would reset. And depending on which office a person is running for, those new term limits would apply.

Okay. And that's where I was confused. Is that up to our discretion in how we write this in the charter?

The effective date?

Yeah. Not the effective date, but whether or not that then causes a reset.

I believe it is up to our discretion and we've made it much more clear to clarify that the term limits, at least as they count towards what's described here.

I think you did a really good job of explaining that right now that's what it is. But if it's to our discretion and we can decide as a group, we're not going to do that. We're going to finish our terms and that's that. then we can do you're saying that is our discretion okay good that gives me um because that is i would that is definitely something i would want to see um in terms of discretion um can we add additional things so i'm looking specifically this is something new looking at section 4.3 under eligibility And yeah, I'm just a sucker for following cases online. So this would come in, could we add additional requirements for eligibility in terms of length of time for residency?

I may have to defer to our city attorney on that if that's going to be something we can do.

I know many cities do do that, and states do that in particular, looking at, like, you must be a resident for five years or one year or, you know, a certain amount of time before you become eligible.

Regarding eligibility, I will have to look into the issue and then report back to the city council regarding it can be crafted into the charter language to add eligibility requirements.

So that is something also, because that would also be something that I would like to see. Correct, yes.

Okay. For various boards and commissions, our current Orange Municipal Code does have certain preferences or eligibility requirements when it comes to serving on specific requirements. audit and advisory committee for example having a financial background but as to the charter for the city council i will have to research and get back to you councilmember barrios yeah if that's at our discretion then i would like to see something like that added um so be i'd be very interested to know if we can do that how long did you live here before you ran

Six years.

Oh, seven. OK. So a minimum of five. Because he did OK. Thanks for not defaulting.

No, not at all. No, it would be good. You must be an OUST.

No, I'm not going to go that far. No, no, no. And then, okay, so the next one that I had specific questions on, and it was further back, where was it? Section 701, so temporary vacancy, suspension, and ethical misconduct. One of the things I was concerned about on the ethical misconduct was that the language is a little vague and subjective, which could make it to one of our speakers absolutely open to abuse. And I myself have already been the subject of that twice on this council where I've been accused of things that were patently wrong and certainly not, you know, things that I did willfully wrong. And so I would just, how do we strengthen that language so it cannot be used as a bludgeon against your political enemies? Because that, again, would be another poison pill for me. I would never want to see that happen to anybody else. Nobody deserves that.

So we tried to strengthen that by saying that it has to be by operational law. So essentially there would have to have been a decision rendered by a third party that had found that ethical violation to have been substantiated. And by then, then the council would be able to first in the beginning part suspend, and then we added language about disqualify. Okay. We can strengthen it a bit more in the first part, which has to do with suspension, because it does say, or where formal judicial or administrative proceedings involving corruption, fraud, abuse, official misconduct. So when it comes to judicial or administrative proceedings, we could strengthen that a bit more. So it's clear when that has now crossed a certain threshold that the council could potentially... suspend someone but on the second part that has to do with disqualification it does say by operation of law including conviction of specified crimes or judicial findings of official misconduct. So on the second part we did try to strengthen that to it had to have been substantiated by a third party.

Okay, all right, yeah, and the judicial part I got, but the administrative one I was concerned about because, yeah.

No, we can strengthen that.

Okay, that would be something I would be looking for as either a red line or something. If you could bring back some options for us, that would be great. The last one, and this, I'm sorry to take these out of order because I thought of them out of order, but also... I don't know where this would go, actually, in terms of whether it would be eligibility or term limits or districts, where it would go. But concurrent offices can do, again, do we have the jurisdiction or the discretion to decide whether or not you can run for concurrent offices, that you can either, one, campaign and run for them and or hold them? Do we have that ability?

I think it would fall along the same lines of the eligibility research that we're going to be doing. Because if state law is allowing people to run concurrently and we're going against that, it's just a matter of whether or not that falls under that municipal affairs section. Since elections are generally seen as being municipal affairs, it may be something that we can do, but we'll confirm that.

And regarding holding offices concurrently, state law is clear, so that would already be established. But regarding the ability to run, there is some case law that has been argued in the courts. But it's not really clear.

It's very vague, and it's almost case-by-case subjective. Well, this isn't like they weren't conflicting offices, and therefore... So, but if that is something under our discretion. Correct. If you want to be on the city council, run for the city council. If you want to be somewhere else, go somewhere else. But I think that if we have the discretion to make that clear, I think we should take that step.

We will look into the issue and add it if it's something that is at the discretion of the charter consideration.

