City Council - Regular Meeting

Mr. Mayor, it's now 6:00. Are we ready to begin? We are ready to begin.

Recording in progress. Wonderful. And uh welcome everyone. Good evening. And uh this is the regular meeting of the Pedaluma City Council and Pedaluma Community Development um successor agency for Monday, March 2nd, 2026. If you wish to provide a comment uh tonight, we have forms in the back of the room just outside there on a table. If you fill them in and bring them to our clerk who's here at the front, uh we'll be able to do that. And let's see uh please note that we are doing concurrent translation service and um this for this meeting it's in Spanish and a variety of other languages and to access translation online you can use the link that's printed in the agenda that we have here or we have a QR code on the doors and other places so that you can participate in multiple languages. Uh may we have our roll call for the evening please? Barnacle

present. Kater Thompson here. D Carly here. Now here. Quint here. Shribs here. McDonald here. And we do have a quorum. Thank you. Let's stand for the pledge of 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.

And a moment of silence, please. And uh to begin the meeting, I always look up and down the dis and ask if anyone has any agenda changes to make on what we've uh shown in print. And uh not seeing any uh then we're going to adopt the agenda as printed by consent. Uh and um we have a couple proclamations tonight which is always a fun thing. And our our first proclamation is for women's history month. I'd like to invite uh our commissioner Jenny Belway of the Sonoma County Commission on the Status of Women to the podium to accept. And there she is. And I'll start. It says, "Whereas this year's theme for Women's History Month, leading the change, women's shaping a sustainable future, calls upon us to confront the wide range of overlapping global challenges, including climate change, economic insecurity, healthc care disparities, and threats to de democratic participation. And whereas the story of women throughout American and Sonoma County is the story of women of all ages, races, and cultural backgrounds who led campaigns for equality and civil rights, advanced professional and educational opportunities, founded entirely new enterprises, and contributed significantly to the arts, sciences, and humanistic causes. And whereas Women's History Month provides an opportunity for communities and schools to expand appreciation for the diverse contributions of women who have led and who are leading sustainability efforts across environmental, economic, educational, and social justice movements and empower empower actions towards sustainability. Whereas Women's History Month highlights

how these challenges are intertwined, how women, particularly from marginalized communities such as in parts of Sonoma County, often experience their impact most acutely. Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Kevin McDonald, mayor of Pedaluma, along with all the members of the Paluma City Council, in recognition of the significant role played by women in leading the charge towards lasting sustainable solutions to these complex challenges, do hereby proclaim March 2026 as Women's History Month. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, we also have tonight um, American Red Cross month. And to help us with that, we have uh, Natalie Lynn Henry, American Red Cross Emergency Management Agency Coordinator, and Brian Brley, the external relations volunteer. And if you'd join us at the podium, we'd sure like to see you. and not seeing them step forth. Um, we will continue to read the proclamation anyways because they do contribute mightily in case of emergency. Whereas in March, we celebrate American Red Cross Month by honoring our neighbors who make its humanitarian mission possible in Paluma. Every day, their acts of kindness change lives, bring relief, comfort, and hope when help can't wait. This compassionate spirit runs deep in our community just as it has for 145 years through the American Red Cross. And whereas today, those who serve with the Northern California Coastal Region of the Red Cross light the way during emergencies, whether it's delivering shelter, food, and comfort after disasters, providing a safe, life-saving blood supply for patients

facing facing conditions like cancer treatment, childirth complications, and traumatic injuries. assisting military members, veterans, and their families with 247 global support or empowering individuals with skills like first aid and CPR that which all save lives. Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Kevin McDonald, mayor of Paluma, along with the members of the Paluma City Council, do hereby proclaim March 2026 as Red Cross Month and encourage all citizens of Paluma to reach out and support its humanitarian mission. Thank you. Now, we um always open our meetings with uh general public comment. And uh let me describe that. Uh during general public comment, the public is invited to make comments on items of public interest that are within the city council's subject matter jurisdiction and that are not listed on the current agenda. Public comments are limited up to three minutes per person and depending on the number of persons wishing to address the council. Time will be allocated in equal shares totaling no more than 20 minutes. If we have more than 20 people wishing to speak, the additional comments will be heard after the last business item on the agenda. And um and I note that the big agenda items of tonight, the North Bay Animal Services um and the uh referendum are independently agendaized, not in general public comment. And so I'd like to ask our clerk if we receive any general public comment via email or other communication. And then please uh read the script necessary.

Uh absolutely. We did receive nine general public comments and those are posted online. And at this time, I will start a 30-se secondond clock. During these 30 seconds, members of the public should bring their speaker cards to the clerk's desk if they have not already done so. Spear cards received after this time may not be accommodated. We have eight speaker cards tonight. And so, uh, that'll set the clock at two minutes, please. Uh, Madame Clerk. So, um, I'd like to invite George Wagner to, uh, be our first speaker and Jody Johnson to be our second speaker. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, distinguished members of the city council, and city manager Flynn. My name is Dr. George Wagner, and I'm with the Rotary Club of Pedalum Sunrise. Tonight, I'm here to announce and to invite you all to Pedalum Road, Pedaluma Sunrise Rotary's 20th annual Great Pedaluma Egg Hunt. The event is Saturday, March 28th at the Pedelma Fairgrounds from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon and it's rain or shine, so wear appropriate clothing. The egg hunt is for children 12 and under, but free to all who attend. It's going to be a lot of fun. We have a Easter Bunny will be there. We have great music from DJ Tainment. We have hot dogs from Pedle Market. We have milk and chocolate milk

from Clover Storeetta. Local businesses will be there promoting their goods. And if it rain doesn't uh present itself, we might even have some demonstrations from martial arts and on guard fencing. We do three different egg hunts with the different ages so the little kids aren't battling the big kids for their ages or for the eggs. Um we have lots and lots about thousands and thousands of eggs that are pre- stuffed with toys and candy. And if the children are lucky enough to find a prize egg, they can turn it in for some kind of toys. um possible slushes from Once Upon a Slush, possible um from BaskinRobins, and um they might even walk away with a bicycle. So once again, the great PedalMa egg hunt is going to be Saturday, March 28th um from 10 to 12 at the Pedaluma Fairgrounds. And thank you all for having me and have a wonderful evening.

Well, thank you very much. and Jod Johnson to be followed by Tim Portius.

Mayor, city council and staff, our mobile park residents in Pedaluma continue to be abused, retaliated against, and secretly harmed. Youngstown Park management has undervalued purposely a mobile home they sold. Sold as all ages, not seniors, with an exorbitant ground rent of $1,900. This property at 12 Michael was originally listed at only $40,000 and then remarkably sold for $18,27. The intent is to devalue all residents owned mobile homes and drive the ground rent to inflated prices to once again coers residents into having to sell their mobile homes below value so as a potential buyer could even afford the ground rent paid directly to parks. Should the ground rent be able to be raised to these inflated rents under the city's RSO? The answer is no. We remind all that the only two ways the ground rent can go up beyond RSO limits is eviction or removal of an old mobile home and replacement with a new. Neither happened in the case of the sale with 12 Michael Drive owned by the park. Unlawful comes to mind. Park owners and management are and continue to go against lawful ordinances and the senior park overlay. Again, no judge has ruled they can lawfully sell as all age. Litigation continues. Violations exist in the marketing as all age. 8020 has always existed. But is it not fraud to list online a mobile home as an all-age park when city zoning and ordinances and city websites state that Youngstown is a senior mobile park. Capri Littlewoods Youngstown cottages have had residents come forward that ground rents from seller to buyer went up in a city that has zero vacancy control. Some 10%, some 15%, some 100%. No replacement mobile homes or evictions. In fact, quite a few where a resident dies and their heirs are taken

advantage of not knowing that ground rents are being increased to buyers. Thank you. Our next speaker is Tim Portius to be followed by Jennifer Bole.

In a lot of cases, realators who represent their buyers and sellers are not allowed in a room while leases, approval of ground rent, etc. are happening. How mobile home park residents have been harmed is almost always 90% in secret. If a resident doesn't know their rights or is led to believe in them by management deemed to be the authority that rates increases, even contractual agreements are lawful when they sign. Just lately, there existed a contract in Youngstown that says if the park decides to close that residents will get either 80% of what they paid for their resident or what they pay for it. That due process falls under state law AB 2782 and relocation efforts, fair market appeals are demanded by any closure process. The question becomes, can a mobile park resident give up their rights in closure if they don't even know they are giving up their rights? Of course not. Our seniors and vulnerable residents should not be taken advantage of, manipulated, or even deceived in any pursuit of gouging or greed. This type of aggressive business practice should never be allowed. Fair housing and HOPA housing for older people's act were formed into law to protect. Retaliation is a real fear for almost all mobile park residents. There is such an ambulance an am I imbalance of wealth going against these large egregious investment group owners. But that is doesn't mean a senior or vulnerable resident who owns their own mobile home living within their means should have less rights. We ask you all and the community to continue to stand up for the vulnerable as you have been doing and stand against greed and secretive

unlawful practices happening every day in our mobile parks. As always,

thank you. Jennifer Bole should be followed by Christine White. Sorry. Good evening. As always, we are proud to live in a city and to be governed by leaders that place equal importance to all their citizens. Paluma Mobile residents united. Thank you. Thank you very much. Christine White to be followed by Robin Riley.

Good evening, mayor, council members. Thank you. My name is Christine White and I wanted to talk about the um recent HCPC meeting that I attended regarding the hotel. First, I was pleased that EKN found a way to make four stories pencil out and um and at the meeting there were several comments about the historical design. I tried to find it online and I couldn't for all four sides. So, if it is there now, please point me in the right direction because I would like to see it. Anyway, some of the comments had to do with can we use more historical design elements and um and and when the historian was asked, she said they were she was questioned what kind of design is this? And she reported contemporary. And then when they asked about, well, what makes this fit into historical? The historian reported that well the site had always been commercial property and this is going to be a commercial building and and west as when asked additionally well some of the comments had been about can you make the windows not quite just a square box on the side that faces Rex in particular can you add some either a uh a sill or or some arches or something to fit in and she reported that she didn't take the other stories into consideration. I would like the council to take a look at the design and take the whole building in all into consideration because we don't just see she only took into consideration the first floor and this is a four-story building. So I found that a little alarming and so I'm asking you to please take a look at it the whole structure and how do we make it fit in? for example, the new Adobe Creek Winery. At least it has some shape to it and it fits in with our downtown. So, this is a gateway. So, that's it. Thank you so much. Thank you, Robin Riley. To be followed by Eric Shear.

Good evening, city council, city staff, fellow members of the public. My name is Robin Riley and I'm a former member of the city's uh past tech technology advisory committee and a volunteer chapter leader with the ACLU Northern California Snow County chapter. Um over the last few months, we've had a series of very interesting meetings at the public safety advisory committee. Uh as people have learned that four flock ALPR surveillance cameras were installed in town last October. Uh these cameras run 24/7. Uh are connected to the internet. uh can be compromised and have been um not necessarily ours but the devices themselves in general uh and they produce data that is easily shared against California law with federal and out of state agencies like ICE and CBP. Uh public safety advisory committee, typically a pretty sleepy committee, has seen an outpouring of input from concerned community members with more than 100 people providing written and verbal public comment expressing their concerns about Flock, a widely abused and errorprone technology. Uh as well as concerns about the creeping growth of surveillance technology infringing on our civil liberties at a time when we have a lawless federal government that is endangering us all. Um I'm here to say this. Uh, I would like us to slow down and make sure we get this right. Uh, the stakes are just too high in this moment. Uh, I asked the city council and city staff to uh, place a moratorum or slow down and not expand any of the surveillance technology like no new cameras. Uh, convene a community workshop or town hall, one that's accessible to working people for us to begin to build a collective understanding of the issues, the risks, and the benefits and approach this thoughtfully. Uh and lastly, uh I asked the city council and city staff to work with a diverse array of stakeholders to craft a surveillance technology ordinance. An STTO will provide us with a framework so that we don't fall into the trap of letting the recklessness of Silicon Valley get ahead of us as it has here and jeopardize our civil liberties. Thank you for your time and care and ensuring we uphold our longstanding American ideals of liberty and freedom.

Thank you. Thank you, Eric Sheer to be followed by Chantel Rogers. And may I hold one second here, please? Sure. Um, our screens have gone blank. Have all screens gone blank? And so is the big screen. And are we recording and and broadcasting? We're back. Okay. Please hear.

Thank you. Thank you very much. some city council mayor, city planner, um, uh, city manager specifically first and foremost for recognizing the American Red Cross and also women collaboratively and the brilliance they've provided with us in the medical field which I'm in has been extraordinary and so important. So, thank you for doing that. Um, we have a public health crisis both on a national and regional and local level. Um, back in the day, ebikes were developed for old geysers like me, so that I can go ahead and start to continue to ride bikes as I got older. And since that period of time, actually, they've quote unquote flourished so much that they become really sort of ebikes on steroids and that they've really become mostly a avenue for young kids to go ahead and use and enjoy themselves on. um working as a ER physician for children both on a regional local level and on a more broad level in the Bay Area, we've seen so many more injuries both for children and pedestrians that it's becoming a true public health crisis that I think we need to really grasp and start grappling with as a community on a local level even it starts there. Um, so both as a father, as a resident here for 13 years and watching what happens outside when I walk along on Lynch Creek Trail versus being in the emergency room and seeing what we see and talking to my colleagues. It's really something that we need to be I won't even say proactive now, but reactive. Proactive is so important in health care to make sure we don't see the injuries and deaths that are really actually happening now in front of us. Back in the day, um, metal bats were used for baseball games and we made it a point to go ahead for children since they were so dangerous to change that and to go to wooden bats. And, uh, nationally that became such a big deal as well because it actually did save

children's quality of life by going ahead and making sure that we were safe using the right instrumentation. So, please, let's work together to make a a difference here. Thank you. Thank you very much. That was our last speaker under general public comment. I'd like it bring it back up to the council. And uh and we have Chantel as my error. I don't know how that could happen. I apologize. I was thinking about the kids.

Thank you. A few council city meetings ago, Councilman Barnacle as others as well as others on the deis expressed heartfelt concern for our immigrant community amid increased ICE activity by our current administration. Not knowing when we might be more severely impacted locally. Members are understandably worried about the impact to our foreignb born friends and neighbors who are vital to our community and economy and who can be snatched off the street at any moment. I share your concern for the fate of these marginalized communities. One concrete thing you can do is to consider immediately terminating the city's contract with flock. These cameras are AIdriven and cloud stored, making it impossible to safeguard information gathered. Regardless of perceived protections, no one has been able to maintain guard rails around sensitive info once it becomes part of flack data. This is why so many cities and jurisdictions are cutting their ties with flock. It's just not worth the risk of inadvertently sharing info that could be used by governmental agencies to target pedaluma residents. Pedaluma is not special. We do not have a magic way to make sure ICE and others don't access info that we gather and upload. It's easy to vote to uphold mandates already put in place by state or county to protect our immigrant population. It's harder when our city police department would like to use technology with the newest bells and whistles to make their job easier to catch the bad guys. We've only had the cameras for a few months and had other options to track info before then. While the committee was split on recommending to council to remove them, I believe that the city council needs to en agendaize the issue and soon. It's not fast enough for us to write out the contract until October while evaluating options. Every day that they are up is a day that info we facilitated could negatively impact one or more of the most vulnerable among us. Thank you.

Thank you. And that concludes general public comment. And uh that brings it back up to the council. And um you know, I think council sometimes uh um fills more of uh the minutes than uh we intend to. And I'd like to ask the clerk tonight to set us at a three-minute clock and um and try and keep us on target as the public stays on target. Uh and I'd like to invite our uh council member Shribs to start us off tonight.

Okay. Thank you. um not many meetings this past week, just one week since the last meeting, but I did this morning attend a meeting put on by the Redwood uh food bank and um uh it was really impressive about the numbers that they reported as well as their operations, what they do and how they do it. So, just um some facts that they kind of gave to us to go over. Um first, they're a large organization, but they're still local. um they pretty much cover the California coast, let's say from Napa all the way up to Oregon on that. And but here in Paluma alone, just Pedaluma, um they um bring in a $1.5 million of a year of work, but they provide $6 million worth of food to our population and they serve 12,000 people here right here in Paluma. So uh sub substantial and they work with partners KZ UN um uh Univa and Elon Luther all organized with various churches and these groups and and they actually cooperate very closely together providing lots of services and extend even more. So um KS alone said uh they provide over 250,000 meals per year. Our senior center also provides thousands of meals a month. So huge effort is being made here. Uh the goal is nobody goes hungry uh in any one day uh at all. Um so in many cases some of the situations especially some of the nonprofits that are working um they actually have a 100x ratio of cost benefit between the amount of money that they spend and the amount of service that they provide for a community. They said they've turned 2,000 one case they illustrate $2,000 turned into $700,000 of of actual food uh provided. So it's pretty huge. And one of the the things that they goals that they set by is

customer service with love. Um which I thought is a pretty substantial goal that they have as they're doing things. And pretty much everything is anonymous. Go get food however you can. Um and work with them. And uh this comes down to dollars plus people power, cooperation, collaboration makes this all work. Uh but they still have lots of costs in their fuel and staff time. So uh money and and they bring food to them and bring uh money to them and that's a high need. They do wonderful work here in the community. Um so I thought I'd just report on that for the benefit that's being provided here. Sort of like a proclamation on my own here. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Council Member Quint.

Yeah. Thank you. Uh, okay. This week I attended the with with uh a few other members here the community workshop on the Cfield ELI project. Um, thought that was a great event. Uh, and then upcoming uh this Wednesday at Peback, we we are set to review the Pedaluma River uh Pedaluma River Parks MTC complete streets checklist for a planned multi-use trail. Uh, and we're set to provide additional feedback on the Cfield Lane and Eli Boulevard South safety and pavement safety and pavement upgrade projects. And that's it. Thank you very much, Council Member. Now,

good evening and thank you for attending tonight's city council meeting. My public safety advisory committee lia is on report will only be brief and to the point. The public is invited to check the city's website for a complete video of the meeting and the decisions made that evening. The Pedal Police Department staff and chief presented an automated license plate reader program and the city's policy number 461. After much public input, questions, answers, discussions, the committee took a vote to recommend that the city council eval evaluate the current city of Pedaluma's ALPR provider of four flock cameras and an alternative service providers. After an L ALPR grant expires in fall 2026, the city's cost for these four four cameras is 12,000 a year. The Pedalma Police Department currently uses these four cameras as a tool to solve crimes. All data is removed after 30 days unless it's being used for an active crime investigation. The city's policy 461 has been updated and is very solid. The city's attorney's office is currently reviewing the service provers contract with the city. In the homeless coalition lengthy Zoom meeting I attended, members heard from service providers and county staff on subjects like rapid rehousing, the future with cost and benefits. Good news, Pedaluma is to receive funding through measure O for CS and the Mary Isaac Center. It was commented by one of the staff members that the homeless information and understanding it in Soma County is like drinking water out of a fire hose. As I reported in the last month, the 2026 point in time count was done. The actual numbers are not available yet. The 15% increase reported by the Press Democrat is not accurate.

Preliminary results will be reported in May and due to for HUD future funding. Lots of changes are forecasted in the future in this area. On Saturday, I attended the opening day Pedalum American Little League. My grandson's team won. I want to wish him and all the players and his team for a winning season, but to remember to have fun, make new friends, and lifelong memories. This afternoon, I kicked off the ReadAcross America, also referred to as Dr. Seuss's birthday, by reading to a group of students at Mcdell Elementary School. This year's theme is celebrating a nation of diverse readers. champion kindness to make all children feel welcome and valued by highlighting books that reflect the diverse communities and personal journeys and this is especially true in Paluma. Thank you.

Thank you for all all that report. It is hard to keep it your message in that time, isn't it? Council member Barnacle. Uh I have no report out. Um but I would encourage the gentleman about the ebikes to reach out to me. I'd love to talk. Thanks. Uh, Councilwoman Kater Thompson. Um,

I don't have any reports from my liaison. Um, but I do want to talk about the Cfield Eli workshop. It was a great workshop. Bjorn um Griffinberg did an excellent job and there were a lot of great questions and it was really easy to understand and I just want to give him kudos for what a great um presentation that he did. And it was my granddaughter's 18th birthday yesterday and her wish was that the entire family went up to Davis for her birthday and even my grandson from San Diego flew in and surprised her. So that was exciting. Thank you. Um Vice Mayor, what do we have?