Okay. I think you're off the hook, Jack. Yes, those were all of my questions and concerns for right now. Thank you.

So for purposes of this evening, I know it's to hold the second public hearing. But for clarification, there's no formal action needed tonight. We're just providing direction.

That is correct. The next step would be waiting the 21 days and at the next council meeting the staff will bring back updated language for your consideration and at the time the vote may take place regarding placing it with the registrar voters and that should give us plenty of time for the November election.

At that time it may be a series of votes deciding which direction we want to go on several of these issues.

that you will bring back for further correct july fourteenth would be the absolute deadline uh... for the city council to place on the november uh... you can take them section by section or the entire policy right right now it's very good

I THINK ONE THING ABOUT A CHARTER IS THAT IT STIFFENS OUR GOVERNANCE. SO I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CHARTER, IT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT IT TO BE. IT TAKES A YEAR OR TWO YEARS TO TAKE THIS CHARTER BACK AND REVOTE ON IT AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, RIGHT? AND I THINK AS WE GO THROUGH IT, JUST A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS, JACK. YOU KNOW, JUST SECTION 800 JUST SAYS BALANCED BUDGET. CAN WE BE SUPER CLEAR WHAT THAT MEANS? And that is a structurally balanced budget, no movement of monies in between funds in a one-time manner. Can we just clarify that to get the heart of that ask? Yeah, we can add that. Okay. And then section 600 and 601, we move away from state-mandated bidding processes to our own. There is no actual clarity as to what that is. It just says it's in our hands. So I don't know if... we want any sort of specific direction as to how we go about procurement and prevailing wage. I think those sections are generally more important because they actually represent something this charter could do different that would allow us some level of local control. So those should be developed to something specific that's acceptable within the city. If we move forward with the charter, again, anything we miss or anything that needs adjustment is just a long process, an expensive process, right? So we gotta get it right. Again, the main question is what do we gain in local control through a charter? And I think you answered it with those two areas, elections, term limits, and then the contractual bidding piece. I think a lot of what's in here is either already what we're doing, and codifying it or not changing dramatically from the general rules that we have already governing us. So I think a way to look at this is if we want to solidify something that's very difficult for future councils to adjust, it should go into this. So I'd like maybe strict caps on municipal spending, requirements for supermajority votes, Prohibitions on some levees I can work with you on this, but I think there's a way to lock in strong fiscal fiscal constraint into this That's it Very well, I'm counselor Dimitri Thank You mayor Towards the district item I believe We would have to go back to court to change anything.

It's an adjudicated It was an adjudicated settlement, which created the district's, not a decree, but adjudicated settlement. So it would create, there's a pretty hefty legal barrier from just making a change. So I think that would cover that. One of the things I actually really like about the charter, and I think Council Member Guillen, you just hit on it. One of the things that can't just be willy-nilly changed at the whim of the council by ordinance is all our campaign reforms. Things that are locked in like contribution limits, stipends, anything like that. So it won't change unless it goes back to the voters for a charter amendment. So I think that's a positive in regards to items with the charter. Something I disagree with with Council Member Barrios is the eligibility time. I don't personally think that a person that comes to town should run right away. You should invest yourself. However, I think it's also a big disservice and it's I think borderline discriminatory to say if you move to town and you haven't lived here for five years, you shouldn't have the ability to run for office. If you're being taxed, you have a right to your own self-representation. So I disagree with putting that line in there. But that can all be worked out. This is just, like I said, or was said earlier, these are just ideas for staff to work with. That's just one of the things I think is there are a lot of good people that could move here that might, who knows who might move here. We might have some former Senator that, you know, could do wonders for us. We wouldn't want to say no because, or, or get behind a candidate just because they have a limited amount of time here. That's not right either. I think that was it. All right. Thank you. Council Member Tavares.

Thank you. I'm sorry. My, my voice is a little hoarse tonight, but this is what I love about having the idea of a charter. Everybody has their own ideas. And I think I want to thank you all for, kind of put yourself into it. And I really appreciate that. One thing I'm guilty of, too, and I think we all have to remember is that we're not all going to be 100% happy with what comes out on the 14th. But as President Reagan used to say, if you're 80% happy, that should be good. But I'm going to tell myself that over and over again because I know there's a lot here. But the most important thing is that this is for Orange. I didn't bring it up for, I know a couple people said, any political reason at all, except we're orange to set our own rules. Los Angeles is a charter. Long Beach is a charter. Anaheim's a charter. A lot of big cities are charters, and they do just fine, and it has nothing to do with any kind of political affiliation. So I just want it to be pro-orange, and I'm open to discussing anything that was just brought up tonight, and I just really want to thank you guys for just participating in discussion. I'm really pleased with it.