Good evening everyone. I have no new leas on reports since last week. My only meeting Agon Open Space was cancelled and so in the last seven days, not much.

Thank you very much. Yeah, it's only been a short short time since our last meeting. Um, and uh, I I think as you gather, you uh, you really can't go to um, a public meeting without running into one or two or three council members. And so I too was at the Redwood Food Bank this morning and uh, um, and I think Council Member Shribs summed it up quite well, but Cot said that they've gone from 50,000 meals to 250,000 in just five years. And yet they're saying that because of the immigration issues and immigration fears, their numbers are going down and they're they're seeing the impact of um immigration oppression and um and then uh the uh the Cfield meeting was um I really appreciate the Cfield meeting. So many good questions from the public and such good explanation of the potential lane reductions and and roundabout in in that area. Uh big changes coming from the city. also attended the climate action roundt over this uh week which is how to take what we adopted as a climate blueprint and turn it into real action at the city level the individual level and all community level and um also um attended a workshop this week on reimagining public spaces spaces like Putinham Plaza where uh there's so many examples of successful uh public use of things and and we want to try and make all public spaces more welcoming And um I believe um we have news on our north planning area. Uh we formed an outreach committee, but I'll uh defer to the city manager as we ask uh um for the city manager's report. Thank you.

Thank you, mayor. Um yes, you're right. We have a advisory group in place and we have 15 members and we had a very introductory kickoff meeting on February 25th. One of our agenda items at our first meeting was to discuss the format for future meetings. Another agenda item will be for the working group members to introduce themselves and their backgrounds, a larger group. Um and uh so lots of flex flexibility because it isn't a Brown Act body. So um you trying to go around their schedule and and kick this this specific plan off.

No question. Outreach is an important part and I'm glad they're getting started early on it. That moves us to our consent calendar for the evening. Um there are only two items on the consent calendar this week and so uh if uh no objection, I'm going to ask do we move right to public comment on the consent calendar and ask the clerk to lead that discussion. We did not receive any cards on the consent calendar, but this is the moment to bring

and not seeing anybody uh having a card uh running to the clerks. Well, maybe one um coming to the Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on the on the consent calendar and um our um speaker tonight is Christina White? And um we start. Sorry, this card was for a later item. For a later item clarified, I'm not having a great night, am I? Okay. So, um that uh closes um public comment on the consent calendar and I'll bring it back up to the DAS. Council member Barnacle.

Yeah, just because we have such a packed audience, I just want to point everybody to uh Monday, March 23rd, we have a special meeting to talk about our goals and priorities as a city. Um it's a good opportunity to get a big picture of what's going on in the city and um comment on things that you think should be a priority. And with that, I will move the consent calendar. I'll second that. So, we have a motion and a second. May we have our roll call vote? I'm sorry, I missed the second. It's from Kater Thompson. I'm sorry. Motion by Barnacle. Second from Kater Thompson. Uh Barnacle, I. Kater Thompson, yes. D Carly, yes. Now, yes. Quint, yes. Shribs, yes. McDonald,

yes. Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you. And that takes us to our next um agenda item, which is a resolution appointing individuals to um certain committees and commissions. we have including the climate action commission, the historical and cultural preservation committee, the public safety advisory committee, a senior advisory committee, and the Sonoma County Library Commission. And um by way of introduction of this, we make appointments from time to time to to keep these comm uh committees and commissions all full. And um the J the way it's going to work here is I'll ask the council if they have any questions and and then following that I'll ask the public for any public comment. We'll bring it up um back up to the the dis and um and during during public comment any applicant may also speak. I mean anybody from the public including applicants may speak um and then we'll bring back up and we'll vote on each of these committees commissions individually resolve that move to the next committee. So, uh, do we have that correct? And do you have a bit of a presentation for us?

Yes. Just to give a little bit of background. Um, good evening, mayor, council. Uh, we currently have six vacancies on our city commission's committees and boards due to members leaving their position prior to the expiration of their terms. Our usual recruitment is in the spring. However, because the Sonoma County Library Commission bylaws state that vacancies should be filled within 60 days, we decided to do a mid-year recruitment to fill all of the current vacancies. Uh it should be noted that several of these seats are for a very short term, just expiring June 30th, 2026. This is just to keep consistency with our usual term limits. Um however, council would be able to reappoint these folks to a full term in June. Uh, and for those who are appointed to these short terms, the clerk's office will work directly with them to streamline and simplify the application process if they want to reapply for reappointment. Uh, the recruitment was open from January 19th to February 19th. Our outreach included posts on social media, the city's website, announcements in the community update, and during the city manager comment, and direct outreach to folks who had expressed interest in the CCBs in the past. We received 16 applicants for the six vacant seats. And as the mayor mentioned, we will conduct a round of voting for each committee separately, as many rounds as needed uh for an applicant to reach a majority of council votes, which is four. Uh and I'll have slides for each committee for voting. Um and council has submitted a voting worksheet of their initial preferences, which will be filled out on the slides just to get us going. Uh and they can confirm those votes when we do it. and I'll pull that presentation up after council questions and the public comment.

Okay, great. So, I'll look to council and ask if anyone has a question they wish to ask before we move to public comment. Any question? Let's move to public comment.

Okay, we did receive one comment ahead of time and that's posted. And I have several cards, but if there's anyone else who would like to speak, now is the moment to bring your speaker card speaker cards to my desk. So, our first speaker will be Robin Riley to be followed by Ellen Obsler. Hello again, city council. Um, I'm here to make two brief remarks about the appointments you are making this evening. Uh, first with regards to the Sonoma County Library Commission. Uh, I will say it has been an honor to serve on the Pedaluma Library Advisory Board for the last coming up on three years I think now. Uh, and to serve as its chair for nearly the last two. Um, and I will add I've had the real distinct privilege of working alongside former commissioner Tim May, who I believe many of you know, as well as our uh, late commissioner uh, Paul Heavenidge to take the Pedaluma Library Advisory Board, which had been awfully sleepy and not particularly effective for the community uh, to make it a more robust municipal body and service of the library and the communities that it serves. Uh it's against this backdrop that I submitted my application to serve as Pedaluma's next library commissioner where among other things uh I promise to fight censorship to build ever more inclusive and educated communities uh to ensure our tax dollars are used effectively and to improve library advisory boards across the county. I humbly ask for your support and your vote to appoint me as our next uh library commissioner. Uh second, very briefly, I want to voice my support uh with regards to the public safety advisory committee appointments for Sabrina Petri Dove's application to serve on that committee. The PAC, like

any other m municipal body, uh really needs people who will listen, who will do their homework, who will work to understand multiple perspectives and exercise good judgment. Um I am aware of Sabrina's record and I know that she's this kind of person. Uh, so please vote to appoint Sabrina as the next member of the public safety advisory committee. Thank you for your time. I hope everybody has a lovely evening. Thank you very much. Ellen Obsler to be followed by Chantel Rogers.

Hi. Um, hi there. Uh, I'm Well, I was going to do the that opposite, but I'm also here I'm here for the both same two recommendations. I want to support Robin Riley's application to serve on the Sonoma County Library Commission. Robin has just said, uh, she's been on the Library Advisory Board, chairing it for two years. Um, and like all the volunteer work Robin does, she's always given it her all. And so I hope, um, I know that she'll do a great job representing us and help you appoint her. And I also support, um, Sabrina Dove's application to serve on the public safety advisory committee. I sit on that committee and believe her service will help it immeasurably to fulfill its mission to act as a community resource to address police community relations regarding the public safety of the entire community. I think it's been lost in the years since the council created the committee that it was formed in the wake of black liv matters protests when community led listening circles showed that historically marginalized groups were having very different interactions with police than white people were having. The listening circles led the council to establish an ad hoc committee who after meeting for six months recommended among other things at the city institute independent police oversight. In May 2022, council directed a hybrid model of civilian oversight, including the independent police auditor and the committee. Last Wednesday was the committee's first opportunity to provide the community a say in an important matter of public safety. Before the meeting in January of this year, we had very little pod engagement. That changed when the subject of flock license plate readers came on the agenda. For January's meeting, 73 people wrote in and about 15 people showed up in chambers with six or seven people making public comments, all against flock. Because the topic wasn't agendaized for a vote, the subject came back last

Wednesday. For that meeting, 56 people wrote in and there were 45 people in chambers with 17 people making public comment. all against flock. After all the comments, our chair, Mike Miller, made a statement about the committee um being about public safety and hearing the public clearly stating they didn't feel safe with flock readers. He made a motion to recommend that the city council take down the readers. Three members of the committee voted no and therefore the motion did not pass. Sabrina Dove is a mom with kids in the school system and a small business owner. She's an engaged community member. She'll widen our spectrum of viewpoints. I know from all the questions she's been asking about the committee that she'll come to the meetings prepared. Most importantly, she will take the function of police oversight seriously and listen when the community speaks. I really hope you appoint her. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Um, our last speaker is Chantel Rogers. Didn't forget me this time. I just wanted to quickly express my support also for Sabrina Dove. I for the um public safety advisory committee. I I think it's really important that um you appoint someone who is willing to um listen to all sides. Um whether you support things or don't support them, you know, everything needs to be taken into consideration and I feel like she's imminently capable of uh fulfilling that role. I hope you'll vote for her. Thank you.

Thank you. And that closes public comment and I'd like to bring it back up to council. Any other comments and questions before we move into voting? Um I I think I do want to reply to um um one u this question of our public safety advisory committee. Um, I think, uh, you know, it's my thought when people volunteer for these kind of things that they're well intended and and, uh, hopefully skilled and that's what we get to review resumeums, uh, applications for all these positions are. And, you know, I have my faith in good community helping out with with all this. And our speaker here moments ago mentioned how uh, the public safety advisory committee was formed in our George Floyd moment. And I want to note that what we did in Paluma um exceeded anything done anywhere around the county. Our um city investment in bringing out voices that hadn't been heard was unprecedented and unparalleled. and um what our police department does to um lead that mission, buy into that mission, uh to to see eye to eye with the community uh is really fabulous and want to give a big shout out to both the the advisory committee and our policing department who are so community policebasing. So, um, you know, I think it's, uh, it's just important to recognize that while we're advocating for one perspective or another, it's important to recognize that in Paluma, the, um, the community is well represented by its police department and by all its committees. So, um, that was all I wanted to say and turn it back to you, madam clerk.

Yes. So, I can share, uh, the slides for each vote. There we go. So, uh I entered in the uh the preliminary votes. So, uh we actually did uh narrow it down to two. There are two seats available on the climate action commission. One is for a shorter term and one is for a longer term. Uh with council's preliminary votes, there actually were two candidates who received four. Um, so if council is comfortable with these votes, um, that would be that Bin Oddonnell, who received four votes from Kater Thompson, D, Carly, Quint, and Tribes, would be appointed, and Miguel Perez, who received four votes from Barnacle, Quint, Shribs, and McDonald. And it looks like um there were two indications that Miguel should receive the shorter term. So, if everyone's comfortable with that, Bin would receive the longer term and Miguel would receive the shorter term.

I think it speaks for itself. So, let's move that over. What we didn't say either at the end of this there's a resolution and it puts our winners into the resolution and we vote at the end. So, um let's move to our next committee.

This one also seemed uh fairly simple. Harold Matson received a unanimous selection by the whole committee or council. Everyone's still comfortable with that. We'll move along. The public safety advisory committee um uh Sabrina Dove Petri received four votes from Barnacle, Kater Thompson, Quint, and McDonald. If everyone is comfortable, we'll move forward. and senior advisory committee, Katherine Wells, received four votes from Barnacle, Kater Thompson, Quint, and Shribs. And finally, the Sonoma County Library Commission, Robin Riley, received five votes, actually six votes from Barnacle, Cater Thompson, now Quint Shribs, and McDonald. And uh Vice Mayor Darly, I apologize. We couldn't read your form. I wasn't sure who you wanted to vote for. We can add to that now if you'd like.

I'll vote for Riley as well. Okay, perfect. It's unanimous. And that was all of our seats. So, thank you very much. Relatively painless. Uh we'll have the motion now to make it official. Right. So, we're looking for a motion from council that reflects that uh straw polls for all these, right? Yes. All right. I'll move that we appoint all of these and um with that, express my thanks for everybody who applied and for everybody who's signing up to serve. Thank you very much. I'll second. We have a motion from Barnacle and a second from now. And may we have our roll call vote? Barnacle, I. Kater Thompson, yes. D Carly, yes. Now,

yes. Quint, yes. Shri, yes. McDonald, yes. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. And thank and as council member said, thanks to all the u applicants for this operation. We next we move to item five which is an um no item four having a day. Um, so item four is an introduction to first reading of an ordinance to change certain appropriations for the operations of the city of Paluma from July 1st, 2025 to June 30th, 2026. uh and a midyear FY2526 general fund update and finding that this action isn't SQA and um pursuant to the guideline section. I'd like to have um turn this over to uh Corey Garia um our assistant um director of finance and to Linda Lee our deputy uh city uh deputy city manager. So there we are.

Thank you Mayor McDonald and members of the city council. The city reviews its budget on a continual basis. There's three budget adjustment reports um typically presented annually. One at first quarter, one at midyear, and the final at year end. The proposed mid-year budget adjustments before you this evening are for the adopted budget for fiscal year 2526. The majority of the budget adjustments presented are resulting from approved council action since adoption of the budget um October 1st uh through December along with uh CIP adjustments to better align fiscal 26 project budgets to actual estimated expenditures ahead of the 27 budget cycle. A detailed list of all the budget adjustments are included in the staff report. Um adjustments to non-general funds are primarily due to capital project changes and updates. Um also included forformational purposes um is a general fund uh update which provides a recap of the revised budget adjustments and updated forecast as of midyear. In summary on the revenue side we are expecting uh fiscal 26 revenues to be slightly more than what was originally estimated a year ago. This is largely related to sales tax and property tax. Um given the uncertainty in the economy heading into the current fiscal year, our sales tax consultant projected slightly conservative revenues. We now have several quarters of activity um that show greater growth. Thus, we are um increasing our revenues in fiscal 26 and over the 5-year forecast. In addition, our property tax revenues have seen greater growth than anticipated mainly due to more um property tax generated in the redevelopment areas becoming available and then being redistributed to local agencies. On the expenditure side, we are seeing increases in cost um due to increased service levels as well as increased cost uh costs across the board. Expenditures have been adjusted as well um in the current year and over the five-year period.

So over the 5-year forecast, we do anticipate our expenditure growth to outpace our revenue growth. Uh the economy over the last several years has been challenged, resulting in a lower sales tax base than what we were estimating coming out of the pandemic. Um in addition, costs have gone up for essentially everything in some and in some areas we are experiencing cost increases of about 25% since 2020. All of this together has created a situation that requires a rebalancing. The city management team has been meeting regularly since la uh late last year to closely review spending across all departments and programs to identify efficiencies and reduce or eliminate costs where possible. This work is ongoing uh with further reductions necessary as we continue building and balancing the fiscical year 27 budget. Approximately 80% of the general fund budget is salaries and benefits. Therefore, the focus of the reductions could come in forms of lower cost of living adjustments, position freezes, or layoffs. We are required to bring forward a balanced budget, which we will do along with a balanced longer term forecast. We continue to refine revenues as well as anticipate costs, and we'll continue to adjust if changes emerge. We will be back to council with another update in May at the fiscal year 27 budget workshop. So finally, it is recommended this evening that the city council adopt the attached ordinances to amend appropriations for the fiscal year June 30, 2026. Happy to answer any questions and staff are here too as well to assist.

Thank you very much. I'm bring it up to the dis and does anyone have a question for for Corey tonight and um no particular question? Um I think um probably most of us have our questions in the form of a comment here and so we'll go to public comment first uh so that we can uh get to council comment to that I I uh pass the maton back over to our clerk. We did not receive any comments ahead of the meeting but I have received several cards. I think I see one more coming.

Okay. So, I'd like to invite Heather Krat and then Darren Ratkazen.

Good evening. Um, I just wanted to request more transparency on the measure U spending. I think most people supported it because they thought it would go to maintaining and repairing our roads and I think most people would be surprised to learn that most of it goes to staffing and operation expenses. So, just some more transpar. Thank you.

Thank you, Darren Racusen to be followed by Moren Gotchel. Thank you, clerk and councel. You know, I examined this mid-year budget update and also took a look at the comprehensive annual financial report for last fiscal year to see what trends the city's looking at. And I it's all outlined in the attachments. I really appreciated attachment one, the kind of forecasting. And I actually really appreciated Cory's comments on kind of the structural moves that have to be made because the trends are pretty clear that expenses are going up. there's not major revenue centers coming online and with inflation increases in pension uh and benefits, we're eating away at what is already a non-existent unassigned general fund balance. So, we're kind of trending toward a point like how do we sustain this? Uh so, I'll just run through my my overarching comments on this. Uh general fund unassigned reserve is near zero. Uh so the forecast shows that unassigned reserve so extra money in the general fund that we can do things with is going to be about zero throughout. Uh in looking at other cities like San Rafale, Santa Rosa is a totally different animal. So I kind of move that off. But looking at San Rafale and nearby municipalities, it looks like most have some kind of formal reserve target uh as well as a replenishment plan. This is part of the reason when I've come forward talking about quarterly expense reports. Where are those areas where we can peel back a few hundred,000, a million dollars in spending and start putting that toward some kind of unassigned general fund budget so we have something in some kind of flexibility or liquidity in the general fund. Uh capital projects being rolled forward. That is kind of a the most significant item in my mind. It's really called out and I think we have to understand is the bottleneck because there's clearly restricted funds. There's funds that have been collected that are available for capital projects.

But I guess the question is, is it delivery capacity in terms of staff and project management? Is it because we don't have any extra unassigned general fund monies that we need to maybe support that or are we lacking like some kind of matching funds that are necessary to pull that restricted money into service. Uh so really figuring out where that bottleneck is and figuring out what is our realistic annual delivery capacity. I know we've had some changes in public works and utilities. So, I assume some of that work is kind of ongoing. Uh, and I think it goes without saying delays could increase the long-term cost potentially. Um, and then the payroll and benefit growth. You know, Cory spoke to this. I think it's finding intelligent ways to pair back that spending. Um, and then al also what I called out was in the um in prior years we've had some U payown. So, some payown of like these massive long-term Kalpers liabilities. And I'm wondering if there's any strategy like that and if that even mitigates long-term costs. I noticed there's about 7 million that we've made in prior years to pay down those big liabilities and maybe that saves us money in long term. So something to think about. I also uh just brought up last thing fairgrounds and public safety facility just understanding if those are in that attachment one budget forecast. Obviously there's going to be a much more robust budget process in May but are we capturing those costs? Thank you. Thank you. Moren Gotchell to be followed by Shantel Rogers.

Hello. Um, I appreciate the work that goes into the midyear financial forecast. I want to focus my comments tonight on two areas. The state of our reserves and the characterization of the 30 million in capital project deferrals as right sizing. The revised general fund un unassigned balance is 308 27700 on an 82.6 million budget. This is 3/10en of 1%. The government finance officers association recommends amendment unrestricted fund balance for 2 months of operating expenditures. For a pedaluma that would be 13.8 million. We're not just below the threshold. We are functioning at zero. And if the city does hold reserves elsewhere, why are they not included in this forecast? That would be a meaningful data point for this council and the public to evaluate our fiscal health. Looking at the 5-year forecast, there is no trajectory toward building reserves. The unassigned balances flat lines at zero from fiscal year 2029 through 2031. The budget appears to balance each year, but only because measure U transfers increases from 14.7 million this year to 17.6 million in 2031, consuming nearly all of the funds revenue for general fund operations rather than infrastructure and priority initiatives voters expected. This is not fiscally sound. Without meaningful reserves, the city has no cushion for an economic downturn, a natural disaster, or unexpected event risk. The staff report also acknowledges the forecast assumes steady revenue growth, but staff also notes that the GDP growth is projected to be less than inflation through 2027. California faces a 22 billion deficit beginning in fiscal year 2027 and 2028. The sales tax performance which drives

both general fund and measureU revenue remains uncertain. Additionally, the staff report notes that trans transient occupancy tax revenues are trending at only 55% of the budget as of December 2025. Yet, no mid-year adjustment was made to that revenue line. If the second half of the year does not dramatically outperform the first, that becomes another shortfall on top of an already razor thin margin. If any of these risks materialize, we have nothing to fall back on. The core problem is is that the expenditure growth is outpacing revenue growth and the city has not taken sufficient action to reduce spending. Personal costs represent 79% of the general fund expenditures with workers compensation and health care projected to increase at a minimum of 8% annually. Services and supplies are projected to rise 3%. These are structural cost increase that compound over time. Without a deliberate plan to reduce operational spending, the city cannot build reserves period. On the capital side, this m I think I'm getting another three.