Thank you, council member. And I'll just weigh in at the end. I like the staff recommendations, particularly Sully Miller and those type of things. I think they're great. I still have a heartburn over the term limits issue, as some of my colleagues expressed. If we're going to reset it, I feel it should be two terms for council, three terms maximum for mayor. I think two years for mayor is fine. Because God forbid we elected Turkey, we need to get rid of him. And so that's what the voters said they wanted, and they wanted term limits. So I'm just going to weigh in and say I prefer that if we're going to do a reset that they go back to where we're at today. Okay, Council Member Gutierrez.

Thank you for bringing up Sully Miller because I did write notes on that. In regards to Sully Miller, Jack, is there any way that we can say all open space? Because I'm thinking the creek. And I'm thinking potential private ownership that maybe the city could one day purchase. You never know, because that's in our plan. Wouldn't we want to say all open space is protected, very much like we're calling out Sully Miller? And that's what I would like to see, because I wrote that down in my notes. And I understand the sensitivity of the Sully Miller site, and what potential there is, and what how the people that live in this orange feel about that area. But I'm also thinking about other open space, especially along the creek. And I think it would be, if you're going to have this in the charter about Sully Miller, which is a big open space, what about the rest of our open space? I would like to see it call out all open space, potential open space. Okay.

So a potential to expand that definition to include other potential properties that the city could acquire.

Yep.

I like that, too. All right. If we talk this out, Councilmember Demetri.

Yeah, real quickly, just dovetailing on Councilmember Gutierrez. If we start looking at creekways and everything, we have to make sure we're not stepping on an agency that actually owns it in the description. I think, for instance, the Santiago Creek is actually isn't ours. It's ours.

Is it Army Corps of Engineers or Orange County Flood Control? Yeah, it's a mix. It's Orange County Flood Control, Army Corps of Engineers, and then when you get around Hart Park, that's when you get a lot of city ownership.

Yeah, because I would hate for us to go out to the public and say we're going to get this as park land only to have some government agency say, right, it's not going to happen. So, yeah, no, I got it. I just want to make sure we cross our eyes on it.

Okay. Council member Gillenhammer.

I think that's a zoning call out. Like I think when we go into uh a charter essentially we're we're locking that decision in the hands of residents in a in a voting capacity right so whatever we we put into this charter in terms of locking in certain zoning regulate regulations uh again we just have to be thoughtful around like removing that as an option for future city councils which again is a Potential reason why you have a charter is you want something to exist in perpetuity and make it very difficult for future councils to change So if we start bringing in zoning components, we just have to all be sure that that's what we want.

So Good point. Thank you All right, I think we're good Administrative reports, item 10.1, progress update regarding the 2025 design review committee DRC ordinance number 1825. I think this is a six month check-in and I will ask for a staff report.

Thank you and good evening, honorable mayor and city council members. My name is Hayden Beckman. I'm the planning manager in the community development department. You may recall that in October of 2025, the city council adopted ordinance number 18-25. That ordinance became effective on December 12, 2025. And the ordinance modified the purview of the design review committee to include only those projects either located in a historic district or projects that involved historic structures that may be outside of a district. In the six months since that ordinance was adopted or became effective, multiple outcomes have occurred. Most significantly, staff can report that a reduction in overall entitlement processing time has occurred by, on average, about two months. Due to streamlined design review process, both staff time and ultimately cost to the applicants have been reduced, and staff is now actively also discussing administrative design review for non-historic projects with potential applicants. FOR EXAMPLE, TWO RECENTLY APPROVED RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, THE FLETCHER 15 AND MELIA HOMES SMALL LOT SUBDIVISION DID BENEFIT FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS. SOME OF THE ELEVATIONS ARE FEATURED ON THE TOP, LEFT AND RIGHT. AND ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE TWO PENDING PROJECTS. ON THE LOWER LEFT, THE RANCHO RIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AND ON THE LOWER RIGHT, MILAN RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS HAVE EXPERIENCED EXPEDITED ENTITLEMENT REVIEWS BY STAFF and will be scheduled for discretionary action ahead of their original estimates. That does conclude our administrative report, and staff is available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Hayden. Council Member Barrios.