I see that we have seated time. Thank you very much, myself.

Thanks. On the capital side, this midyear adjustment includes over 30 million in capital improvement project budgets being rolled forward to future years. The staff report describes this as rights sizing. It is worth noting that this term has a well-known history in corporate culture. It emerged in the 1980s as a self a softer alternative to downsizing which was itself already a eupheanism for layoffs. Making right sizing a eupheanism of a eupheanism designed to distance decision makers from the reality of their bi business decisions. Right sizing implies the original budgets were wrong and that they were oversized and are now being corrected to match actual needs. But these were not abstract estimates. They were specific project budgets that city committed to. the Pedaluma public safety facility at 2.77 million, the PIPS parallel force main at 12.3 million, multiple wastewater and water infrastructure projects, road restoration, fire station upgrades, and the Wilson storm water pump station. The more accurate description is that the city lacks the capacity, whether financially staffing or operationally to execute his capital plan as budgeted. These are deferrals, not corrections. The word choice matters because it shapes how this council and the public perceive what is actually happening with our infrastructure commitments. I urge this council to direct staff to develop a plan that prioritizes building reserves through expenditure reductions, not just through revenue growth assumptions, and to provide an honest accounting of our capital programs execution capacity rather than characterizing significant deferrals as routine adjustments. Fiscal responsibility means making difficult choices, not engineering a forecast that balances on paper while carrying functional zero reserves. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh Nicholas Harris. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. Um I want to uh go back to uh the mayor's comments last year at the budget workshop for this current fiscal year. There were two poignant observations. One was uh and this is my understanding that the rolling forward of of capital improvement budgets appeared um somewhat misleading. Uh and correct me if I'm wrong. Two recognizing the ambition of the scope of the capital projects presented in the budget. Mayor asked if more headc count was needed to support and execute. Right sizing in the business world is code for layoffs and restructuring. I know that from reading books by Jack Welsh. I'm asking the council to probe into the reduction of CIP target by $30 million. That means a post-mortem analysis is required. One of you needs to make a motion asking for that post-mortem analysis. I'm asking you all demonstrate your commitment to oversight of public spending and support that motion. Thank you.

Thank you. And that was our last public speaker. Closing public comment on the item. Like to bring it back up uh to the council. But before I do that, um I'd like to invite uh Corey to comment on particularly reserves is an area I think is misunderstood perhaps by the public. Would you make that?

Right. So, um, the item, uh, the forecast update and the budget item on tonight's agenda, um, mainly are focused on the current fiscal year. We do update the 5-year forecast, but we're really focusing on the unassigned fund balance and whether our budget is balanced um, operating um, our operating budget is balanced for the current year and into the future. Um we do have emergency reserves and actually at the end of 20 fiscal year 25 our emergency reserves um our total assigned reserves which a portion of that is emergency reserves was at 16 million. So that represents about 22% of our operating expenditures. Um a portion of that is um for uh capital and debt service. So when you take off that off the top, um the percentage that we're currently looking at is about 13 and a half to 14% of our operating um expenditures. So we do have emergency reserves. Um we continue to build them. We maintain them at the council policy which is at currently at 15% of operating expenditures.

Thank you very much. That just came to mind because um you know as we go out for bond and bond rating and things, you have to have strong reserves to get the kind of rating we just got rated for. So, I'm, you know, I'm sure we're in good shape on that. And, um, then, um, I'm seeing our public works team stepping up. And so, uh, I think you guys need the microphone for a minute here. Would you like to weigh in?

Yeah. Good evening, mayor and council and community. Uh, Paul Kell, director of public works. I'm here with Jonathan Sanga. He's our deputy director of public works and oversees our CIP program. Um, I did want to talk about a little bit about the paving uh projects, which I know is of concern um and and excitement from the community on on when those projects are going to get implemented. We do have several projects that we're working on actively. For example, Reineer Avenue paving project is about to get started. I think we're about a month away from um from that work happening. Um in addition to that paving project, we have two projects that are currently in design or are about to start design. Howard Avenue project is currently under design. We anticipate um completing the design um this fall and bidding it for construction um next spring summer. Um additionally, Coffee Lane is going to be a design is going to be underway soon and then that project's also scheduled for construction next summer. Um, and then I think Jonathan can probably speak better to kind of how we budget and um, kind of anticipate for best case um, so that we budget uh, more than sometimes is needed with within any given fiscal year and sometimes those get carried over or rolled over into the the next year.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council members. I also just want to point out we also have preventive maintenance projects going on. We just completed uh slurry seal se ceiling this fiscal year and we're already planning next fiscal year's slurry ceiling as well. Uh but just to add to Paul's point um you know one of the things we have to do in capital projects is you know plan for our best case scenario in terms of getting these projects done. So when we're coming to you know council for the project award we're not coming to ask for more money. So one of the things we're also planning in these budgets and so you're seeing some of that as reductions as well as we're planning you know 15 or 20% depending on the project of contingency. So some of those are accounting for some of those reductions as well. Um so one of the big projects that's a large portion of that money that is uh is transferring this year is the PIPS project. And so I just want to point out that we're we're on track for that. Part of what's going on in terms of staffing is we have a lot, you know, a pretty ambitious capital project uh budget. And so we're working through hiring new staff as well to make sure that we can get all these projects done. So currently we have six vacancies um that we're actively interviewing for for our capital team. And so that will help us be able to deliver these uh capital projects.

Great. Thank you very much. U you might want to hang for a heartbeat in case any other council has a a question in this regard. Any uh anyone want to lead off the question? Um I I wanted to comment on the reserve balance is that um you know typically we don't put reserve into the budget. We have reserve in our funding. So sometimes it doesn't you know where if you do a quick cursory look at a 300page budget you pro you might not find things where you think they are. Having been here for a number of years of discussion on this, I'm confident that we have that one in place. Um and and um and I appreciate what the city's done and what they've watched other cities do regarding uh the PERS debts that are out there that are still, you know, like haunting us. Uh pre decisions from 20, 30 years ago that that we still can't shake free of. But we have plans and we watch what other cities do and we find out whether that's a good practice or whether our practice is is the path to follow and I'm sure we're following the first also all of the fairgrounds improvements um a lot of that doesn't come up in a capital project at the beginning of the year. So we see that money kind of come out of it's not reserve it's it's funds we have that we decide to augment the budget with this year. So we're augmenting the budget and achieving more in this year in some areas. And if you come in May, you'll hear me get on my bandwagon like every year about why aren't we getting more capital done. I'm a capital projects engineer by day and I just want the team to get like so much more infrastructure done in in the city. We need a better plan. We're working on it. Um that's part of what one of the other speakers mentioned is he's heard the mayor say this again. Do you need more bodies? You know, what does it take to get more work done? So, I'm sure we'll see that. But this moment right here is kind of the compilation of the changes that we've done and being totally transparent of how our budget is uh dynamic during the

year and this is our snapshot. So I think the real fun and meet will be at our budget meetings that are coming real soon where we set priority through budgeting. Anybody else have anything before we uh have a motion here? Can I have a motion? So moved. I'll second that. Motion by Barnacle and a second by Kater Thompson. And may we have a roll call vote. Barnacle. I Kar Thompson. Yes. D Carly, yes. Now, yes. Quint, yes. Shri, yes. McDonald, yes. Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you very much. Thank you to our whole finance team. And um now uh I'd like to uh move on to item five, a staff update on potential changes to the animal services within the city of Paluma. And to lead us off here, we have assistant city manager uh Brian Cochran. So take it away.

Okay. Thank you, mayor, and good evening, council members and community. Uh staff were before you tonight with an animal services update and request for possible direction from the city council on some next steps. Uh, in an effort to be accountable and transparent, we wanted to provide you some options in case you feel it is imperative to make a change to our current provider, North Bay Animal Services, ahead of the release of our animal services RFP, which we had planned to release in a few weeks and ahead of a new agreement which would go into effect on August 1st. The existing agreement uh has an expir expiration term of July 31st. Our goal is to provide a stable, humane, and responsive animal services system that the public can count on. We're focused on continuity of care for the animals currently in the shelter and continuity of our field response for residents during any transition that might occur. So, we have seen the reporting and their public outcry related to the situation at the Clear Lake Animal Shelter, which is egregious. However, while we shared the same provider as Clear Lake, uh we want to be clear that Pedaluma is not Clear Lake and there's no indication that our shelter is operating any differently than it has for many years. Nor is there indication of the types of poor animal conditions that were apparent in some of the publicly released photos that many of us saw. The city's prior plan was outlined in our response to the grand jury report and we uh finalized that and you all approved it in September of 2025. And that plan included uh making some facility improvements to the animal

shelter, hiring a third-party consultant to assess operations and assist NBS with improving their operations, uh and then issuing the RFP that I previously mentioned for a new provider um to come online after the expiration of the current contract. And again, we are anticipating releasing that RFP this month. So, on the improvements front, in terms of the shelter itself, the city has already completed more than $150,000 in shelter uh facility renovations, including significant roof repairs, HBAC upgrades, and other improvements uh like front uh facades on some of the kennels. However, uh the operational improvement efforts have been stalled because NBS declined to work with the city's selected consultant to help them improve operations and staff have noted ongoing concerns regarding communication and responsiveness to the community and to city staff. The RFP remains on track to be issued and a draft that is ready to to go very soon. uh as soon as mid-March was attached as a uh attachment three to the staff report. Uh and we can go ahead and issue that if there isn't some other transition that's made in the interim that we'll we'll talk through more here tonight. So we did put a couple of different options in the staff report and I want to acknowledge that there is no perfect option. All of them have tradeoffs. They have ambiguities and they have issues that are still to be worked out, but staff felt it was important to lay out the options for council and for the public with as much information uh as we could compile in

the short time prior to publishing the staff report. So in that report, we identified three main pathways to move forward. And option one would essentially be to stay the course to continue with the current shelter provider NBIS through the existing term of July 31st of this year and then also concurrently uh as I alluded to uh immediately issue the RFP for a successor provider within the next couple of weeks. Option two uh is to terminate the NVIS contract as of a date certain, say for example, March 31, um about four short weeks away, and potentially close the shelter on a temporary basis to new admissions during a short transition windown period. This would require us to relocate all of the existing animals uh temporarily at least. And the staff estimates our the last last count we had about 2 weeks ago was 68 animals. Complete whatever uh improvements, cleaning, counting of inventory, transfer of data, etc. is required and then bring on an interim provider or providers for up to one year um possibly shorter than that while a full RFP process proceeds. Also, uh we wanted to note that during the shelter closure period, any new animals that would be admitted to the shelter would need to be uh taken by another provider and admitted at an alternate shelter location while uh Pedaluma is temporarily closed. Option three would be to terminate the existing agreement and permanently close the Paluma Animal Shelter. And in this option, we would contract with an alternate provider, uh, shelter provider, I should say, as many other cities in Sonoma County do to maintain that service continuity and take in, uh,

sheltered animals from Paluma on an ongoing basis. So, wanted to expand a little bit on option two, uh, because we did provide some additional information on that and attachments one and two to the staff report. So, we do have a proposal in there for interim field services. And for field services and licensing, we have been discussing an interim option with Sonoma County Animal Services that would include enforcement uh coordination with our police and dispatch for after hours emergencies and then provide regular field service hours. The proposal includes priority definitions and emergency response targets such as response times both during regular operating hours and outside normal business hours. And so we feel that this is a workable interim approach and if we wanted to move forward with option two, this would provide immediate and interim coverage for the uh animal control and the field services. The sheltering piece is admittedly more complicated and there are just a number of realities here that we wanted to mention. So there are unknowns and that's that's just going to be inherent in a transition such as this and there are multiple interdependencies with the operations of the shelter. So we would need to work through both with NBS as well as a future provider uh animal ownership and transfer issues, medical and vaccination histories, any behavioral assessments that had that have been done on existing animals, transfer the data and the animal records including any bite records. Uh sorting there there's a significant amount of city-owned equipment at the facility. So, sorting through what is city-owned versus providerowned equipment and supplies, looking at the staffing uh continuity for staff. Do they want to come over to a new provider? Do they

not? Those sorts of questions. Uh and the facility's condition and any cleaning upgrades, repairs, or deficiencies that a successor provider might need to to cure or to correct in order to take over the operations at the shelter. So, what we want to do is avoid an overly rushed approach that would compromise animal welfare or public service reliability while also providing for as smooth of a transition to a new provider uh as we can. And uh so looking a little bit at the financial impacts of this, our existing contract with NBA provides all of those services, both the sheltering uh aspect as well as animal control and field services for uh $478,000 a year, about $40,000 per month. And I think it's worth noting uh that the grand jury report from last year pointed out that Paluma currently pays significantly lower on a per capita basis for animal services than any of the other jurisdictions that the grand jury studied. So, uh just acknowledging that it's not a surprise that if we move to a new provider, there may be some significant cost increases that we'll be facing. The uh the Sonoma County Animal Services proposal for field services is estimated at approximately $360,000 uh for a full year or or priced out at about 30,000 per month. And looking at a shelter transition scenario, we did include um attachment to a an initial proposal from the Humane Society of Sonoma County and they were estimating initial startup cost of about $200 as well as a quarterly operating costs uh in the in a range and this is an estimate about $200 to $300,000 per quarter. uh again with the caveat that uh there are significant unknowns that

that we would need to work through. And then I also wanted to mention uh some sort of late breaking news here. Just late late this afternoon, we did also receive an interim services proposal from Marinhumane. So we do have a couple of options that we can look at to ensure that that transition is smooth if we are going to to move to a new provider. And additionally, I wanted to mention that uh we would obviously be in regular communication with that provider during this interim period to assess costs with the hope that once operations are up and running and stabilized that the costs would also stabilize. And we're hopeful that uh donations andor volunteers may be able to absorb some of that cost and the the the duties as a new provider gets fully ramped up. So in conclusion, uh regardless of which path council chooses, our guiding principles remain the same, which is to protect the animals in our care and to uh maintain services to the pedaluma community. And any transition plan uh needs to prioritize the well-being of pedaluma animals and the continuity of services, reliable field services, including response capacity and uh animal licensing. And we are we're emphasizing an orderly transition that accounts for some of those real operational complexities that I mentioned like records, medical histories, uh, bites, staffing, inventory, cleaning, etc. So with that, uh, staff is here to receive direction from the council and proceed with a plan that keeps Pedalum Animal Services safe, humane, and reliable for our community. And so if we go with option one or short of any change in direction from what we stated in the civil grand jury response back in September, as mentioned, we will plan to to uh issue the RFP for a successor provider in mid-March. And with that, we

are happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thanks. Um and really appreciate staff getting us on the council's agenda right away. and you know um it's it's a big deal and so I'm glad to pull together reports and investigated options for us. So who on council wants to lead with any uh questioning? Council member Barnacle.

Yeah. So we have it feels like we have a a pathway for option two. Um, but I don't think I caught that we have identified a long-term uh shelter if we decide for option three tonight. Right. That's correct. And our our thought with option two is that we would likely uh slightly delay the issuance of the RFP just to kind of get the new provider up and running and then issue perhaps in April or May. Uh but that could still keep us on track to have the new provider in in the late summertime. if we wanted to go that route. Uh you're you're correct though. Option three, we have not fully flushed out or vetted what that would look like or what the costs would be.

Okay, that's really my only question at this time. Can I just u paraphrase that back to make sure I'm hearing this right? So with option one, if we do an RFP, we think that the transition date is July 31st. That's the end of contract date. If we do the second option and delay the RFP, we still have a we still could hit that 731 that we'd aim for hitting that same 731.

We we could aim for it, but just given, you know, the amount of time for agencies to create their responses to do any followup and vetting of those responses. It may need to go past July 31, but we can look at that timeline more closely to see if we can still make that. And just some wanted to be on clear what what your report council member Carly thanks for the report Brian. So in in option two you know we're proposing to close the facility in two to four weeks. Is that I understand that correctly? That's correct.

Okay. Because then it it seems like as I as I read it, you know, the animals that are there, they don't have a place to go. Any animals that need a place to go don't have a place to go. And uh so why why can't we tighten down the date to have a smoother transition if that were the option council would go with?

Yeah. So part of that transition would be to relocate the existing animals at least on a temporary basis. So we close the shelter uh find alternate uh sheltering for those animals which would then enable us to do full inventory cleaning repairs etc. then spool back up with the new provider. Uh we've had a number of offers of sheltering for animals, whether cats or dogs. Uh so we feel that we can we can get those animals out to safe good locations. Um but that would really be necessary at least for one of the providers that you know that would need that kind of time to really assess the facility. Again, we have two proposals so we can kind of look at the pros and cons of those. Oh, but in either scenario, there is at least a necessary uh closure of some limited period of time to help them get up and running before they're fully operational.

So, this comes as a request from from others that are applying to do this this transition period. Well, again, we have two proposals from two different agencies who have stepped up to to help if we want to go this route, and both of the proposals mentioned that there would need to be at least some closure. So, yes. Mhm. Do we know how many animals could be displaced? That would be incoming that wouldn't be able to.

So that would be another component of it. Um we don't have a good count of the flow in terms of the number per week or number per day, but those would need to get diverted to a different sheltering solution while that closure was in effect. And then as soon as it uh reopened, then we could start accepting animals into our own facility again.

Okay. Yeah. Cuz my concern there would be um you know so often people dump animals out in the countryside thinking that they're animals and that they'll survive, but they're not equipped to and they need you know they need shelters to go to. So I I don't really like that there's this long I get things need to be cleaned but a long transition period in between. Um so you know with um kind of all the unknowns here you know I'm I'm why aren't we waiting to to bring this discussion back when like this is a little more clear. Well, we we felt that this was important to get to you quickly. Uh even if we didn't have all the information and you know, because of some of the headlines and because of some of the things that we're seeing and sort of a lack of confidence, we thought that it was necessary. Um even if we don't have all of the answers ironed out immediately if we receive direction from council to go a different direction uh then staff will continue working with our partners and our providers to ensure that we we do have a solid plan once we can get some of those u finer details worked out over the next couple of weeks and this would happen relatively quickly like within the month of March.

Okay. Yeah. because again I just the long transition time it and then the unknowns you know we just had the issue with Kavanagh pool and and that was not a good situation and this is much worse. So I I wouldn't want to see something like that you know happen again and that's well and and I have one other question too. Um there there was a consultant that was brought up and there's been back and forth about that and uh you know if there if there was any sort of issues with the consultant why did we not seek to hire another one? Well, I I don't think that there were issues with the consultant, but NVAS made a decision and I can't speak for them, but my understanding is they for whatever reason decided that they did not want to work with that particular consultant. Um, you know, contractually the city manager uh through as the administrator of the contract has the ability to request any data, any information, do walkthroughs at the shelter any time, request, you know, financial information. So that was really in the the spirit of why we had uh hired the consultant to perform some of that work which was then going to inform uh the goals of the of the agreement with the consultant which were to uh look at the organizational structure of NBS help them with some operational improvements and efficiencies look at the licensing to see if there was a way we could get that u upgraded. So the the goals were those, but we needed and the consultant needed some baseline data to be able to start making some decisions and recommendations and that just didn't happen,

right? No. And it would have been good to have all those things for sure. Um but um you know uh since it didn't work, why did the city not then go with another consultant so that we could get all those things and get things ironed out and potentially in a better situation? I'm just going to jump in here. It was pretty evident because we had asked for that information. Then we had a consultant ask for that information. In both uh scenarios, we did not get that information. So, we believed that hiring another consultant wasn't going to get us where we needed to be. Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions.

And and also I appreciate that you were already preparing the RFP. You know, based on the grand jury, our actions from the grand jury, we're already on a path to have the RFP out there. So, that was a good effort. Council member Shribs. Um yeah. Uh so Clear Lake is is definitely was a um actually a physical emergency disaster uh for the animal care itself. But what what I'm hearing is that it's more of a management, communications, paperwork, communic um uh documentation, all that is the real issue here. Um, but I'm also hearing that the actual animal care, the actual physical shelter, the animals uh that are there are mostly pretty much we're in a much better situation where it's okay. There's not an emergency for the animals right now today. Is that correct?

There's not an emergency right now today. That's correct.

So, not today. Okay. Okay. So, I just want to be clear that um if there's not an emergency today just for the animal care for the moment, um then uh I'm I'm afraid of the transition period creating problems, staffing getting involved, trying to do things on a temporary basis, doing this, doing this, this, and still ending up with an RFP later on, not sure what to do. So, um just for efficiency of staff and of animal care, um what does it look like if we um go ahead and we we know that uh the North Bay say, "Okay, you're you're terminated, but okay, the date's going to be kind of maybe pushed out a little bit. We need the care. We want to transition." And then have the staff do the work that's necessary to bring someone in to do it instead of this temporary. Well, let's actually do something full. What type of time frame are we talking about? If we do something like that, do we have to do it right now or can we come back and have it ready to go in about a month? When would you by be ready to actually do something and transition without a temporary uh intermediate type thing?

Yeah, I would say at least 30 days. Um I think the reason why we didn't parse that out as its own option is because at the end of the day, we're talking about a total of four months, you know, between now and when the contract would expire anyway. and with the the lead time needed on the RFP anyway, uh we're kind of getting to that point where we need to start that process of selecting a new uh ongoing long-term operator anyway. And so that seemed like the, you know, in terms of efficiency, the smoother thing would be to to leave Nbas in place for those four months while we do the RFP process rather than kind of a multi-step, you know, leave them in for a little while, find some other contracts when we're already soliciting for new contracts anyway.

Okay. So, I think through the RFP process to identify the in the contract what's expected and I think it's u we have some expectations not being met now. We need them the expected. So can the um if staff can get it done in 30 days, can we come back to this decision and go with the RFP then? Um is that an option now and and tell NBS, okay, you got to maintain care until we actually do the transition and then actually plan the transition. So it's within a day just boom boom and not all this intermix stuff. Can we do that? So, let me just understand what you're asking, Council Member Shribs. I think what you're saying, I mean, the RFP process will take a couple months, right? I mean, we need to be able to put it out there, get um get the proposals in, analyze them, be able to ask questions, be able to work with the proposers. Um so, that's why we offered this intram solution that had the 30-day ramp up period.

Right. So I'm think just for efficiency of staff time and effort uh would it be better um for the efficiencies of a transition because it's animal care is the number one thing we want animal care properly with minimum disruption to the system and still have the care here. Um, so anyway, I think you answered my my question as to if we wait go through the RFP process, they have a couple months, it's going to take us that much time to have a good transition, not this thing that happened up in Clear Lake, which clearly is not the way to do it. So anyway, um, is there any other information you give is that can we delay just delay until a couple months and make it happen and get for the transition person?

I think that's essentially what we're saying in option one. I mean we would we would keep our existing provider. We we know that there was going to need to be a handoff again of all those things, data, equipment, supplies, etc. ownership of the animals themselves and that will take a little bit of time anyway. So there in that uh scenario where we are doing an RFP, we have a new provider August 1st, there is likely anyway going to need to be some crossover, some handoff and uh just like we would in this scenario, but this was you know the option two, the interim proposal was so quick and you know developed very rapidly to just uh make a change quickly that it's a little different scenario than if we have the planning time and the ramp up time to be able to onboard a new provider. provider in a thoughtful way.

Okay. I think that answers my question. Thank you, Council Member Quinn. Thank you. Uh I'm going to try to So, I I I was trying to wrap my head around the timing questions and uh I I was hoping we'd get there, but I was still I'm still a little confused. So, um, for option one, uh, the the time from between now and having a new provider in place, roughly your best guess?

Well, our target again was August one. Um, again, that's for the reasons Peggy mentioned that, you know, we issue the RFP mid-March, give the providers, say, six weeks to respond. You're, you know, you're already at the end of April. we need time to analyze the proposals and maybe do interviews uh negotiate a contract etc. bring that to council say in June you know early June with an onboarding date uh of August 1. So that's kind of you know we wanted to have enough time if things need to slip or some unexpected things happen that we've got that time to to onboard the new provider. So,

so that that to me sounds like a kind of a a worst case scenario. And maybe it's not the maybe it's not the worst case scenario, but it it's it's a conservative time frame, right? That's correct. It may be able to happen sooner than that.

Yeah. So, if could I ask I mean, you're asking us to to provide um direction on really essentially a couple of options here. And so to help do that, can you help us understand what option one could look like in a best case scenario? Like if if if we if our direction is let's go with option one, but let's do our very best to do it quickly. I think July one is is probably a best case. Do you think we can sooner, Peggy?

Yeah, it it may it may be able to happen in June. We already have some proposals from from what who's probably going to respond to our RFP. So, I think we've got some good foundation. We got kind of a start. Yeah.

Yeah. I would just I would just add that you know we've in terms of the RFP itself and and wanting as much um you know to be responsive to the grand jury and some of the other concerns that we've had. we've really tried to do is beef up the RFP to ask a lot out of potential operators in terms of their response. Uh some of the things that were cited as shortcomings. We're going to we want to ask directly how are you going to address you know X Y and Z. So want just wanted to make sure that they're able to provide a thoughtful response and that they're taking all those factors into consideration um with a new contract moving forward so that we don't run into the same some of the same issues that we've had.

That that's fair. Is it also would it also be fair to characterize that we already kind of know the players in the market who might be potential and I'm sure they have reputations and we can I think not not that we want to make the decision purely on that but we it's it's not like we're going to have several new players come in and and buy for this opportunity. Right. I think that's fair. Yep.

Um can Okay, so that's the timing on option one. option two timing. So we're we're we're talking late June, early July is sort of the best case. Uh August 1 as a conservative on option two. Um can you sort of frame up like I'm thinking at the point how long would it take us to get the facility back up? Are we looking at you know is that again your your your sort of best guess?

Yeah. So, we were we were looking at a termination date of around March 1st for NBA or excuse me, March 31st for for NBAS and then um in the in the Sonoma County Humane proposal, they were requesting a 2 to four week closure. Again, a little bit unknown just depending on what they find when they get in there. Uh Marin Humane, I'm going from memory, but I believe it was a one or one to two week closure. So, a little bit shorter, but again, in either event, um some sort of closure. So really, I think you could count on most of or part part or most of the month of April as being closed and then back up and running no later than May 1, I think is a good good ballpark. Again, meanwhile, the RFP process would be ongoing at some point during that time as well.

Okay, that's really helpful. Um, do we have a sense for excuse me uh do we have a sense for what transpired in Clear Lake to understand I like I look I know we we I was horrified to see what transpired in Clear Lake. So, I'm not I don't want to suggest that I don't know what happened, but I'm not close enough to know if we were to as again as we're trying to weigh between option one and option two, are we, you know, what's the the the level of risk that something like that could happen here? I would just say that um the level of risk and I think we we mentioned it in one line in the staff report is just um lack of confidence in the viability of the current provider.

So yeah um okay those are all my questions. Thank you. Thank you very much council member now. Um, thank you um to the city staff for all the information leading up to tonight and thank you community for being here. But for the city staff, I want to know how far behind is NBS in their reporting and paperwork to the city on the animal calls, service calls, etc.

So there are two main reports that they're supposed to give us every year. Number one is their audited financial statements which we do have for all years up through 2024 which is the last year that we could expect them reasonably to have financial statements. Uh on the the stats, the data, the annual report side, they're supposed to provide us a comprehensive annual report each year. We the last report we got from them was 2022. Now, I I will say that I I will say that they do have they do have some shelter data. And

I'm going to interrupt for one second here. I didn't think I'd have to uh do this kind of messaging, but I think I'm going to step in and say we run with a certain amount of decorum here, and it's disrespectful to shout out answers. Sure, our hearts are broken. Sure, we may be angry or other issues, but this is deliberative to try and find improvement. We don't shout out and and we don't cat call. So, if we could, we'll let the speaker speak.

Thank you, mayor. Um, yeah, just to add one other bit of information there. So, NBS does have a number of statistical reports on their website. There is some up-to-date uh statistical reporting for 24 and 25. Uh, though I would characterize those as mostly uh data dumps out of their their database. So, they do provide some basic shelter stats, but definitely not to the level of an annual report, not calls for service, not not any of the services or the animal control uh stats. Correct. Yeah.

And in the future, if a contractor fails to meet a deadline set by the city, as we had the grand jury report, um there needs to be some serious and immediate consequences. Um, I blame some of this problem on the fact that the city um didn't keep up with what the MBAS was doing and that's our fault for not asking after the grand jury report for a monthly update. So, I I take that because this the community was asking me things and I'm like, I don't know. I I haven't gotten that information. I should have known to ask and I apologize. um the third-party consultant that the city hired was not a good fit. I don't know when we discovered that, but that should have been a red flag right then. And um they they a they agreed when we had the grand jury report when we sat here and made the motion and voted. We said we were going to do this with Nbas and they agreed and I'm I'm very disappointed that they didn't follow through and uh in the future we just got to be more we we've got to be on these service providers immediately.

Thank you. Yeah, I think we drifted a little into comment commentary and I think it's impossible not to and just ask uh questions about how a contract's going to work. Um because uh I do feel too that when the grand jury came in and advises of problems um that you know we had some awareness of um we stuck our neck out by saying we provide that management support because we felt we still had a partner and um and I don't think we do. Um I I think that burnt a lot of trust and goodwill. Uh and so um what I worry about is I'm I'm I'm looking at the schedules as you're telling us you know the sheltered you know there's a lot of moving parts here and you know as a project scheduler I'm kind of like wait a second here. Um, so what we're saying is we may have selected somebody by mid June and have them under contract by mid June, but then there's still transition because option one, we don't let them out early. We say you run to August 1st. The new people, will there be any transition time for them? You know, that's will there still be a closure in option one and in option two, just at different days? Uh I I don't know if there'd be a closure in option one if we have the full ramp ramp up time to select a new provider, but I think some of those issues that you're asking about, those would all be part of our discussions and negotiations once we've narrowed down to a selected provider to be able to integrate some of those specific details into the agreement that we would bring forward. And that's one of the things I was thinking about. we're uh thinking about um comparing uh known players with known reputations that we'd like. Um there's still the terms of service we have to review and that's the two weeks to a month, you know, for fee and service. Um and um and then and then all the transition workload as well. I'm I'm

really worried about schedule on this that it's going to keep, you know, it's going to it's going to take longer than we anticipate and I don't want to misrepresent now um how long a transition would take. Um so you also mentioned a number of costs. So we're uh you're seeing a $480,000 cost currently and we're talking about one and a half millionish um future costs. Have you a plan for how we fund the difference? where where were we I mean where do we pull that if we don't have a reserve or we what not having reserves means or what you know having a good budget means is that you're pulling it out of another pocket to pay this pocket we got are we that far down the road we know that well that'll be part of our overall budget discussions that'll be coming to council in a few months uh you know if we go with uh like an option two obviously we would have the savings of not paying NBS for those couple of months that they're no longer on contract which would then offset any of the costs of one of the interim providers. But you're absolutely right that would all need to be worked in. This is a general fund cost. Um so we would need to plan for that and and we are we're already starting that. We you know we're in the middle of our budget discussions internally as a staff and as a team and this would be part of that overall equation to ensure that the general fund can fund a full year's worth of a new contract's costs. And we had already anticipated an increase um a 100% increase. So

yeah, when the grand jury report came out, I remember cautions about next year's budget. But um you're saying option two, there's this year's budget impacts, not the full number, but we save what we wouldn't pay to NBS, but we still have a big jump this year and then of course the real big jump in next year's budget. Right. Right. So there would be a jump in monthly cost for essentially months April, May and June. So we would need to look at either some vacancy savings, other savings that we had in in the budget in the current year to ensure that we can make that work.

And then one last thing, if if we do close the shelter for a period shorter, you know, two weeks to six weeks, whatever it takes, how do we communicate to the public that we're not taking animals here, that their animals need to go to somewhere else? And how do we how does that process work if if you don't have one locally?

I would love I'm going to call somebody up. I I've got both the Humane Society of Marin and of Sonoma Sonoma County and I would love to have somebody come up and speak to that in Hi. Hi, Mayor McConnell and city council members. Thanks for having us today. I just want to start off and say that um our proposals that we submitted are complimentary and this is Cynthia King from Yeah. I'm Cynthia King. I'm executive director of the Humane Society of Snowoma County. Nancy McKenna, CEO of Marinhumane.

And in general, animal welfare is very collaborative and supportive network of providers and that's how we've responded to Clear Lake and how we're approaching this situation together. regarding I think the question is about our closure plans and why we put them in whether it's one week, two weeks which was I think yours. Uh that doesn't necessarily mean we wouldn't help or answer calls or respond to calls but it is a way to say that there is a need to stop the intake as much as possible. So owner surrendered animals would be encouraged to go elsewhere for a while. There's definitely opportunities for um preventing or um uh diversion of animal intake while we analyze the number of animals there are at Pedaluma. There's concern that there are animals there that might not be identified that might be on bite quarantine might be part of cases from the other cities that got transferred in. Again, these are all rumors as far as I know, but trying to go in and and make an assessment on the condition of every animal, making sure we could track where that animal came from, what's the status, if it can be up for adoption. We have lots of rescue partners that we would move those animals out so that they could have a chance to get adopted faster. So I think the the in intention of the one to two weeks is to get staff in there to get our hands on the animals, get the veterinarians in to do the assessments and really do the paper trail that we are under the impression has not been done and to get the statistics out and to be fully transparent. So there would be people there caring for the animals. there would be the opportunity to take emergency calls and to um get the animals that are deemed already past their hold period and are not part of property of anybody else or lost animals people are trying to find move them to our partner agencies for adoption purposes.

I think one of the things that I want to share is the discussion around transition and the reason that my board was not comfortable with us overlapping with Northway as a provider is because they have not demonstrated good faith to be trusted for that and so they felt like it was too much risk for us to step in in that role and then be the continued operator. So I would say that more time is not necessarily going to solve a problem when it's missing data and potential mistreatment of animals even if it's not clear lake level conditions. And so I would just take that seriously. I have comments from my public comment time that I'll keep separate. Um but we have been working with North Bay. We've been providing this Bay Neuter for them on a regular basis and have um had trouble getting records and getting consistent information that we need. And so my assumption going in is nothing, right, when it comes to records or assets or anything like that. It's not handing over. It's just starting a new. And that's why partnering with Marin Humane and with the Snowoma County Animal Services is what makes sense to us rather than trying to salvage what might be there. Uh I also just want to note while there is 68 animals on site, there's about a hundred in foster care. Many of them are fost adopt because they're waiting to get fixed. And so there is a larger project to be done and the intakes need to be done by a veterinarian to provide medical assessment and really forensic assessment of their conditions. We expect a lot of animals with behavioral issues from warehousing.

Uh thank you very much. Appreciate having you at the microphone. I think we want to ask since we have you uh council Darly. Hi. Thank you for all that clarification. the fostered animals that are out there, will they be moved as well or will they be able to stay with their foster families? They should be able to stay with the foster families, especially if they're foster adopted, and we can certainly work together to facilitate the adoptions as quickly as possible, waving fees, getting the um certain neuter done uh at our facility. I I think the biggest question that Brian mentioned is ownership. Um the question is whether ownership transfers immediately with a municipal contract or whether North Bay as a private organization holds ownership and can retain it when they lose the contract.

And I think we we recognize it goes it gets transferred with the contract. Yeah. So once that if that's true then that that's not a problem. It's just a matter of time and scheduling them for surgery and support. Thank you. Okay. Council member Barnacle. Question. What what ownership transfers? What what are they what is the owning ownership of what of the animals? Oh, gotcha. Okay, thank you. Okay. Um, council member Shrebs,

just to get an an estimate of costs, both of you can maybe answer this. Um, so just do a dollars comparison of um let's say one versus two. Um, or before we get to ask this. If we're going to go to transition at any point in time, whether it be now or August, and we need to transition services, there still will need to be a a shutdown time. U and that's not going to be any different whether we do it now or do it later. Is that correct? I think the way what we're saying is if that you transition to a fullervice full-time new provider for longer or an interim such as Marine Humane coming in to be sort of the consultant that you need and to transition and document what's there and and maintain some basic services. We are suggesting we would need to be closed at least for a week to do all the assessments and the paperwork to do the forensics like where is the data for the dog licensing? Where are the tags? If any animal is adopted, they need to be licensed. So, it's getting in there and also looking at the facility and getting that exam. So, we say one to two weeks depending on how quickly that can be done. It could be faster if that's

Yeah, I think we agree with that as well. Okay, good. And since this is a the proposal that you're bringing forward, is this an interim proposal until a permanent person permanent business comes in and does this or are you offering permanent once you get in that you you would also

I think there are three stages. There's what I do think is an emergency stage right now which is the assessment and response to find out what's actually happening in there. It's kind of a black box for everybody. So whatever we submitted was our best guess. Then there's that interim through the end of the contract for whatever period remains that needs to be covered. And then there's the longer term which you need to plan based on the actuals because right now the animals coming into your shelter are coming from all over the place. So we don't know how many animals actually would be coming into the pedalum shelter. We're assuming it's lower than the number that have been happening now. But we would need some data to confirm that that we can trust.

Okay. Uh then maybe uh then for staff um interim versus long-term. So what I don't want to see is like hiring interim. We're doing this and then all of a sudden do a third party comes in long term. What is the difference of the cost of this interim offer versus uh waiting for the RFP just a couple months and just going through the the permanent person as a transition? What's the cost difference?

Well, I'm not quite sure we know that because again there are a lot of black holes in terms of data, etc. Um but I think one of the advantages of the interim is that again like was mentioned that's a bit of an opportunity not super long but you know two to three months maybe to actually start gathering some of the data as uh both what's there now as well as the throughput of the shelter itself which may help inform the proposals on a go forward basis. But some of the cost that is in the proposals that we have from the from the agencies um is some of that startup, you know, the interim kind of get in there, do the analysis of of what is or isn't there. Um and I I feel like that's a little bit different when there's, you know, they already have some of the knowledge. Uh they've they've streamlined the operations. They've got, you know, they're kind of up and running than to do a proposal to just continue with that, you know, a similar type of service provision that they're already doing. um again versus coming in cold. So I don't know if that

Yeah, I mean our original proposal was and this has all been less than two weeks but um to have the three months that would then uh leave space to negotiate the price for the year contract right based on the actuals rather than committing right away to a totally unknown and that's because I have an active board who takes their fiduciary responsibility seriously and should be asking those questions right and and know that information before committing us to a contract. So that's the intention behind that. Not necessarily that we would come in for three months and fly away unless you know the conditions are such that we do support the idea of closing it permanently if that's what's needed. But that's not what we're thinking. We just don't know.

Okay. I'm just trying to get a ballpark figure here. Nothing exact. So if you do the interim and and take care of that now, which is option two versus option one, waiting until uh later on and just doing the full RFP. Are we talking about 100,000? And is that all in the staff report? 500,000. Can you tell us what was in the staff report to towards that question?

Well, again, we we didn't have any costing in the staff report for a permanent kind of ongoing annual. What we did have is um I believe it was the Sonoma the um Humane Society of Sonoma County had up to a one-year, you know, if we needed a long interim period, say up to 12 months, they had it, you know, kind of quarterly, what would the cost be? So, you could extrapolate that out for a full year. and it was um between I think 800,000 and 1.1 million kind of in that ballpark. So that is you know just to compare to our current cost that's effectively double or more than double what the city's currently paying.