My question is just, does this change in terms of where we are with the preservation ordinances and where those are in the process? although I am glad to hear that the other things have been streamlined. I agreed with that from the beginning.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Now, this doesn't impact the historic preservation ordinance, but I am happy to report that we are moving along with that. We do have an administrative draft back from our consultant team, and we are on the cusp of sharing it with our partners at OTPA and OLA, so they'll be getting a chance to review it, and then we're off to the DOC for a courtesy review. Planning Commission will be back with Council, hopefully late September.

since you got all this time back from streamlining, I wanted that to just stay in focus because before I leave, I want that done. That's our goal as well. Thank you.

Yep. Thank you for that. Council Member Gutierrez.

Mr. Peenem, if you could return really quickly. I was wondering, with this ordinance, when will we be seeing the cleanup in regards to the Smollett subdivision being taken away from the DRC and that cleanup in there?

Maybe to the city attorney's office. I don't know that we have a due date or that we are, do we have something on that?

We don't have anything on the calendar yet, but I will follow up with staff to check on the status. But thank you for bringing it to our attention.

Yes, because I definitely would like to see that all cleaned up, tied up in a nice little bow. Just because I know that there were some issues, and so I just want to make certain that that is no longer in their purview and I want to make certain that that's nice and clean in our ordinance, considering that you are doing a fantastic job of streamlining things, which is good, right? Orange is open for business. There you go. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further questions? Thank you, staff. There's no formal action required. Okay, item 10.2, policies and procedures for the business assistance facade program funded through the community development block grant program. Item 10.2.

Good evening.

Good evening, Mayor and council members. This one, we're putting in a request to continue to the next council meeting on July 14th. Unfortunately, our housing manager, Jessica Herrera, is unfortunately under the weather. And she is really the subject matter expert on this particular program. And while I could potentially report to council on what the program is, if you had any particular technical questions, I would really appreciate the opportunity for her to be here for this meeting. In addition to her efforts and working so hard on this program, I think she would appreciate the opportunity to bring it to council.

Thank you. So, Council Member Gutierrez, do you want to convert this to a motion to continue this item to July 14?

I'll be happy to, but I was so ready to vote for it tonight.

I don't want to hold you back.

That applies to the seconder of the motion.

Yes, the application or the staff report has been written. Staff recommendation is included in the staff report. Yes, you may.

And I think she would appreciate it.

She's probably watching from home.

Very thorough report. Extremely thorough with all the different tiers, all the capabilities. It was fantastic. And I really am looking forward to all those areas that potentially can improve their facade. I already have quite a few in mind that I'm going to go talk to.

Thank you, Council Member Barrios. So we'll revert back to a motion to approve this item. And any further discussion or questions? All right, seeing none, please vote. Approved six votes and one absence. So hopefully that'll make Jessica feel better.

Mr. Mayor, if I could, just before I move on, I just wanted to thank you and please give Jessica our thanks. This is something we've wanted for a long, both of our districts are full of areas that are just going to really thrive under this. Thank you.

All right. Fantastic. Um, item 10.3 adoption of the revised fiscal years, 2025 through 30 citywide strategic plan. And, um, Would the council like an update or staff report on this, or just have any questions? Would anyone like a staff report? Not seeing one. Does anyone have any questions of staff? I'm not seeing any. But Council Member Barrios, there's a question.

I guess this is more a question for my colleagues because so much of what we did here was based on where we were at that moment. And once again, we did it all before we went through the budget process, which is bleak. So what are our options to change this if the scenario completely changes following November and or is it, better to wait a few months till we know what happens in November and either pass this, which this is a perfectly good plan if the sales tax passes. It is a wholly unrealistic plan if it does not and would need to just be thrown out and done again in a very different manner. So I'm just kind of questioning, and maybe that's for you, Mr. City Manager, because this just really, I was going back and forth.

No, I think as written, the plan is absolutely wonderful and provides us some policy guidance and documents and clear direction. The budget was sort of built around it. As I'm looking at the plan right now, the priorities for fiscal year 26-27 are already underway, right? Received direction for annexing County Islands. Deputy City Manager Jack Morgan is currently working on a report, which he will receive soon. Start planning for the general plan update process. Money is allocated in the 26-27 budget. Obtain resolution on the Sully Miller site. I can tell you that is coming soon. So direction tonight would be to adopt it as is. And to answer your question, city council can bring this back in August if you want, right? It's strategic plan, it's policies, it's goals. One thing we might do, I believe with the budgets as well, is if the sales tax measure does not pass, you would revisit in January. I would say let's take that same approach, see what happens this November, and then we can bring this policy document back to you in January to make any changes that are necessary.

Okay, great. Council Member Gutierrez.

I just had one question actually for you, city manager. Towards the end, it was a great report. I liked the way you synthesized it, made it smaller, made it more readable. I appreciated it. And at the end, what a great synopsis of what occurred at that meeting. But I did read one of the comments there at the end was an ad hoc committee to make the onboarding handbook that Council Member Barrios had proposed, and was just wondering if that was still going through or had that even started.

We have not started that process yet. I'll make sure to get right on July 1st. Is that me? Sorry, am I touching my microphone? Apologize. Process has not started yet, but I'll bump it to the top of my list.

Okay, thank you.

All right. Councilmember Gutierrez, you've made a motion to adopt the revised citywide strategic plan. Is there a second? Second from Councilmember Dimitriou. Any other discussion or questions? Seeing none, please vote. Approved with six votes and one absence. Okay, item 10.4, review draft resolution number 11689, reaffirming the city's commitment to responsible stewardship of the public's money. And I will, I guess there's no need for a staff report on this, or would you like to give us an update?

THE ONE THING I CAN JUST NOTE, AND I'LL GET INTO IT. SO THIS IS THE SAME ITEM THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL A COUPLE MEDIANS AGO. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY CALLED THE CONTRACT WITH ORANGE. WE DO HAVE A COUPLE ITEMS THAT, IF THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE, THEY COULD CHANGE THE TITLE OF THIS. AND I HAVE IT LISTED HERE. It's the Orange Promise with the same tagline on both, Local Control and Accountability, or Rebuild Orange, Local Control and Accountability. And just based on the conversations that happened at the last meeting, we did add language under Section 8, which is economic vitality support, which we added language that includes IT JUST MENTIONS THAT THE CITY WILL PRIORITIZE SUPPORTING VULNERABLE POPULATIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO NEED ASSISTANCE, AND THAT WAS JUST BASED ON SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WERE HAPPENING AT THE LAST MEETING WHERE THIS WAS CONSIDERED. SO ULTIMATELY WHAT STAFF'S LOOKING FOR WITH THIS ITEM IS ANY FEEDBACK ON CHANGING THE DOCUMENT AS PRESENTED, or approving resolution number 11689, and with that, the new title that the council would like included. The attachment that's with the staff report has that blank, but highlighted, and so we're just wanting that feedback so we can insert the correct language.

Okay, great. Thank you very much, Council Member Barrios. Oh, we do have one public speaker if you want to do that. Okay. Uh-oh, I think she meant Mary Oberslake still here. All right, Council Member Barrios.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Obviously, we worked on some of this together. My preference would be the rebuild orange. I think that that, while it's not as emotionally compelling from a marketing standpoint, I do think it really speaks to what we need to accomplish and do going forward. And I think it's very proactive for people to understand as we go out and talk to people and residents and businesses about what we're trying to accomplish here. Second, in terms of the measures that are in the actual document, in my conversations with residents and asking about the sales tax, asking about kind of what the priorities are, my preference, my strong preference would be that fiscal responsibility of all kinds go up front. And this is no disrespect on public safety, but people feel that there are specific aspects of public safety that they feel are going along well. And they want certain things addressed, but they really want us to focus on the fiscal accountability and stability part of it first. So what I would recommend is that what we have now is section five, go first. What we have is number six, pensions and other obligations go second. I would even probably change that language a little bit. Pensions and other outstanding debts, just to make it a little more clear for people, because that's a little hard for people to understand. And then you can, Yeah, public safety, independent oversight committee. Well, actually, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Independent oversight committee would be third. And then everything else kind of flows from there. But those would be my strong recommendations, Mr. Mayor.

OK. I like your recommendations. I also love the rebuild orange. I really do. I think that says it all. Unfortunately, the only thing I'm having trouble with is the line will support vulnerable populations in our community that need assistance, and I know your heart is always in the right place, but I just think that that is too vague, and I think that's going to confuse the main issues that we're trying to accomplish here and keep our tax dollars moving toward the priorities that the citizens have stated. So I'm having some difficulty with that one. But otherwise, love Rebuild Orange, love your other suggestions. And with that, back to you, Councilman Rivarios.