Okay. So we're looking at uh maybe 40 to $60,000 per month to do an interim right now rather than over. Yes. Okay. So all right just want to make sure one more question over here before we go to public comment. So, Council Member Darly,

uh, going back to the closure period, and anybody can answer this. Um, what will we do for field calls where an animal control officer is needed to respond to something? Well, our understanding is that we would be able to we're looking at whether the current animal services officers are are certified and qualified and want to remain to cover city of Pedaluma jurisdictions, then they would be able to answer what we call priority one calls, calls for animals running at large, investigating bite reports. It would be the priority calls. And if the animal services officers from North Bay Animal Services are not retained by whoever is the interim, uh, marine humane officers would be deputized to come in and cover for those priority calls. So we would send officers to cover the city of Pedaluma for those priority one calls during the interim four to six weeks that we might be doing it. Is that

okay? could I mean are we talking about four to six weeks now or one to two or two to four or I mean it's all unknown right so we are just doing our best guess for what might be there might be needed if we can we have three to four shelters who are willing to take the animals in that's not going to be an issue the issue is um giving them exams doing the forensic investigation and then getting them placed into a new home and then the issue is really the transition so you know clearly chose a six-month transition that didn't end better than a shorter one. So, that's I think my concern is that more time is in this going to have a better outcome.

And field services can also get covered um depending on um how long the interm is is by the county. They just can't get up and running until about April. We have a lot to learn on this as we go forward. Whatever we do is going to mean brave new world. Uh let's go to uh the public uh for um public quest public comments and then we'll come back up here because I know we have a lot more still up here on the council to talk about. I do have a question. I need to do that. Do I need to? Yes, I do. All right. We have one more council uh uh council member.

There was a $200,000 and then a $300,000 number for the intim. So with the field, that's what I'm interested in. So we would not contract. We could actually contract if the employees today want to stay and then they would provide that and then that cost would be through the it would be through marine humane. Okay. Yeah. Just I just want clarification on that. So then that would separate so we wouldn't have to look at the other document that talked about the field. That would be separate or that would be void because it would be through the humane.

Yeah. That so that document that you're referring to is the proposal from Sonoma County Animal Services. Correct.

They they submitted a proposal to provide essentially one FTE coverage uh for Paluma for up to one year at a cost of about 30,000 per month. So that would be again more like a a longer term interim period for for lack of a better term. U but we could also flex that time period. If we do have a permanent provider that can provide the animal control services, we could go ahead and end that contract once the new provider was fully up and running. But if we didn't go in that direction and the employees that are there today want to stay and continue with that position, then that would be funded through.

So the employees of North Bay Animal Services are their employees as a private nonprofit. So even without the contract, they're still their employees and uh would have to be transferred over to a new employer based on both their availability, interest, and the need. Qualifications also. Absolutely. But the animal control officers would be hired by SCAS if they had openings, not by humane. Public comment, please.

Yes, we received 24 comments ahead of the meeting and those are posted online. And at this time, I will start a 30-se secondond clock for the public comment. And during these 30 seconds, members of the public wishing to speak should bring their speaker cards to my desk if they have not already done so. Speaker cards received after this time may not be accommodated. Okay. Um well, we have uh 23 people wishing to speak tonight and um that's a lot and and we allow three minutes per and so that's that's a lot. And um so I'd like to caution everybody if the comment you wish to make has been made by someone ahead say I really really support that comment that was made ahead and you know see if you really need the full three minutes or I think it would be appreciated by the whole room if two minutes worked for you. So, um, you have, uh, three minutes and, uh, I appreciate everybody being here tonight to, uh, to speak. And, uh, we'll start with, uh, Carrie Stewart and, um, followed by, uh, Cynthia King. My name is Carrie Stewart and I'm the senior director of operations and programs at the Humane Society of Sonoma County. I'm also a registered veterinary technician. I've worked in veterinary medicine and animal welfare for 15 years, including about 10 years of my career with HSSC. For more than five years, I managed the Hillsburg shelter under both a sheltering and animal

control contract serving that community. In Hillsburg, we separated from NBS and contracted with Sonoma County Animal Services in 2025 as our field services provider. The results have been clear and measurable. faster response times, proactive patrols, increased dog licensing and rabies vaccinations, and transparent time timely reporting of records and call logs. SCAS has long served Sonoma County, and we are proud to partner with them to deliver coordinated community-based animal welfare solutions. I also want to speak to what I personally witnessed at Clear Lake. 3 days after the change in providers, I was on the ground leading an HSSC team that transferred 30 dogs into our care. These included nursing mothers with newborn puppies, unvaccinated puppies who later developed parvo virus, and severely emaciated adult dogs living in conditions unlike anything I've seen. Some animals could barely turn around in their makeshift kennels. The stress caused by starvation, inadequate housing, lack of medical treatment, and minimal human contact was profound. Animal control services are meant to prevent suffering, not allow it to occur through neglect. Those animals are still at HSSC today receiving life-saving medical treatment and rehab from our veterinarian shelter teams. I invite you all to come visit and see firsthand the level of care that we are offering. HSSC is committed to humane sheltering that meets and exceeds the guidelines established by the America the by the association of shelter veterinarians. We provide comprehensive medical care, behavior support, robust adoption program, humane education, community outreach, and shelter desert diversion services, including food and medical assistance to help families keep their pets. We also provide accurate, transparent, and timely reporting of records and statistics. Our organization is widely regarded as a leader in progressive and humane sheltering practices in the state of California. Tonight, I respectfully encourage the council to remove North Bay Animal Services as a service

provider as soon as possible and allow management to collaborate with our trusted shelter partners and community partners to implement humane, accountable, and effective animal welfare s solutions for the Paluma community. Thank you, Cynthia. And uh the other the other day decorum is to we do not applaud during uh these speakers because that's at a risk of not applauding other speakers and let's keep our uh respect high and Cynthia King to be followed by Adah Noms Norris. Norris,

it's my writing. Sorry. Hello. Um hello again. I am the executive director of the Humane Society and I wanted to share that we've been here before. um in your the history of your shelter, we have been the operator. We have been the interim in between operators. Um we have been we've had a long relationship together. And um while there are specific and clear concerns with North Bay's operations and nonprofit administration, the larger pattern of choosing the cheapest proposal to provide services um where the contracts that are signed have budgets that clearly don't cover the cost of what's required is a repeating issue. The use of nonprofits as a safety valve to operate critical servicesers at cheaper prices is a common but outdated model with its wheels falling off. The updated model is to recognize that paying for organizations that offer technical experience, community trust, and effective administration saves money and ensures quality. If moving to that means we need to share the cost, then let's do that as a direct negotiation rather than an assumption or a competition constructed of a scarcity mindset that cuts operational corners and chronically underpay staff. We are excited about the potential of exploring a joint power of authority model that hasn't come up tonight, but it's a very important solution to all of this and that we be considered as a partner in developing that and that all of our partners in the animal welfare in Sonoma County are recognized for the value and experience and expertise we bring to join that conversation during and not after just as an RFP. While our Humane Society is also recognized as a no-kill shelter with an average 98% live release rate, the term is outdated and misleading. An agency that consistently boasts about its no-kill status while warehousing dogs for years without behavioral intervention, enrichment, or medication is not being compassionate or caring. Dogs, especially large dogs, deteriorate mentally with this kind of solitary confinement. Keeping them in this condition is not an accomplishment. It is a celebration of avoidable suffering

to make the people rather than the animals feel better. I'm also hoping we can move the funding conversation in general away from a divisive people versus animals idea that um comes up. The work we do uses a prevention focus that helps humans help their animals and supports the mutually beneficial bond. The cheapest and best thing we can do for an animal is return it to its owner or provide the owner with resources like food or access to care to keep their animal at home. We see the shelter as a last resort meant for short stays, continually decreasing the need for sheltering by increasing resources, spayneuter rates, and foster care. Your shelter is right next to Cott's Mary Isaac Center and near Goodwill both are great partnership opportunities to serve the animals and community members. The opportunity for improvements in health and wellness, workforce development, therapeutic relationships, and population management are the results of an animal are the results of animal welfare work and benefits our entire county. Let's focus on the intersections rather than the separations that'll create a stronger community together. And thank you to everybody here tonight to advocate for animals. Please consider fostering large dogs. That's what we all need the most. Thank you.

Thank you. Um Aydah Norris uh to be followed by Ashley Armstrong.

Uh thank you uh mayor and council members. Uh my name is Ada Norris. I am veterinarian and senior medical director at the Hubane Society of Sonoma County. I trained at Cornell's College of Veterinary Medicine with a focus on shelter medicine. Since 2019, I've led um the development of our public facing safety net community clinic and expansion of regional spander programs as well as overseeing care of our shelter animals. Uh I just want to comment and emphasize one core principle around the animal sheltering piece. Veterinary oversight is not optional in modern sheltering. It is foundational. Animal shelters are not just holding facilities. They are medical and public health operations. They manage infectious disease, rabies control, behavioral safety, spay and neuter compliance, disaster response, and when necessary, humane youth in Asia decisions. These are medical determinations that require defined protocols and accountable leadership. The Association of Shelter Veterinarians publishes a peer-reviewed standards of care that are clear. Shelters must have timely integrated veterinary leadership guiding daily operations, including medical recordkeeping, compliance oversight, and a designated veterinarian of record. When veterinary leadership is ad hoc, absent or undefined, predictable system failures occur, delayed triage and preventative care, inconsistent documentation, compliance gaps, population levels that exceed humane capacity for care. Our proposal centers veterinary authority capacity for care principles, transparent reporting, defined protocols from day one, a framework that protects animals, staff, the public, the city, and brings cohesion and accountability to animal sheltering across the county. Thanks.

Thank you very much, Ashley Armstrong to be followed by Mark Kimberly.

Good evening. My name is Ashley Armstrong. I'm the executive director of WeCare Animal Rescue in St. Helina, but I'm also a Sonoma County resident. I have 18 years of animal rescue experience. I'm here tonight to strongly support the city to award the city's animal care and control contract to the Humane Society of Sonoma County, Marine Humane, Sonoma, and Sonoma County Animal Services immediately. I work closely with these organization and seen their professionalism and compassion firsthand. And I think about it personally. If my own animals were to be lost on the streets, I would want a kind scaffer or marine humane officer to pick them up and to bring them to the humane society where they could be sheltered safely until we could be reunited. For too long, North Bay Animal Show Services has shown a pattern of mismanagement and neglect. Animals who arrive sick, scared, and injured were placed in a system that should have protected them. And those animals were greatly failed. Mark Scott, it's ironic that you're not here tonight because the next part of my speak talks about how your contractors are never available when calls to service are made. I've reached out many times as my shelter neighbors, the city of Kalisoga, who contracts with MBAS, were constantly getting calls that they're being ignored for services. One case I'll never forget is Ziggy, a six-week old kitten with a ruptured eye, literally oozing out of his face, found injured within the Kalisoga jurisdiction. My staff and I spent hours on the phone with North Bay Animal Services trying to convince them to take this animal that they were contractually obligated to take. They didn't. At 7:00 at night, we decided we could no longer allow this animal suffering anymore. We took Ziggy in. Today, he's 3 years old and he's thriving in his lovely adopted home. The situation is also personally deep to me as recently I went up and saw firsthand the condition of the Clear Lake shelter and I actually left with a dog. I love her dearly. I'm so thankful for Clear Lake Animal Associations who made sure she was safe and kind because she's a senior who I found up there with every rib showing full of parasites and riddled with cancer. I left Clear Lake in tears and I want you guys to know in my 18 years I've been in puppy mills. I've been in dog fighting rings and I've been into

hoarding houses. The conditions at Clear Lake brought me to tears. Many of those situations have not. I want to also address something that's very important and often misunderstood in the community and this field as well. NBS has frequently positioned itself behind a nokill label. While that sounds great, animal professionals, progressive animal welfare professionals I should say, know that focusing on a single label can sometimes do more harm than good and it becomes a marketing tool instead of a commitment to true human care. That's why the Humane Society of Sonoma Countyy's tradition transition towards socially conscious sheltering is so important. This model focuses on ethical decisions, collaborations, public safety, and true humane outcomes. Tonight you have the opportunity to reset the standard in Paluma to rebuild public trust to choose organizations with experience, structure, and compassion. I hope that you'll do it for Ziggy. I hope that you'll do it for Lady. I'll hope you'll do it for every animal that had to endure pain or suffering at the hands of NBS. Thank you.

Thank you, Mark Kimberly to be followed by Amy Taylor. So, I guess North Bay Animal Services back in the headlines again, right? You must have seen it. That's the only reason any of you are taking action tonight because this is not a new situation. You, city managers and assistant, all of the council has been receiving complaints and been handed evidence for years about this place. And what did you do? What did you do, Brian Cochran? You issued blanket denials, letters saying all the allegations were false while your boss wouldn't even answer anybody's emails or take one step to remedy this situation. Now, here we are. It's a big emergency. Right? You're acting like, "Oh my god, we have to do something now right away." Why now? I've been involved five years. There's people that have been involved longer than me and nothing has been done until now. That's because bad publicity. You have egg on your face. You look terrible. Now you're going to do something. Well, when you finally do, don't think you're going to get a pat on the back from any of us because you're all guilty of dereliction of duty. Now, let's just look at a few bullet points from the past history about NBAs. That organization is headed up by a man with zero qualifications. We need to look at this. How did he get the job? How'd he get there? Right? He had zero qualifications. He had only had one job in the field previously. He was fired from that. He is utterly unqualified. Number two, they have been investigated by private parties, news reporters, and

two county grand juries, but never by the city of Pedaluma. No investigation has been done. Don't say there has because we've asked for it for years. Nothing has been done. They've been sued by private parties and former employees. They've been forced to pay out 70,000 on a private lawsuit and 30,000 to an employee just recently. And you can expect that number to go way higher because now that that employee is getting paid out, all the other ones that didn't get fairly paid, they're going to be filing claims. Number four, evidence exists to support allegations, including cruelty to animals, illegally euthanizing healthy animals, falsifying official records to a governmental agency, which is a felony, submitting fraudulent reports, embezzlement. I can point to right. I can point you right where to find that evidence. If you want to do a forensic audit, we have proof. I can point you right in the right direction. Also, operating a nonprofit after they were suspended from doing so for over a year. So, the big questions are why did he get the contract? Why once complaints started pouring in did the city refuse to investigate and ignore all of those crimes and adamantly defend them denying and deflecting everything who direct

Thank you very much. That's the three minutes so fast isn't it Amy Taylor to be followed by I thought you said I'm done. Um, she's allowed to one more paragraph.

This is one of the most important ones because we have to stop this from ever happening again in the future. And it's up to you. Now, what have we learned? We learned that there's a private party, not even an elected official, not even a member or employee of the city of Pedaluma. Her name is Sher Cardo. She allegedly, for some reason, holds undue influence and access over city managers Peggy Flynn and Brian Cochran. And it was her allegedly that was able to get them to capitulate. Then they allegedly swayed the council to follow their recommendations back when it was time to award this contract. And then since then, in all the coverups, their recommendations were her recommendations. That means Sher Cardo is making decisions for this city and she is just a private citizen. Well-connected, wealthy, access to the press, right? I want to know what she promised you guys. What'd you get? What was it? Why would you do her?

You know, at some point, um, this kind of allegations back and forth, unproductive.

All right, those are my questions. Okay. The people of Pedaluma want to know and in return we're going to want to know what is going to be done about it because this situation is of your own making. We never had to be here. Thousands now of animals have been harmed. Their humans have been harmed emotionally. Hundreds thousands possibly are dead. There's 30% of those animals have no outcomes. It's like they just disappear out of the records. city attorney blocks every legal attempt at gaining the documents we need to prove that I've gone through two attorneys and thousands, two of my own, I mean, that I was paying and thousands of documents. I can never get the things I want. It's like he's a co-conspirator with these people. All three of them are. And it's illegal. And I can tell you something. We need to get to the bottom of this. We need to know who caused all this. It didn't just happen. It's not new. It's been going for years. It was an inside backdoor deal, a nefarious deal. These people never should have had that contract. This never should have happened to the animals and we shouldn't be here right now in damage control. We will eventually get to the bottom of it. I'm asking this council to investigate how this happened. It's on you to find out how it happened to prevent it from happening again. And if you find what I think you find, if you do investigate, there's a couple people up here that need to get fired because that's how corrupt it is. Because I'm seeing corruption in little old Pedal Luma every bit as bad as what you might expect to find at the very upper echelons of federal government. That's how bad it is. And it's not new and it's got to be dealt with. That's all I have to say.

Thank you, Mayor. Can I just add that uh the contract was awarded in 2018 prior to my coming on, prior to Brian coming on. Yeah, that's a good point is that this contract was uh the cause of quite a public uh stir back in 2018 and quite uh quite a few contentious meetings and uh none of us um on this dis were in uh in the council at that time but I think all of us followed all the contentiousness in the paper at that time and um and uh for for one I'm glad we're having this one here tonight and coming to a close on um this chapter So turn Warden is our our next uh speaker. She

Amy Taylor. No, Amy was the one who seated time. Seated time and then and Oh, sorry. I had the next speaker up was Amy. And so um it's Do you have a card in? Yes. Yes. And the name is Carla. Thank you very much. Amy's next and then to be followed by Terry Warden.

Good evening. Um, it's hard to follow Mark Kimberly, but here I am. I am here to talk about the community safety issue of no rabies vaccines and the fact that the grand jury told you this last year and nobody jumped out of their seat that no dogs coming from North Bay Animal Services had rabies vaccines. Rabies like the whole city is under surge. If you get one rabies bite, you're done. lawsuit. So, on the foster adop to adopt issue, I in the last year I've had 15 personal friends that have fostered to adopt from North Bay Animal Services. Here is one of the letters that I was sent. I adopted a young dog from North Bay Animal Services on a foster to adopt. They released the dog without a rabies vaccine. The dog needed socialization, but I was severely limited due to the vaccination status. I followed up every week for a couple of months and they finally said I can get what he needs at my expense. I just had to pay to get him what he needed. All the tests he needed were $550 and he wasn't even mine. He was technically North Bay Animal Services dog. When you foster, you're not the owner. Let's get that straight. Shortly after the contract, a shortly after they contacted me to bring him in for the neuter, they gave him a second rabies vaccine. After that, foster told them he had his vaccination, but because what she says here, we did adoption paperwork, but due to the fact that their sloppy record recordkeeping and they acknowledged that he shouldn't have even been given the second one, triggered an auto autoimmune reaction.

This dog was sick for three months, including hospitalizations of $7500 and the dog suffered. So, this is just somebody going into the shelter, you know, I'd love to foster to adopt. What a great idea this is. And he's out $8,000 because of it. This is my neighbor. He came to me. He came to my house. You don't think that I'm like triggered by that? The man holding the sign in the back, Eric, he had to go. Same thing. Found a dog, paid for the dog. Then Mark Scott called and said, "Hey, do you want to adopt that dog now?" Now's a good time after he's neutered him and done all the veterinary on him. He wanted another $250, and I won't tell you what his wife told him to go do. So, there's a problem. Here I am again. And I when PASF got kicked out, I didn't want to talk about them. The transition was very quick. So, thank God for these women over here, but it's a very quick transition. It's not that big of a deal. Thank you.

Thank you, Terry Warden to be followed by um Pip Marcus de la.

I just basically wanted to talk about how this does not seem to be like an oversight of information. It just seems to me that that the evidence points more to a malfeasance in office and and intentionally misrepresenting uh reports to cover up animal abuse has happened and just it just seems like the city really doesn't take it as seriously cuz they haven't turned in reports since 2022. And I don't understand why when I'm hearing all of these different things you could do, why no one has said that they should hire an independent uh forensic auditor to come in and look at all these records. You don't know if your officers are certified. Um it seems like uh people are questioning uh financial data and shot records and health records. And I just feel like an independent company should come in because um I agree that the Sonoma County Animal Shelter should take over, but if they're coming in and they're auditing this data, there's no checks and balances in place. You know what I mean? Like there they should not be pleasing themselves and looking at these records. An independent person should come in so that when they start to do what they need to do, there's no question about the data because it's already uh been compromised. I've been a CFO for over 35 years and you know when you have data that's compromised your reports and your work that you're going to do based on it aren't aren't going to be good either. And I just like to know if you're going to hire an independent person to come in and audit these records.

Forensic period not a question period.

Okay. Well, I mean it should be I mean that that's what should be done. There's obviously been, you know, crimes in place, you know, with the people in charge, Mark Scott specifically, you know, and I just feel like the leaving them in charge like where you were saying, like they might have to be in charge for a few months, that's just doesn't make sense because then they're continuing and going on and being able to keep abusing these animals and and the city's kind of enabling it by by not moving quicker and not following up on all these discrepancies that have going been going on since 2022. That's what I wanted to say.

Thank you, Pip Marquez de Plata to be followed by Stephanie Laren.

Hi, my name is Pep. I'm the executive director of Forgotten Feel Sonoma County. Um, I had something written, but the more I hear tonight, I think I want to go a little bit of a different direction. One of the things that I've heard is that are we going to get as bad as what you saw at Clear Lake? Um, remember Clear Lake doesn't exist anymore for this organization to shuffle animals to. Um, so what's going to happen inside the shelter here in Paluma? Because there's not that outlet to move animals around like it was before. Number two, there's the animals in the shelter that you can see, but there's the animals that's the the shelter's responsibility that you can't see. Someone just made a reference to one we have and I put in the written response that I had. I put in multiple times that our organization has actually intervened when there's been neglectful things happening with their foster animals. Um, I'm going to give you Zach and Zoe for example. Um, Paluma resident was in a foster to adopt situation. He called us. I'm I've tried to get them spayed and neutered. I can't adopt them until that happens. It's been months and months and months and months and now they're in my living room and they're trying to meet with each other. So, we said just get them to us and we will get them fixed. They're not it's not going to happen there because we knew the history of that not happening. They brought the cats to us. They were just six-month-old kittens. The male cat had an eye infection

um that was not treated. They pleaded with North Bay Animal Services to look at the eye and treat the eye and they refused to do it. By the time we got the cat, we had to remove the eye because the infection was so severe that is was 100% preventable. So these things and I have a list of these that we took on not get paid not anything because what we care about is the welfare of these animals. But you're not going to see that because these animals aren't in the shelter. They're in homes. I think there the estimate is there's 50

700 that are in foster homes. You're never going to see that. You you don't know what condition those animals are in. You can't walk in the shelter. They're not in where you can see. My guess, my gut from working with North Bay for the last six years or seven years or how long it's been, it's not as good as you would hope it would be. Thank you very much. Was that my time? Yeah. All right. Stephanie Luren should be followed by Dana Grryer.

It's Stephanie Lavin. Sorry if I didn't write it properly. Um, under sworn testimony, it's been acknowledged by Mark Scott that he both signs checks and overseas bookkeeping functions for North Bay Animal Services in nonprofit governance, especially for organizations receiving public funds. That concentration of financial authority is a recognized internal control weakness. Best practice requires separation between authorizing payments, issuing checks, maintaining accounting records, independent recon, reconciliation and review. This is a structural governance concern that has been ignored by city leadership. When financial authority is concentrated in one individual, the system lacks internal checks designed to protect against error or misuse of funds. Because taxpayer dollars are involved, the appropriate response is not debate. It is verification. I respectfully request that the city commission as an independent forensic audit to confirm that adequate safeguards are in place. Transparency protects everyone, including the organization. I'm glad I have two minutes left to speak. I'm Stephanie Lavin. I've been here living here since I was in sixth grade. I am a citizen of this town. I'm a retired Pedma Police Department dispatcher and an ex North Bay Animal Services volunteer. I left there because of what I was seeing there and what was going on there. I have contacted council members. I've contacted board of directors. I've contacted Peggy Flynn crickets. Crickets recently the mayor Thank you. You did respond back to me. Didn't answer my questions, but you responded back. So, thank you for at least responding back. You're out there. I'm shaking right now because I'm so upset from the things that I saw there. I know you said you have walked in there and

says it looks okay. I don't know what you're looking at. I now currently volunteer for Roner Park, which I'm proud to say that I volunteer there. I don't leave there in tears. I love volunteering there. It's the best people that I volunteer with and volunteer for. They're the hardest employee working people at a shelter. Go walk into Roner Park and see what it should look like. See how it should be ran. With that being said, I asked you about the thrift store. He has that thrift store. He's making over $100,000 a year. Where is that money going? It's definitely not going to feed the animals or to take care of the animals. I've had several friends. I'm going to relay what some of these other people are saying. My girlfriend did a foster to adopt. The dog needed dental work. After 6, 8, nine months, she finally paid for it herself. I had friends that got those French bulldogs that all went to city employees. All went to city employees. Even though I asked for one and I was a volunteer, I didn't get one. They didn't get fixed for at least nine months.

Thank you very much. That's the three minutes. Uh Dana uh Grryer to be followed by Susan Hussie.

Good evening. North Bay Animal Services knows you're firing them. So some outside agency needs to come in immediately. If you think the care is going to improve, you're you're fooling yourself. I want to talk about structure, not personalities. The city used to have an animal services advisory committee. That committee provided independent oversight and regular public reporting on how the animal services contract was performing. The previous contractor was required to post their balance sheet and profit and loss statement. Full transparency on financials. When that committee was dissolved, an important layer of accountability went away. After that oversight was placed under Brian Cochran alone. And while I understand that may have seemed efficient, it also meant there were fewer checks and balances. No more financials to review. Nowhere to ask questions. In areas involving public health and animal welfare, oversight really matters. It's about making sure more than one set of eyes is reviewing performance. Oversight committees create transparency. They create regular reporting. They allow problems to surface earlier instead of later. When that structure is removed, safeguards weaken. Problems are less likely to be identified publicly and addressed. Instead, they tend to surface only on after they've grown into what we see now. The performance issues that later emerged didn't happen in isolation. They happened in a system where independent monitoring had already been eliminated. When you remove checks and balances, risks increase. That's not personal, that's structural. So, the real question isn't about individuals. It's whether the system itself had enough safeguards in place. Based on what we've seen, I don't believe it did. It's time to face the reality that change is needed. The time for oversight is long passed. We owe it to this community and to these animals. We are their voice. You have employed an agency to provide care that

has been derelct in its duty. You have not provided proper oversight. You've asked for transparency. They provided none. Animals from Pedaluma have been shipped to Clear Lake. They've been neglected and left to die. If you fail to cease this contract immediately, any other animals blood is on your hands. Thank you. Thank you. Um Christine Susan Hussy to be followed by Christina White.

Hello, my name is Susan Hussie. I have a business here in town. I have been doing rescue work for 20 years. I have uh done a lot of deliveries of babies, foster puppies, problem dogs. I was highly involved in the calapies that came out of Reading. So, I've seen a lot from acid burns on faces to puppies left in boxes to herpes deaths in an entire litter. I have never seen anything like this. Never. And the fact that we knew going in that Mark was not the right choice. His personal record alone should have spoken to that and the underhanded way that he got this contract never should have happened. And year after year, plenty of evidence has been brought before the committees, before the councils, more than just yourselves, and it's been swept under the rug. And no one can understand that. and two grand jury reports should have been enough to say, "Wait a minute." And abolishing the oversight committee was outrageous. And Mark is masterful. I will give him that. He's the biggest con artist I have ever met. And when he tried to get me to go and do the coup with him, he said one evening during the fires, "Do you know what a puppet master is?" Well, that's what Jeff Carter is. And if you can't see it, I will help you. That's the kind of man you have. And you can say, "We aren't responsible for Clear Lake. That's not our deal." Well, maybe we can't bomb in there with our police department, but we sure as heck have an obligation. When that entity was developed here, that 5013C was specifically developed to take this community and he has parlayed

that to other cities. We have a moral responsibility to push for some kind of accountability. Our police department can talk to their police department and he should be criminally prosecuted. And yes, we do have evidence that our dogs are up there. That was his ashwitz. That was his let's hide it up here. And you can walk into this shelter and say all kinds of things about how great it looks and sure a ton of improvements have been made. But if you leave the vermin in the building, it doesn't really matter, does it? So I think what we need to understand is if we don't do something now, you have experts in this room that are immense. They have a knowledge of this field like nobody. And if we aren't listening, we've got a problem and we should all turn in our moral compass.

Thank you. Christina White to be followed by Carly Boyd. Hi. So, I am deeply saddened by everything that I'm hearing here. My experience with animal control, my experience is with animal control. And when I call because there's a hurt animal in the wildlife area where I walk every day, somebody comes out. So when you're looking at um the cost of what the new cost what we're paying our current is 480,000 and what the recommended price is 200,000 a quarter. Clearly we're we have a disparity in what we're paying and what we need to be paying. But I have a question when it comes to if you're doing an immediate turnover and council member Dari thank you for asking. when we have a hurt skunk or fox or uh deer, who are we going to call and how long is it going to take? Because when I make those calls, they come immediately. And those animal control officers are phenomenal. And I can send a pick text to locate where it is and I get a call back and they they come. I have a dog who won't leave a hurt animal. So, sometimes they have to stay and sometimes I have to take her because we have social therapy that we have to be at. And with the skunk, I'll be honest with you, I wasn't all that wanting to wait in case it got upset. But it it concerns me that we won't have our animal control services officers to to be here at our immediate need. And calling Marin is not always easy or Santa Rosa, we all know what that traffic is like. So, please in your considerations, I I have nothing but respect for them. I've had great uh reactions or interactions with everybody, but I have not been to the

shelter since our daughter was young and volunteered there. So, thank you. Thank you, Carly Boyd to be followed by Courtney Garcia.

Hi. Does this adjust? All right. Hi. Um I'm Dr. Karly Boyd. I'm a veterinarian here in Paluma and I have been a veterinarian in the Soma County area for a total of 5 years. Um, this issue is uniquely important to me because I also grew up in Lake County and I still have family there that I recently or commonly go to see. Um, I also frequently volunteer with the SPCA of Lake County and help with their spay and neuter um, operations up there. So, I think you know I I had more um of a comment prepared, but essentially it really echoes a lot of the anecdotes that you're hearing tonight. Although these comments are my own and I don't represent my employer, I would like to just mention what I am seeing from uh the uh standpoint of a general practice veterinarian in our area. I completely agree. We have many clients who come in. They are doing the foster to adopt program. They are waiting months and months for services that never come. They end up spending their own personal money to get these animals spayed or neutered or any other medical care they might need. Um, not only that, but when we get records from these places, it is no surprise to myself or any of my staff members when the records are incomplete, incoherent, um, missing, you know, rabies vaccines is a huge one that is actually a state law for them to provide. Um, so you know, I think it's very clear from everyone that has come up tonight that the North Bay Animal Services contract should be cancelled as soon as possible. We have reputable um, providers who are willing to step up to that. And to just kind of return to the statement I did prepare. Um, while we may sit here and say that the situation in Clear Lake is not directly equivalent to our situation

in Paluma, I do uh resent that a little bit only because I don't think this is just a downfall of an impoverished county that didn't do their due diligence. I think this is a longstanding uh gradual decline due to, you know, gross negligence. Um, this city should not tacitly endorse or ratify this type of deplorable and arguably criminal animal abuse. Further, the city should not let them continue to continue as a service provider in light of these issues. At be best, North Bay Animal Services has provided minimally competent services to the city. And at worst, services that have been provided have been wasteful, fraught with controversy, and love less benefit and value to our city than alternative options that would have been provided by more competent organizations who are ready to serve. Thank you.

Thank you, Courtney Garcia to be followed by Heather Krat. Good afternoon. I come to you as a Pedaluma community member, uh a rescue mom, and uh a pedaluma educator. Eight years ago, I stood before the city council, and I cautioned you about the integrity of the people of North Bay Animal Services. For eight years, your community members have been bringing their concerns and questions about the quality of care and the financials of North Bay Animal Services to you. For eight years, North Bay Animal Services has been a danger to the animals and the community members of Paluma. I think 8 years has been long enough for this danger to perpetuate. Now is the time for Paluma animals to be put in the hands of people who truly care about their health and well-being. And my last comment are to those heroes who walked into the Lake County shelter and saved those dogs that were harmed at the hands of the people that the city of Paluma put in place. Thank you. Thank you, Heather Krat to be uh followed by Susan Takami.

Um I'm going to start by pointing out that it doesn't matter who was here in 2018, the contract still required oversight and that's what was lacking all these years. And I know many people personally who have complained and um had their dogs illegally their dogs and cats illegally euthanized by NBS. They didn't wait the proper time. Um so when you when the issue is dismissed as a lack of paperwork or a lack of dog licensing, I don't I think you're really getting the whole gist of what's going on at NBIS. Um, I also want to point out that if if this if director Mark Scott is not willing to work with a consultant in a period of time where he might have been able to retain control over the shelter, why would you expect him to work with a transition team when he's losing full control? I would expect him to go in and just mess everything up just to just to be like his usual character. Um, so, um, I would just like to remind the community too to reach out to dis the district attorneys in both Soma and Lake County. Um, because it isn't just Mark Scott who who um, committed these crimes. Anybody who was aware of the crimes and did nothing to do it or covered them up is just as guilty as the animal abuser himself. Thank you. Susan Takami to be followed by Sierra Morance.

Good evening. I'm Susan Takami, a retired educator and uh rescue mom, a public servant, and uh business owner. I will be brief because I support everything that has happened and been said before, but I wish I could remember who said it and where I read it, but a mark of a civilized society is how we care for our elderly, our children, and our animals. And I know you have a difficult financial decision to make. Um, that's part of the value here, but it's become clear that it is going to cost money to provide the care that these animals deserve. And one very specific um action that I urge you to take is on uh looks like page four of what was sent to council on the responses to council questions and comments. There's the question about the um um animal services committee and it uh is staff's recommendation that the animal services committee if it's under consideration be formed following the um transition or the hiring of a permanent um organization to care for uh care for our pedaluma animals. Um, I would urge you to do that immediately as a way to provide the oversight from the public that you've been hearing tonight and um provide that communication that apparently has just been been the disconnect between what's been going on with animal control and services and care and the city council. Thank you.

Thank you. Sierra Morance to be followed by Sale White. Right. Hello again. As someone who was bit by a dog in Paluma and has had a terrible experience dealing with NBS, the comments about potential rabies exposure issues hit really close to home with me. While I'm hopeful that you terminate the NBIS agreement for cause, this is not an issue where you can just wipe this slate clean. Here are two things the city of Paluma can do to effectively move forward and start to rebuild the public's trust. First, secure administrator level access to NBIS's systems and records as quickly as possible and by any legal means necessary. City staff has said they don't have access and NBIS has refused to provide information to your consultant. I am and or you uh I imagine this puts the city in a precarious position with regards to public records requests and open cases. It is also important that agencies have access so they can follow carry forward existing cases and known issues such as potential cruelty cases and dangerous animals and adequately care for and adopt out animals at the shelter. Second, it is crucial the city call for a third-party forensic audit of NBIS's finances. If an audit shows that funds have been managed responsibly, you'll be able to release the results for public transparency and have better data to inform how you budget for animal control and shelter care moving forward. If an audit shows any deficiencies, you'll have the opportunity to find and redirect or recover any misappropriated or misused funds, protect the city and taxpayers, and preserve fiduciary integrity and transparency to the public. I know this is a difficult subject and I'm glad to see it's being addressed in a public forum tonight. This is your chance as elected officials to set an example and demand better for

the animals and people of Paluma and Sonoma County. I seen my remaining time to sail white. Um it doesn't work that way unfortunately. I won't take long. You guys know me talking to you. Um the mic here followed by to be followed by Nina Zita.

I'm I'm pretty riled up right now to be honest. I'm angry and I'm sad. I'm extremely angry at city staff and I'm extremely angry at the council members that I've spoken to about this for the last seven years. Seven years I've I've spoken about this. I'm an animal person. I'm a numbers person. The minute North Animal Services took over the contract, things stopped making sense. Mr. Cochran was a math major in college. I find that really annoying because I looked at the numbers and I said, "This does not make sense. How can you have fewer adoptions and a higher live release rate? That doesn't make sense. Well, what's missing here? Can you give me the animal records?" Then I started looking at the animal records and they made even less sense. Animals that I would go missing from the records, animals would be taken in as healthy animals and then they'd be cremated out of the blue. I brought this up. I wrote 14 pages of public written public comment over the last seven years. I've actually I stopped in 2021 when Mr. Cochran disbanded the animal services advisory committee because no one was listening to me. No one was listening to anyone in the city and that's all I have to say.

Thank you Nina Zto to be followed by Becca Edwards. Hello. Thank you for considering all this so thoughtfully. Uh the the past uh 78 years have been pretty bad, but anyone who who knows Pedaluma knows that uh the shelter location and and services and out buildings have been uh inadequate for decades. Truly decades. But what this means is we've got a great opportunity to build a state-of-the-art facility to join the uh new fire department, the new police department at the fairgrounds. Uh it makes sense and with the leadership and guidance of Marin Humane Society, Soma um uh health services, the county of Soma, uh we we've got some, you know, some big talent who can show us the way and make this uh a shelter to reflect all the good things we do like the ice rink and the music things and all the bicycles and all the transit awareness and all that nonsense, but we've got living creatures who are suffering and that's unfortunate. Um I I would concur we need to have an advisory commission again and um uh please uh act on these things promptly and uh remember the people who didn't. Thank you. Thank you. Becca Edwards should be followed by Garrison Boyd.

Good evening. I'm Becca Edwards and I'm the life-saving programs manager for the Humane Society for Inland Menace County and I'm here tonight with the team from Clear Lake Animal Association. I just want to start by saying that distancing yourself from the emergency in Clear Lake does not change the fact that it was caused by North Bay. I have been to meetings in Clear Lake where the city manager tried to convince us that there was not an emergency happening inside. Three weeks ago, I was exposed to the worst case of neglect and abuse that I've ever seen. Inside of the Clear Lake Animal Shelter, over a hundred dogs were found, emaciated, living in crates and half kennels, covered in feces with no access to clean water. I have been helping on site and behind the scenes at Clear Lake Animal Association since they took over the contract from North Bay. And just like everyone else, I am traumatized from what I have seen and exhausted from the endless work that still needs to be done to clean up after North Bay. But I'm here tonight because I never want to see this happen again to any animal anywhere. And I just want to stress the urgency we're all feeling to make these changes h changes happen very swiftly. Part of my supportive role has been helping with entering records for the Clear Lake Animal Association. I have seen every record that was provided by North Bay in the handoff. Animals living there for three months were not given a name. They were not sexed to determine if they were male or female, microchipped, or even given the most basic life-saving preventatives, vaccines that every animal entering a high-risisk environment deserves. Animals that lived there for years were not spayed or neutered, and aggressive dogs sent up from Pedaluma were labeled untouchable and sentenced to life in those small

unsanitary kennels and crates. Sorry, these were not records. These were pieces of paper with a numbers that did nothing to help provide the continuity of care that was promised and that the animals deserved. And I fear that's what's going to come next if this doesn't happen quickly. Clear Lake has a huge problem in their community with homeless and unwanted animals, just like every community in our area across the country and across the country does right now. But these conditions were not caused by too many animals in a community. These conditions were caused by neglect. And the animals inside of the Clear Lake shelter were not given the most basic needs that any shelter should provide. They were not fed and the shelter was not managed the way it should have been. In North Bay's press release and letter to the city council, they pride themselves in being no kill. And in 2025 having zero healthy animal euthanas. Meanwhile, hundreds of sick and neglected animals suffered quietly in their care. North Bay wants to warn you that discussion of euthanasia has already begun from these new proposals.

Thank you. That's the three minutes there. Appreciate your input, Garrison Boyd to be followed by John Monia.