I understand the concern and why that could be considered vague. There obviously could be strengthened, but it was specific to two things. And one of them that I forgot to mention earlier, I think we need to specifically address homelessness. So, and that will be one of our key elements that we address going forward and as part of this promise. That has just become, even though the numbers are dropping, that at least in my district, that is becoming a bigger and bigger issue. And we're seeing different populations move in, which is really disturbing. So I don't know how we would frame that, Jack, in terms of how we would address that specifically. And we do support those vulnerable populations through things like the Hub, the Hub OC. And the city manager spoke to me tonight about other things that are coming forward that are going to help in that particular effort. But I think calling it out will be really helpful for the voters. And I think attractive. It was one of the things that popped up in the survey questions that came out. Just right out in front. And it's becoming bigger. Specifically what I meant in that is that When we're talking about vulnerable populations, one of the things you and I have argued about, Mr. Mayor, is about supporting the hub because they have not reached their fiscal, the goals we set for them, what we asked of them in terms of doing more outside fundraising. However, if they fail, that will be a failure for the city. So if we need to be more specific about helping something like that that is currently unfunded or doesn't have enough funds to self-sustain, that would be fine. I'm also thinking, when you look at the whole first page of this, all we talk about in here is the pain of our residents, that everybody's under pressure, that everybody is feeling vulnerable and helpless, and that economic times are uncertain. And yet we're going to tax them. So at the same time, if you're not doing something specifically to create safety net for people in our city whether that's we're gonna you know if there becomes a need we're going to help with some of our food banks we're going to help with some of the nonprofit charities and be very specific I'm fine with being specific but that's what it was intended for otherwise we're literally talking out of two sides of our mouth you can't talk about people's pain and then say oh but you know we're gonna go do these things Fixing a road does not feed my kids. So it might be nice, but it doesn't help in those really hard economic circumstances.

Thank you. Council Member Dimitriou? I focused it on the same thing the mayor did, was the line is city investments will support vulnerable. God bless America. I forgot my glasses on. I'm sorry. I'm getting old. says that city investments will support vulnerable populations in our community that need assistance. So much like the Mayor thought it was kind of vague, I like where you're going with it, where it's specific, we're helping I agree that making sure the hub is properly funded. If there's a deficit, it shouldn't take the pressure off them trying to use their private opportunities to fund their organization or looking at different opportunities that we have to support those that are in need. MY ONLY PROBLEM IS IF IT ISN'T REAL SPECIFIC, IS THE NEED PAYING AN ELECTRIC BILL FOR, YOU KNOW, ABC FAMILY? OR IS IT PAYING RENT FOR A FAMILY THAT'S OVER WHEREVER? I THINK THERE'S SOME WIGGLE ROOM THERE TOWARDS THE SPECIFICITY. I THINK HAVING IT LINKED TO CITY INVESTMENTS IS KIND OF DANGEROUS. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ITS OWN SECTION. I THINK THAT MIGHT EVEN BE BETTER. And I think this is a great idea actually when we are having the charter discussion. This might be something to put in the charter that, kind of going backwards, that we could be very specific in there towards a humanitarian side of looking at things like if there's a, if the point, and I'm just, this is just a ball, this isn't what I'm saying, but kind of just an idea, is, well, you know, I know it's gonna come up later someday, but is saying, like, if the county's point in time shows that we have an increase of 50% in homelessness, those that are unhoused, then we are going to fund opening an additional five beds at this location or whatever, however it's worded. But that might be something that gets put in the charter that will mandate that the city in the future or even in this document that will mandate us to hit certain goals. But it doesn't need to be specific because I'm also not in favor of buying a new car because somebody can't get somewhere. And if somebody says, well, I'm vulnerable and I need assistance with a new car, I mean, technically right now, that would fall under, I mean, it just needs to be more specific. But I like where you were going on a lot of it.

Council Member Gillanammer.

I get the goal of this. It's to assuage fears and commit to the residents where we're going to spend the money. IT IS PRETTY ALL ENCOMPASSING. IT KIND OF WALKS THROUGH ALL OF THE DIFFERENT AREAS THAT WE HAVE GOING AFTER. IT INCLUDES THE 2025-2030 STRATEGY AS WELL, WHICH IS KIND OF ALL ENCOMPASSING THING WITH THE CITY. CAN WE GET MORE SPECIFIC WITH THIS AROUND PRIORITIZATION OF MONIES? IF THE GENERAL CONSENSUS IS IT SHOULD BE LEVERAGED TO PAY DOWN PENSION OBLIGATION AND POTENTIALLY GET AHEAD OF ANY INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS, IS THAT IN ANY WAY IMPACTING ITS ABILITY TO BE A GENERAL SALES TAX ON THE BALLOT IF WE STATE WE WILL SPEND THIS MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE, WE WILL SPEND THIS MONEY ON PENSION REPAYMENT OR DEBT REPAYMENT.