Thank you very much to the council and also thank you very much to the city's employees and public servants for taking these matters seriously as we are today. Uh, I also want to say thank you to the Marine Humane, SCAS, SC Humane, CAC, and HSIMC for all of their work in trying to triage the mess that's been brought up at the uh, Clear Lake Animal Shelter. I also want to echo Dr. Norris's comments regarding veterinary professionals and doctors and their importance to the remediation of all these problems, including the problems with the Clear Lake shelter. I want to highlight a few things about the record and how we got here today. First and foremost, this year after the grand jury issued its report 2025, the city released a couple of quotes in follow-up to that saying, quote, "Our overall assessment is that NBS as an organization is a caring, competent, flexible, and community-minded animal services provider. further that the city believes that NBAS have been incrementally improving their customer service, veterinary service availability, volunteer coordination, and social media engagement. Looking at all of the records that we have today, and knowing, as some of the council members and the city manager have stated, that they've been out of compliance with their contractual obligations for 3 years since 2022, how are we possibly coming to that determination in 2025? It frankly makes zero sense and is evidence of the city's failure to maintain compliance obligations. As an attorney by trade, I'm very, very aware of the necessity of maintaining due diligence over all aspects of contractual operations. I do not believe that it's a particular failure of any civil servant within the city of Pedaluma, but it's important nonetheless. Moreover, quick civics lesson about federal 501c3 nonprofit creation. You need a board member or a series of board

members in order to create a 501c3. How many board members of NBS are veterinary professionals? Give you a hint. It's zero. How many veterinary professionals are currently on the staff of NBS? Zero. In regards to assessing compliance with the contract, one of the principal duties is maintenance of administrative and regulatory standards and standards that are held up by entities such as UC Davis. How is NBS possibly assessing their compliance internally? And how is the city assessing their compliance without any veterinary professionals on staff whatsoever? I think the city owes a great deal of responsibility for reviewing this. Moreover, when the city's civil servants prepare reports on these matters, it's important that they be followed. This entire debacle results because this council, not any of the members today, voted 7 to zero unanimously to grant the contract to NBS in 2018. Thank you.

Thank you, John Hania. I also have another card if I need it from a speaker who from the person was who's here. Um, sorry if it wasn't submitted during the period. No, no problem. No problem.

All right. I heard all kinds of things. I heard a lady said that uh one person have to pay $250 if they want the dog, which is not true. Adoption fee is $100. I heard a lady I heard a lady talk about Ron Park shelter. My shop is right next to the Ronald Park shelter and it's not as nice as she put it and it's impossible to adopt a dog from there. Marine Humane Society. Okay. You can adopt a child a lot easier than you can adopt a dog and it creates uh uh the uh puppy uh mill. Okay. But I want to talk about my experience at North Bay Shelter. And I suggest that each one of you unannounced to go and visit and see for your own eyes. The level of care for animals, it was beyond beyond what you can imagine. I recently adopted two dogs from there. And you all know how I feel about animals. Animals are my kids, my dogs. In fact, you all seen my big dog who's like as big as a horse who came straight from Russia. And I hope Donald Trump doesn't ice send ICE to to send it out of the country because it was legally brought in. Bella is the Bella, the lady who coordinate the adoption at the North Bay. She take care of each dog as if it's her own kid. Okay. There's two young people who take care of the kennels, Jose and I think the second one, Estvon. They take care of the dogs and take care of the kennels. I am there almost every day. I visit that shelter. I walk some of the dogs and what I see and what I read this and I see the picture. I don't see any of it in there. And I really, really,

highly recommend for each one of you show up and visit the shelter so you could see for your own eyes. That way you can have all the nuts and bolts to make a decision. I don't know anything about the grand jury. I don't know anything about the contract, but I know one thing for sure. The consultant who was hired, there's an issue between him and North Bay. And that's why they refused to work with him. And that right there is should have been taken care of, not put aside. And now we are here in this predicament. So I really encourage you to visit the shelter. Every time I visit there, I see the interaction between the staff and the people. And I've never seen anything from what I'm hearing from all these folks. I don't know. I don't know where all this coming from. Thank you.

Turn around. Thank you very much. and let's try and keep the quorum for a little longer in this room. We've done so well to this point. So, um I just want to appreciate all the public speakers who've come. I mean, I I realize um not all of y'all are u right close and that speaks to how powerful the issue is to you that you're here and I think everything you said has been powerful and impacts our council powerfully and um and and does anyone Yes. So trying to decide who who gets to weigh in first here. Council member Kater Thompson, I'm more than happy to weigh in on this.

Thank you. um appreciate everybody coming and all the comments and I have read the letters and I've been in contact with some people um specifically on dog bites. Um it wasn't that long ago that my daughter almost lost her arm. I mean it was a horrible dog bite the right to the bone and I I did call you know to find out support from the shelter and got none. I didn't say I was a council member. I don't do that. and it um basically had to drug the dog, put it into a garage. The next day, we were petrified to open the garage door. I mean, it was such a vicious thing that happened in my kitchen. I mean, I was in the other room and the noise was unbelievable. Um, and I've been in contact with Sierra um quite a bit um with her dog bite and I have talked with city staff and I apologize for not being um more strong on this and trying to make these changes. I was in the room in 2018 and I watched the dog and pony show with how the contract move forward and it was a political move. It was not really about the animals, but it was, I think, about people's personalities instead of what really we should have been doing was looking at the contracts and what was best. And that's not what happened that night. Um, so here we are today. And for me, I want to move to terminate the contract. I don't want I do believe what people are saying. Um, I would like to talk about the animal service committee because we're kind of coming around the same thing even with the technology committee that

we disband and all of a sudden you have AI and you have all these concerns and so committees are important. They are cumbersome though, you know, so it would be nice to create a situation that works with um because a staff member is usually there. I would support that. Um I want to make sure that the documents that are at NBS are really there and to see what the documents I mean get into the system. Um because I am concerned about if there is financial you know discrepancies and other things and I will admit I feel like as a council member I really failed because I should have brought this up. um a long time ago, especially when my daughter got bit and it was a horrible bite. I mean, the entire arm from here to down here had dog bites. Um, fortunately, the dog didn't have rabies, but we had to deal with it ourselves. And so for me, I want to um move um to terminate the contract and I want to move forward with the interim and move with the RFP ASAP. And I thank you.

I am not going to I should have really pushed staff more and I just don't feel like I did. And I will take responsibility. But there are other people that are in the room that were here in 2018 and we all saw the same thing. I have friends on both sides and but it's not about friends on both sides. It's really what was best for the city at the time and the recommendation was not taken and they just went in a different direction, the council at the time. And I think it's just politics is what happened. Politics and pulling strings and other things and I'm just sad by all this. Um, but that's all I'm going to say. Thanks.

Okay. Thank you. Um, one from this side, Council Member Barnacle. Yeah, I have a couple of questions. Um, before I let my comments out. Um, we've gotten the You said they've given us financial audits. Um, were those clean audits? Yes, they were. Okay. Um, now I'm looking on other cities and I'm not seeing that they have animal service committees. Do you know of Santa Rosa, Runner Park, other cities have animal service committees? I don't believe any other city in Sonoma County has a animal services committee.

Thanks. Um, so clearly we've provide failed to provide oversight. Um, uh, I'll say, um, from the moment I announced I was running for city council in 2020, people were lobbying me, um, for and against North Bay Animal Services. Um, and I, um, I was one of the people that s talked to. Um, and, um, I made a mistake. Uh, we have, uh, we've clearly not followed through on our duty, um, to oversee this organization. Um, I was, uh, frustrated with the grand jury report. I was frustrated with, um, I was hopeful that we were going to see action, meaningful action coming out of that. But the fact that they have been failing to cooperate with our consultant that um we can't get data ourselves that other professionals who would be taking it over feel like it's a black box is um very concerning to me. Um and I would say the the the smoke um that I've seen, if you will, where there's smoke, there's fire. I think there is a huge records issue there um based on the limited exposure I've had to it. So, um I uh appreciate that. Um I definitely support terminating the contract. Um within 6 to 8 weeks, we're going to be in extremely better hands if we did that right now. We'd have 30 days for the contract termination and we'd have two to four weeks um under new new management and I think um we would be in extremely um better situation in a much shorter time. Um so I'm certainly in support of um cancelling the contract and moving forward as as proposed with option two. Um what I'm not clear on right now is um the urgency to

um uh the shelter and a long-term uh whether we should have a shelter in the long term. I don't know what the capital improvement costs are going to be for that. Um I don't know what the cost benefit of whether we're strategically located in South County, whether it makes sense for us to have that. Um, and so for that reason, I'm not in an urgent hurry to release an RFP for something that may not be the right scope. Um, I think that we need to like I want to know what would it cost if we didn't have a shelter in Paluma. Like when I asked the question, my council question, it said we've offered this for many years in Pedaluma. That doesn't mean that we should be offering it. Um, it means we have been offering it. So, I would prefer that we um focus on having a good transition in um getting a new operator in place and um determining if it's a long-term if it's the right thing because the other thing that you know I just want to is burned in my memory from the grand jury report is that um they've been saying that we should have a countywide solution for a while. You brought up the JPA. I asked about it here. Um, I think this is an opportunity because there's other cities in Sonoma County that are going to be experiencing the same thing. You know, what am I doing right now? Um, this is a good opportunity to hopefully turn crisis into improvement countywide. So, I'd prefer that we um focus our resources on, you know, instead of an RFP on trying to fix fix this thing um for good. Um, the other thing, uh, I 100% agree. whatever legal means necessary, we need to get access to the administrative records as soon as we can. Um, and I support a forensic audit. Um, I think we uh we clearly have not done um effective oversight. I don't think that the animal service committee um would have been able to do effective oversight. Um, but I think we owe it to

the community to answer some of the questions because um, probably the most powerful thing to me here obviously other than the pictures of the um, distressed animals is the fact that so many pure organizations here, so many professionals in this space are here to say like we need to terminate this contract. That's um uh extremely alarming that um what I felt like was a political uh stunt from 2018 that I was being lobbied on um is indeed a a mess of peer organizations that feel like this is an unqualified organization and it's not the um it definitely isn't living up to the standard that pedalumans expect and that I expect. Um, so for that reason, I support terminating the contract immediately. I'm not in a hurry to issue the RF RFP. I really want a cost benefit on whether we need to have um a shelter. And then I support uh a third party audit and um doing whatever we need to to secure administrative records.

Thank you. Um Vice Mayor McCarly. So, um, like everybody else, I share sentiments about setting up an advisory committee, um, going forward. Not that this hopefully ever happen again, but what would it take to get that started? The council could create a new committee uh, just as it did in the past. It's a resolution uh, authorizing the the new committee that would have the various bylaws and the setup and the duties of the committee. So, that's that's under council purview. Okay. And I don't know if it was made clear how how did the committee dissolve in the first place?

So the committee dissolved a few years ago uh when we brought a recommendation to council that we felt that there were other ways to get some of the same information with our website, our social media, uh other methods in order to to do the same sorts of things and sort same sorts of conversations. Um, I would also just mention because it's been discussed a few times here tonight, uh, that the duties of the committee were not an oversight committee. And I do want to be clear about that. It specifically says in the duties of the committee that their role and responsibility is not to oversee the activities, the operations, the finances, or the staffing of the animal services operator. So, it was kind of a it it was a little bit um different than maybe what some folks had envisioned it to be at the time. And so, part of it was it was formed many years ago under an old operator when the circumstances were very different than where we found ourselves in 2021 or or 2022.

Okay. No, thank you. Yeah, because I um I don't like hearing how things have been handled by the city. I know staff works hard, but I don't think things were handled very well. And with so much time passing between data and reports that should have been collected by the city, you know, from NBS, um, you know, I I don't understand and how, as councilwoman now pointed out during her questions, how the city, um, wasn't on top of this for what has been years. And so, um, I understand the urge to end the contract as soon as possible. Um, you know, I think the council would like to be assured by staff and those involved in that this transition is as smooth as possible. I think I think we have been. I think it's going to be everybody's priority going forward. Um, you know, because uh it needs to be of minimal impact impact uh for these animals for their well-being um for their health and none of them should be suffering at all. Thank you.

Thank you. Um I'm keeping notes as we go across in case we have wrap-up issues. So that's um leaning towards immediate dismissal. Is that where where you are on the option one? Option two. Option two. I think too. Okay. Thank you very much. Council member now.

Um thank you Mr. Mayor. Well, in 2004 to 2008, I served as a council leaison on in my last term of city council on the animal advisory committee. And one of our things that we met monthly was we listened to the community and one of the concerns was our pot belly pig ordinance. So we did things that we wouldn't want to do up here as a council. We did as an advisory committee and then we brought the recommendation. I think the city policy had an ordinance had to be changed. How many pot belly pigs? Eric Danley shaking his head in agreement because it was unique. It was like how many pot belly pigs can you have in your home? And it was annoying the neighbor. So that was a very, you know, it seems funny to talk about now. Um, that was almost 20 years ago, but we did some very good things that avoided what's going on up here tonight, listening to the community because I didn't get a dog until after the 2022 and I had my first communication with the NBS. Um, and I all I heard was the excuses of the pandemic. This is because of the pandemic. The pandemic caused us to be behind the paperwork and we're not collecting. Well, last Friday, I couldn't wait any longer for the staff report. So, Mr. Hania, I did make that unscheduled appearance at the animal shelter. And the front looked awesome. There were so many donations. And as I was there, a friend from high school was dropping off more donations. Our community is so generous when it comes to animals and people and needs. I remember during the

Tubs fire, we had so much given to us and I was greeted by staff and then I was brought in. I had a tour by Mark Scott without any question. It was clean. It was there was less than a dozen dogs, less than a dozen cats. I got a tour of the back, which is newer than it was 20 years ago, with a huge play area and trailers for a veterary clinic and for um like for people to sit with a dog and get to know a dog or a cat before an adoption or even there's a place for a homeless individual to connect with their animals. So, I was very impressed on the surface, but then when I see the staff report that we have these three options and I read through it and I read through it again and I know that we're behind in paperwork and I know the grand jury report and what didn't take place after we asked them to and the red flags that came up when they couldn't, you know, work with the consultant that we chose. I have to say that one, I'd like to see going forward an advisory committee reinstated for the animal um services um whatever that looks like just so we have this community input that we have here tonight going forward. Um we don't want to look at social media as the holy grail. It is not always factual. So, we don't look probably at social media like you do because it's emotional. We look at facts. We look at what the city staff provides us. And I apologize for not going deeper into my um questions of

staff and what was going forward after the grand jury report came out. I would also like to go with option two and give a 3 to four week period to close the facility. have it, you know, interm taken care of by Marin Humane Society and do the inventory of what is Nbas inventory and what is city inventory. Um what the facility I don't know what we own and what they own. We need to have time to do that. Do a deep clean and a clean slate for the next provider. So, thank you to council member um on this side of the dance who already spoke because I agree with everything. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Quint. Thank you. Uh first, I want to I want to thank everybody for coming out and speaking to uh speaking tonight. Uh it was impactful to me. Uh I want to say thank you for everyone for keeping decorum. you know, it's a emotionally charged um topic and emotions run high and so I just want to express my thanks for that. Um you know, you your voices made a difference with me. I was originally, you know, I, you know, I I was looking at this in terms of like how do we make the the the most orderly um, you know, transition possible and with the least risk and and I was I was thinking that it was probably um, you know, option one and you know, give staff the ability to move quickly into option two if if we see um if we if we see where things are going south, but but I uh you know, you you changed my mind and and so I I support option two and I would even go so far as to to ask that we um you know, if we're giving uh notice uh for the end of March that, you know, if possible, let's try to get someone in there even before that um to to partner

uh just so that we you know, to to really, you know, minimize any risk. Um, I I also I like Brian's Council Member Barnacle's uh suggestion on the holding off on the RFP and evaluating if we really need a shelter, if that's a, you know, is there a a better long-term solution? Um, I also support taking the necessary legal steps to gain possession of any data, you know, both animal records and financial records. I support a third party audit. And if there's any evidence if if there's any evidence of criminal activity, I feel like we should pursue that. I I'm not suggesting that they are that that there is. Um, but if if something in an audit raises suspicions and there's evidence, I you know, I I I would ask that we be transparent about that and and and pursue that. And that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Shribs.

Okay. Thank you. Um, yes. Thank you for everyone that uh has shown up especially the all the professionals from organizations veterinarians are showing up and uh from all the professionals it's a consistent story that you're telling us. So I really appreciate that that definitely changed my mind about what's what to do and how to do it. Um whereas before I was looking at oh maybe a slower transition a little more consistent but it's obvious we need to make it a little faster route than than more sooner than later. So I'll so my preference is is for for uh two um uh and also agreeing with what was been stated before about the uh auditing there's enough evidence that has been stated in this room that's been brought forward now as a collective body. So in the past it was like one little thing here there whatever it was far enough between it was just one off it was but a lot of other folks were getting saying great things and apparently uh there's two faces to NBA there's the funnel face of we have volunteers that do great jobs the citizens came in they did a great jobs at the kennel they made things look nice and you walked in um really good care here in pedal because we have people volunteers who cared so much and took care of the place and then there's um the animal control officers certified. They were doing their really good job. So the face to the public looked really really good for most of us. Did like my daughter volunteered and she came back with always good reports. Um so I always trusted that oh on face things are working well. It's obvious from your story that you've told us there's two faces here. There's the behind the scenes face and all this evidence now accumulated not just one here one there one. It's now accumulated together as a package. And yes, we heard from a lawyer, there is possible actions here we should be taking uh from a legal point of view at this point. So I'm very disturbed by what I've heard tonight uh

from you folks and all these evidences. So yes, a financial audit, yes, but we also need to look at the evidence that's been provided by you and actually accumulated in the package and give it to our police officer chief and say, "Chief, is there something here that needs to be investigated legally?" um and and and either either go for it or clear his name, whatever. And there's folks have been calling to clear Mark's name. Uh he has several letters did come in to supporting Mark saying he's doing a fantastic job, that he really cares for the animals, that he's a good manager. So the several letters did come in. So there's I said there's two stories here entirely. Um but I think we need to follow up and we want your confidence that things are done right. We want you to do um to trust us as a council. I'm just become this is as more serious than I ever thought it was of what you're saying. So yes, investigation auditing is is from what you've said. Yes, we need to do that. Uh maybe it's been cleared in the past. Where's the $100,000? So a lot of accusations. Are they real or are they not? Um we need to know. Uh that needs to be cleared up. So anyway, so I'm going to go with um option two. Now I did have a dog for 13 years. we uh was able to get and took care of the veterinarians and everything. Loved our dog entirely. Died in my arms. It was great uh for for the for his life and for ours for the family life. So, uh yeah. So, I'm all about uh loving animals also uh not just trees as you've probably heard me before talk about trees. Um but anyway, I'll go with uh option two now. Terminating and then bringing especially with the thank you for the humane societies coming from I now confidence what you've said and what you've done. Thank you for coming and and supporting and saying you're going to do your part and make this happen. Um I wasn't sure if that was possible until you actually spoke up and give us give me the confidence that yes, you can do this job. Um I wasn't sure because I've

heard different things in the past, but I'm hearing from you now. Please step up if we need to do it sooner, whatever it needs to do to make it transition between now and then. If it's a down for a couple weeks, okay, I'm now fine with that. Okay, so that's about where where I'm standing. So with that, okay, thank you very much. Um, I had one um I might there might be other conversation on the dis before I weigh in, but there's this been this discussion of um slowing the roll on the RFP. I'd like to be clear on what that would mean if we if if that's in fact what the suggestion is from some is that uh what are you hearing that to mean?

It would really depend on the service providers if they're willing to stick around during the time that we our interim time would be longer and and may I ask that's an RP for the shelter services mainly the interim would be field services be if it'd be for both.