I can answer that question. Council Member Gillenhammer, currently the language is drafted in a way that gives an outline of the city council's investment in specific funding. I would caution the council, including language that's so specific that could be perceived as the city contractually binding to... to allocate certain funds for pension obligation. I think the language itself as drafted is simply explaining that it's reiterating the city council's commitment to pay off those pension obligations without crossing that legal boundary that it can only be used and it's appropriated for that reason.

Yeah. I think the concern is in our strategic budget for 2025 to 2030 is 4.01 to 4.03, where time after time, as any of these taxes passes, immediate equity bumps hit, increase in headcount occurs, salaries and benefits go up, pension gets worse, you further the problem, right? That's historically what happens. So this is just a general statement of things that we should already be doing, frankly. And then there's a line in there that we want to continue to adopt balanced budgets. I think we've been adopting deficits for the last couple of years. So maybe we just adjust that wording to start adopting balanced budget.

Sure. That adjustment can be made.

Yeah. Got it. I consider this intertwined with the sales tax. I don't support the sales tax, so I won't support this. But I understand the heart of what this is.

Thank you, Councilmember. Councilmember Tavalares.

Jack, this resolution is mostly used for almost like a sales pitch, correct?

I think it's just trying to show if we are putting two measures on. We have TOT and sales tax. A part of what's not included with this is staff is working on a community investment plan. So this kind of gives a framework with how the city intends to be responsible with. And the phrase we keep using is any new tax revenues authorized by the Orange community.

So it's goals. what we would do with the new monies.

Correct. It gives a framework and then the specifics would come in that community investment plan, which would continuously change because it's going to be up to the council. Those are budgeted items that are really policy directions, but staff's been working on that. So when we talk about assisting those experiencing homelessness, those are items that I know that it's included in the draft that we already have developed, particularly as we look at our police department and the resources they need to address it. So those are items that we're working on. I think what staff's looking at is trying to have this resolution adopted and that would accompany the resolution.

So for Councilwoman Barrios, would you consider where the highlighted will support vulnerable populations in our community that need assistance? I understand about being too vague now and then that we need to be vague. That, I don't know, if I was reading that to vote for a tax increase, everything else seems, because we're saying to, is it build orange or did you say rebuild?

Rebuild.

You might consider build, but anyway. I don't know if that's part of the rebuilding process, because when I think of rebuilding, I'm thinking streets, lights, infrastructure. I think this is more of a mission part where that's when we're looking at a lot of our partners places of worship, also all of our community organizations. And I understand and I'm supportive of that, but I don't know if it goes in with, if you will, the bricks and mortar of everything else in this section. It kind of stands out as something different than everything else. And I don't want people to sit at home and think, oh, well, I'm not in it for that. I'm in it to get my potholes fixed. I'm not in it to help that. I don't know. I don't think it fits with everything else in the document. But I understand where you're going, too. And I like it. And I really like the idea of putting it in the charter, too. But that seems like more of a mission statement than anything else. Again, I think it stands out. It's very different from the others. That's my only comment.

If I may, Mr. Mayor, just to provide some clarity. So the resolution is intended to educate the public regarding the city's fiscal priorities, financial obligations, and stewardship of public funds. It's not intended, as presented, it's not intended to... advocate for or against any ballot measure that may be in November. And from a city perspective, the education piece just allows for simply educating regarding infrastructure needs, pension obligations, reserve policies, budgetary priorities. So ultimately, the voters will look at this resolution and it'll provide some transparency regarding the council's Council's priorities.

Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Barrios.

Yes, thank you. And I think that I need two things. One, I think the way that you put in what I put in last time was just kind of thrown in because I threw it out, you know, without clearly articulating what I was trying to get at. So I think two things need to happen. The economic vitality support Except for the line that you put in of mine deals specifically almost exclusively with kind of our economic development actions in terms of rebuilding Orange's economic base. And so that doesn't fit there at all. It really does stick out like a sore thumb. So I think really what is needed is two additional sections. One specifically addressing homelessness because I don't want these to be looked at the same. I'm talking about promising our residents and our businesses that we are going to aggressively attack homelessness. And that is something very different than helping vulnerable people. There's a little bit of crossover, if that makes sense, Mr. City Manager, in terms of some of the things or tools that we may talk about and prioritize. But then there's this difference of, you know, if it needed to be very specific about helping vulnerable populations within the city who... Like I said, the whole first page goes into pain and suffering. Okay, well, what is measured by that? If there's an economic downturn of five, 10% overall, and we're still taxing people, what are we giving them that might assist in their immediate needs? Is that more CBDG money? Is it a commitment to our nonprofits who assist vulnerable populations? What does that look like? And I think I can help you get there. But if we're, to Council Member Tavalaris' point, if it's really just about rebuilding and more about infrastructure and bricks and mortars and stuff, then the whole first page suddenly doesn't make any sense. Then we should be talking about, specifically, about the, what am I thinking, quality of life. That would be the language you would use. And beautification and economic vitality up there, opportunities for local jobs, that type of thing. And the whole first page doesn't even really talk about that. And I know you're itching to get this out and to use it as your launching point. But I really think this needs to be reworked a little bit. And then have the specificity that my colleagues want. And they're not wrong in that. And I think we can get there.

Thank you, Councilmember. I know what you're aiming for. Since I'm the one that brought this forward in the first place, I'm going to make a motion that we adopt this resolution with the, first of all, the orders that you suggested, Council Member Barrios. And I'm going to suggest that we strike the sentence, we'll support vulnerable populations in our community that need assistance. Instead, in Section 1, where it lists fire protection, emergency response readiness, comma, add homeless prevention, comma, and neighborhood safety programs to help keep residents, businesses, and neighborhoods safe, I would like to mention something about homelessness in here, but I don't want to go any further than that. And that is my motion. There's a second from Councilmember Dimitriou. And I would entertain any further discussion before we move on, or even a substitute motion. OK, I will call for the vote. That is approved four to two, with council members Gillenhammer and Barrios voting no. OK, moving forward, legal affairs item 11.1, introduction, first reading of ordinance number 11-26, amending chapter 10.40 of the Orange Municipal Code pertaining to parking meter zones. And I'm sure we would love to have an update on this one. Mr. Cash.

I'm actually going to turn it over to our parking czar, administrative manager Laura Labardo.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor and members of city council. Tonight, we are introducing ordinance number 11-26, which proposes an amendment to chapter 10.40 of the Orange Municipal Code related to parking meter zones. This ordinance updates the city's existing paid parking program for the Old Town Commercial Core originally established under ordinance number 2-25. Since the program launch in February of 2026, staff have been closely monitoring its performance and gathering feedback from visitors, merchants, and other community stakeholders. Based on input received, ordinance number 11-26 would authorize the public works director to adjust posted paid parking time limits up to a maximum of four hours. This added flexibility will allow the city to respond more quickly to changing parking needs to improve customer convenience and support business activity while still maintaining the program's goal of promoting turnover in the Old Town Commercial Core. The proposed change allows the city to fine-tune time limits for paid parking areas without requiring a full ordinance revision each time adjustments are needed. This approach enhances operational efficiency and keeps the program adaptable. That concludes my report and staff is available for any questions you may have.

Thank you very much. Council Mayor McGillinhammer.

Thank you for doing this. This was excellent, and this is the right way to go. Just a question on parking fees. For Hour 3 or Hour 4, is there an increase in parking fees?

As proposed, we're not adjusting any adjustment to the fees currently.

Okay. I'm good with the proposal. I think the spirit of continuing to get rotation in parking, it might be something we pay attention to over time.

For clarification, though, as we discussed earlier, it doesn't preclude the council from, in the future, when we review our fee schedule, is saying, hey, our number three is going to cost a little bit more. Or if we ever go to four, that's going to cost even more. That can be done down the road. Absolutely. It's fully within your discretion. Great.

Council Member Dimitriou.

By the way, we do have a motion on the floor to approve by Councilmember Parles and second by Councilmember Gutierrez. Councilmember Dimitri.

So just for clarification, this is giving more ability to extend time limits, correct? Okay. I've been very against this whole parking meter thing. Some of it I see as a benefit, but I'll support this because it actually is finally seeing some of the light of problems that are occurring with it. So thank you.

I will also... Thanks, staff, for bringing this forward and making what's probably a much needed correction. But this still falls within the boundaries of what the consultant suggested in the first place and the goal being open up, you know, what am I trying to say? Turnover. Thank you.

That's correct. We kept it within the recommended time limits that our consultant recommended, so we still will have turnover within the paid parking area.

Fantastic. Again, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'll call for the vote. Thank you.

Council Member Barrios, can you please read the?

I was just waiting. Introduction of first reading of ordinance number 11-26, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending chapter 10.40 of the Orange Municipal Code pertaining to parking meter zones.

Great. Thank you. Please vote. That was approved with six votes and one absence. Next regular city council meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 14th, 2026 at 6 p.m. in the council chamber with closed session beginning at 5 p.m. if necessary. We're adjourned.

However we are managing it and directing