Yeah. Okay. Because um I I worry about us. I um well I I'll roll my thoughts and come back back around here. Um one um I I think it's evident well documented tonight that we have justification for cancelling for cause. Um I mean we have no trust, we have no record, there doesn't appear to be any structural support um board support. They don't uh put out impact reports of of their work. Uh they failed in completion of tasks. I'm I'm very comfortable like immediately this move in a different I think we have legal cause to to head in that direction. Um so I don't want to see any delays but I want to see an effective plan of us moving into the right space. Um you know whether it involves replacing or or retaining the local service officers. Um but we have to provide for continuity. We have to make sure the animals are covered no matter what decision. So, I want we're putting a burden on staff like we're saying do it and then they had to figure out how to do it and it's with our nonprofit organization support. So, I appreciate you all being here. Um, and I concur on the investigation and audit ideas. um on the committee. I think if we select a reputable operator, the committee idea is is less oversight of the service providers than it is what do we need in this arena aside from the competence of the um of a well selected um nonprofit. So there's those and the discussion of the JPA has come up and we we go to a mayors and council's uh general meeting of all cities and and there's a there's a governing board of that and um the idea of a JPA is now either on the next agenda, next monthly agenda, the monthly agenda after that. So it'll be immediately taken up. But I worry that JPA's governmental action, they take forever. I want to make sure when we talk about not doing an RPA, RFP

requests for proposal at at the speed we were choosing that our governmental process of many cities really slows the roll and then the ball drops, the continuity drops. I don't want to see continuity drops. So, I'd expect staff to tell us which is the preferred option. we can't get the countywide done fast enough. We need to do something local and they can sort that out in the next week, you know. So, um and um that uh I I agree long term, you know, we all may look different. We may not have the same shelter here. I know we'll have response services here, but you know, we have to get to what our long term is and not ever have this kind of problem again. Now, I know Council Member Kater Thompson, you wanted to weigh in.

I just wanted to weigh in. It was also on the JPA to because those are long processes and so what do you do in between and so maybe the RFP process is the right way to go. Um because this is complicated and I just didn't even realize Santa Rosa didn't have a shelter and how everything was really working and that you know we've had a shelter as long as I can remember. always have had a shelter and so you know you're I have a warm spot in my heart to keep one down here also but I would like to find that out but that's the long term and I think we need to deal with um what we're going to be doing for the short term and the short term could be a couple years by the time you create a JPA takes time

well and and and perhaps um when we do the RFP part of that service is working with our service provider to determine long-term do we keep the do we keep the shelter or don't we I mean I I've got to tell you it's um just having the physical um place for animals um for vet checks for adoptions I I would imagine there's a benefit but I would want to work with the providers to understand that so maybe we can go ahead and do the RFP with that understanding of working with the service provider to figure out facility needs

council barnacle Yeah. So, I think we're in agreement on the first three. Um, I would either as part of the RFP, we say we offer, do you want to run the ser do you want to run the shelter in Paluma or not? And have someone tell us what their solution would be. Um, I'm just not in a hurry to issue an RFP. I'm in a hurry to solve this problem and like and to figure out what the long-term solution is. Not in a hurry to issue an RFP and go through a procurement that may result in another transition, you know, or maybe not. But like I'm not interested in transitions. I'm interested in stability. And so like I would be like I would say if delay the RFP until we do a cost benefit on shelter. Like do we want the shelter longterm or not? what's what is the cost benefit of that? And the second thing is at least put put our toe in the water on a countywide solution like if if there's no there's no there there and there's no interest from other cities like walk from it um and we can move forward with our own thing.

So what I'm hearing you suggest is an interim solution of not a short period of until a decision is made on the others. 12-month contract 12-month contract six-month contract something like that. I'm just I don't see like I don't want I don't want the staff that should be focused on making sure that we have a smooth transition releasing an RFP and man and responding to bidder's questions and doing interviews and negotiating contracts for that stuff. Like I want us to be focused on making this transition as smooth as possible. And honestly, I'm more interested in a forensic audit than I am an RFP.

Let me um let me then try and summarize because the idea we're trying to do tonight is give staff direction. I think we're in consensus that immediate transition is appropriate, a consensus and then um we're also talking about uh if we let an RFP or whether we let the interim solution continue until a next stage and and if we're comfortable letting that go till staff replies back with a positive uh direction then then so is that kind of what you're hearing? That's going to depend on the service providers, right? they're willing to do the interim without having that clear idea of how long that's going to be. Right. So, I just You're hiring a month to month instead of buying something. Yeah. That's difficult.

And that's difficult. Yeah. Um and and I think we're going to understand that as staff gets deeper into this, they're going to come back with that recommendation that the RFP has to go out or not. But that you don't have enough data to make that determination this evening. Yeah. Won't we won't we have better RFP if we if like the black box is no longer a black box too? Like so I mean so like I want to have them go through and say like this is actually the the mess that we're in and like here's the RFP that should be written or

that and that's going to actually feed into our RFP process. That's why we talked about pushing the RFP off a month while we work with in the interimm period with service providers so they can get in in on the ground and figure out what we've got going. Let's let our attorney weigh in.

Just briefly, I I wanted to address the issue of records and information. Um the NBS agreement, its agreements. It's a there's a an agreement for use of the property and there's agreement to provide the services are based on our standard ones. Um service agreements where we own all the records that are created in the course of of performing those services. So whatever they are such as they are and we've not had an easy time um accessing them. We we have the we have all the legal means we need. we just needed to, you know, practically pra, you know, physically go in and arrange to get those in whatever form they are. Um, and particularly in terms of the the time frame the council's giving us direction about, the sooner the better because that that way we can preserve those and see what what they are, you know, even at staff level review and if it's the council's direction to have a third party look at those, you know, at least we'll have the source document. So that that's that that should not be a complicating factor for us. Thank you.

Well, I think the RFP discussion, uh, Council Member Quint, just one question. Um, so related to the RFP, uh, what would be a standard term for an RFP? If we did have the RFP, would that be for like this one or this current contract was what, seven, seven year? Uh, sorry, seems like eight years. how long it's

so the original contract I believe was 3 years, excuse me, was 3 years with a couple of extensions. Uh we did go in two years into the agreement and added a six-year extension with another three-year. So part of the reason uh at the time was that we wanted to provide a longer term time horizon for them to ramp up fundraising to get their feet under them etc. That was the at least the argument at the time. I believe the RFP draft that we have put in as an attachment to the staff report proposes a four-year term with a two-year extension. So, could be up to a total of six years if we exercise the extension

or we could change that. Yeah, that's totally up to our discretion of what term we want to propose. Typically, we do three years. I think we do that with our landscaping, with our janitorial. It's typically three years. Yeah. I I mean, to me, just u you know, three years um 3 years doesn't seem extraordinarily long. If if we went into a three-year agreement and then started working on the u understanding of whether this should be a a more a JPA um you know to me that seems reasonable.

Okay. So, are we all good on this understanding after that conversation, Council Member Darly?

Well, I just want to say that I think I think an RFP is necessary going forward. I mean, having an animal shelter is is an essential service for not only Paluma, but displaced animals. So, I know option three was on there as uh you know, as a possibility, but I'm surprised that we're even discussing shutting down the shelter. I mean, we we need to have that in Paluma. So I think where we've landed, if I could recap, is that we don't have the best feel about the clarity of an RFP to the vendors unless we first take possession. So rather than the conversation being do this two things simultaneously at the beginning, we agreed um cancel the contract, bring in um another operator, have that operator make the assessment, have the assessment into the RFP. So it's a little slower and it gives us time to be working with the county and it gives us time to have staff recommendation for back to us for best practice. Good. Okay.

When one making sure I want to like that like the full co like cost of capital upgrades and things like that at the at the the existing shelter. I want that to make sure like as part of our decision of what that should like when you come back to us. I want to make sure that like the actual cost of upgrading our facilities to the extent that you know that's warranted like is brought forward. Council member Shrebs.

Um, yeah, just to put thing in relative for the money part which is always a concern on that, but to put in relative terms as was stated earlier, the importance of public safety also includes the animal safety. Um so just as a question for staff um can you just give us a number between police, fire, ambulance services, all that safety cost to the city right now per year about how much total money per year is that if we all all together about 100 million? No, those departments are probably about 50 55 million. Yeah.

55. Okay. 55 million for people basically people uh public safety and we're now we're talking about uh animal public safety which includes the rabies and what we heard of is is also for people too including the wildlife safety and uh animal. Just putting that perspective of the costs that we're talking about here for animal shelter and veterary services and animals compared to the other costs we so if we need to move money if if we have to get the city to agree that yeah we move money from people public service we need to add it and put animal public service included as part of that package. So that's just something to think about relativity

and and maybe there's no better way to close the conversation. We provide a direction. We we got applause from the audience. And that closes this item and we'll move to our next item. Thank you all very much for being here tonight. Thank you. And we will take a uh fivem minute uh recess and be right back in our seats.

Okay, we're back in session. So, let's uh have our council arrive. And um this is my training.

Thank you very much. Our next item here will be um item six. It's consideration possible action. Um and um and can I ask uh our uh help in Sergeant-at-Arms are we today? Um if you would shut the doors except for two open panels there, it'll help the acoustics in the room. Okay. Okay. So, the item is action pursuant to election codes regarding the referendum petition on resolution uh 2025 047 downtown housing economic development overlay general plan amendment which would increase the maximum allowable floor area ratio from 2.5 to6 to either repeal the general plan amendment or submit the general plan amendment to Pedaluma voters um and uh so forth. I'd like to in um invite our uh vice mayor to weigh in.

Good evening. I'll be recusing tonight from this item because of the proximity of my property to zone A. However, I will say that the downtown overlay always was a city-wide issue which has been made especially clear by a very successful referendum which proved that this overlay is affecting the public at large. And in light of that, I'm disappoint disappointed that my district, which is nearly a fifth of the city, won't get representation this evening, even though it is affecting the public at large, including them. Thank you.

Thank you. So, as the uh council member exits and uh we we have our uh city attorney, Eric Danley, to present this, and I think we have slides. Are the slides even up and ready? So, um, we'll pause for a second, I guess, here.

Okay.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Sorry for the um opposite of a catchy title for tonight's item. Um, Madame Clerk, if you'd go to the next slide, please. I'm going to try to go expeditiously through these that that hit the council's options for taking action tonight. So, um, in March of 17, 2025, the council took two related actions, enacted two items of legislation that together make up what we refer to as the downtown housing and economic development overlay. One was adoption of an ordinance, ordinance 2900 NCS that um included most of the details of the council's um overlay policies to protect historic resources and um provide for enhanced development potential in the area affected by the overlay which um was initially conceived of as a larger area but ultimately the council took action on on just a two square block area. The other part um of the overlay legislation was a resolution that was to that amended the general plan um provisions regarding the um floor area ratio of potential development to increase it from 2.5 to 6.0. Um in in the um in the ordinance there was a lot more detail concerning things like maximum height lock coverage um CUP requirements etc. So on the graphic um you can see what the overlay area was and the next slide please. Thank you. So the um the general plan amendment only not the zoning amendment not ordinance 2900 but the general plan amendment and the only the only provision of it was to change the FAR in the overlay overlay area from um from 2.5 to 6 that became the subject of

referendum activity. um sufficient signatures were gathered to certify a referendum petition that suspended the effectiveness of the general plan amendment. Um and the council did take action to um amend the zoning ordinance um that we call the ICO to make the um to basically restore the FAR and make it consistent with what was the initial FAR in the overlay because of this um suspension of the of the general plan amendment. And as we speak now and since then um the overlay ordinance has remained in effect with all those provisions. Next slide please. So the election code requires in the event of a successful referendum petition that the council really has two basic choices. Either repeal the challenge legislation completely or submit it to the voters. Um and and that really becomes a question. the submission to the voters becomes a question of timing. Um it's it must be at an at an election at a municipal election not less than 88 days after the council um decides to place the item on the ballot. It could be at a regular election or a special election. The council has two options for a regular election to save cost and consolidate it. either um um to take action tonight, to place it um uh before the voters um and consolidate it with the statewide primary election in June or to do that later, no later than the first meeting in August um so as to be able to consolidate that election with the general election in November 2026. Um the timing, we could satisfy the timing for either of those. And the reason why this is being brought to the council tonight is it would have to be tonight if the council wants to place that with

the statewide primary election. Next slide please. So um so so because of the successful referendum activity the um for the general plan amendment to be approved it must be approved by a majority of of the the the voters voting in that election. Um and if that occurs then the then the far in the overlay area will will increase from 2.5 to 6.0 I know was was originally intended by the council in enacting the general plan amendment part of the overlay. And I'll note also that would require the council make that same step that did earlier in response to the um signature gathering um only be the opposite action to to make the general plan and the zoning ordinance conform with each other by um by upping the the FAR or eliminating the dis the um inconsistency with the zoning ordinance. So, if the if the council places that um the general plan amendment on the ballot and it's rejected by the voters, then there's a a one-year prohibition on on on reenacting that same legislation. We've got on the slide the cost difference um between a consolidated election and one that is not consolidated. Next slide, please. um that I think we covered the dates, but if there's council questions, we'll be happy to go back to this slide. Next slide. So, I think that that we've covered the the options for you. At a high level, it's the council has the option tonight of repealing the general plan amendment for the overlay. Um and that would conclude the council's obligations um under the elections code. The council could also um order the

submission of the general plan amendment to the voters and it could do it either um tonight for the statewide primary election. It could wait and do it later um but no later than the first August meeting to to um to consolidate that election with the um the next municipal election um in November. Um or it could do it sometime in between at a special election. Um and and those are the council's options. And I'd be happy to Let's see. Is there I don't think that's any more slides. Nope. So that's council's choices. Be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Great presentation. Thank you. I think uh we've all live with this and probably feel like we know it. Um but if there are any council questions, we should do this now. Um I'm going to be clear that this is questions and not comment period. But um is there any council questions? Council member Barnacle. Yeah. If we didn't um put it on the June or the November or have a special election between them, does it just mean that it just basically ceases and dies on its own? I would advise you'd still need to take some time in there before August of 2026, take action to repeal and then you will have discharged your duties.

Okay. Thank you. because the the the voters are entitled to some certainty about what the status is, I think. Thank you. Okay. Well, let's go to public comment.

We did receive three comments ahead of the meeting. Uh and I do have several cards here. Uh but if anyone else would like to speak, now is the moment to submit a card. Our first speaker is Tom Bourneheimr and to be followed by Heather Cret. There's been so much money wasted on this already. I mean, my estimate is probably about 1.5 million. You still haven't collected the 800k from from EKN yet. Why waste money on a special election for this? Just resin this and move on. You only have one developer in line for something and they put forward a fourstory hotel. So they don't need the increase. There's no other developer that's asking for this. The whole process has been slipshot. It's really bad. You know, the whole idea of the overlays and stuff, twothirds of that overlay now has been wasted. That's money. That's our taxpayer money has been wasted. That's your taxpayer money that's been wasted. Just stop. Just just resend this and move on. Thank you. Thank you, Heather Krat, to be followed by Darren Rakazen. Um, so I assume you've already made your decision because No Before You Grow announced it this afternoon that you're going to repeal this. So I guess we're

just going through the motions. Um, I'm curious why is no before you go dictating if and when we'll have an election and is there they carry more weight than the 7,000 signatures that were collected? I think it's very bizarre, but we should not spend another dollar of taxpayer money on a project when they owe us money. And yeah, I really think you need to put a a lean on that property because they could tell turn around and sell it tomorrow. They already did the work to get the permit. Um and then we'd be out that million dollars or whatever they owe us. So, thank you.

Thank you. Um Darren Rakusen to be followed by Christine White. Thank you, council. I'm going to urge you to repeal this general plan amendment. Darren Rakinson have been on the planning commission for three and a half years, have been looking at reviewing this project since 2022 or 2023. Uh the red herring throughout has been the 6.0 zero F the project had three things in parallel the hotel the overlay the general plan amendment and I think for me uh there's a planning commission meeting where I'm going through general plan consistency and I point out how a 6.0 0 F is totally out of alignment with our uh general plan 2025 which is coming to a close that puts a limit of 2.5 F. It was explained to me in that meeting by community development director O that look we're looking toward the future and the upcoming general plan and this is the direction we want to head with this type of floor area ratio. Now that was I think in 2023. I think obviously the community didn't agree with that decision. Hence a referendum once this general plan amendment was filed. That's the city's way or that's the community's way of saying we don't believe in the 6.0 F. That was in the summer of 2025. It did not come to a head in a vote in November of 2025 when this was all still up in the air. But in December of 2025, a new general plan land use map was sent forward for environmental review and there is no 6.0 F. So we have effectively signaled we might not have had an election already but we had the culmination of thousands of hours of community land use discussion discussion by this committee and others on what the appropriate height and building size and scale um scope is things like F were discussed and we landed on a limit on that parcel of 4.0. So we're signaling our land use decision for the next 20 years right now is 4.0 on that property. So, we missed the chance for a vote when this was still up in the air. You

signaled your real land use direction and policy direction for the next 20 years. If we go back now and waste and get the community already in more division over this issue, waste the money on having the election and immediately countermand your signal policy direction with the general plan, that makes no sense on any front and it would look exceptionally I mean already the 6.0 F was a reach. like I said to do it now at this stage after you've adopted the big or sent a draft forward of a new plan that sets a totally different that does not follow the 6.0 F to do this now would be such an obvious loophole that you can't do that in good conscience that's not good policym it's not good leadership at this point there has been a compromise arrived at between the proponents for the 6.0 zero f between the hotel developer and other members of the community. Let's take that victory and move forward and just repeal this general plan amendment. Thank you.

Thank you, Christina White to be followed by Jane Hamilton.

Hello again. Thank you. So, it was my hope that no council member would be recused from voting or responding to items that impact our city and our citizens, especially since the Fair Political Practice Commission has the exception of public generally. So, I really hope that you'll take that into consideration because it impacts all of you and it impacts all of us. So, when Council Member Darly walked out, my district's voice walked out. So, that being said, uh it seems that EKN is committed to the four-story building. They found a way to make it pencil out. Repealing the general repealing the general plan amendment would save Pedaluma money and we all want business for Pedaluma, so it would allow EKN. But I do encourage you to please put a lean on the property because as it's been pointed out, should they decide to change their minds and not build and sell that property, we're not first in line to get money. Thank you.

Thank you. Jane Hamilton should be followed by Eric Sha Sher.

So you know what I'm going to say. Uh first I'm going to speak for Tom Lewis. he had to leave and he texted me what he wants to say and then I'm going to speak for me. Um, so first I have to find what he said. So he says this I'm being Tom now. Uh, best regards to the council and staff for a long meeting. I want to remind us that at one point last year despite all the challenges over the general plan amendment, we came to a moment of clarity and understanding regarding areas B and C. From the disas, it was agreed that areas B and C could be removed from the general plan amendment because there was no applications for development in those areas that will require a general plan amendment in the near future. Money and time was saved. Here we are at a similar moment today. We have a successful application for a compliant four-story structure in area A. There are no applications for development in area A for which a general plan amendment is needed, especially between now and the general plan update coming this fall. I think this is a moment we can all agree on. Let the general plan amendment go. Rescend it. No election needed. Save money and let's focus together as a community towards the update in the fall. Thank you. Okay, that was Tom. Now this is me. Uh, okay. Tonight is the lunar eclipse. Time for a reset. So, think about that. Uh, I'm going to say some things that other people have said. There's no longer a need for a vote of the public. EKN seems serious about the four-story version of their hotel. Actually, it's a lot less expensive for them. The general plan

update is coming in August, September. PHA and Renaissance Pedaluma are pretty excited about working together for the betterment of the downtown and moving forward together without division. And let's not throw good money after bad. So, I hope you will resend the general plan amendment and that we can all move forward together. Thank you, Eric Shear and Tom Gaffy.

Okay. Thank you all. Um, there is no longer a requirement for a six-story building in that area and I'm hoping you can see your way through to just let this thing go now. Uh, it was so good hugging Eliza Weber on Tuesday night and I'd love to keep those feelings going and you guys are the ones that can help us do that. And thank you for considering Thanks. And that closes public comment on the item. Brings it back up to council. Um, anybody who wants to weigh in? Council member Quint. I'd like to make a motion to repeal the uh the amendment.

Second. So, we have a motion uh by Quint, second by Barnacle, and further conversation on the motion. So, council member, now am I going to get to make a comment? you. We have a motion. He He has a prerogative of adding a motion, but the dialogue goes until we kind of agree the dialogue's done. So, yes, you do.

Okay. Well, I just want to remind everybody that I voted no on this two actions that we adopted a year ago. And all I wanted was a fourstory hotel in Paloma downtown. And I hope the Renaissance Pedaluma people will give me a hug because I was um on the wrong side for the last year and I was for the referendum and I want to thank the community who came out for that referendum. But um I will be supporting um the repeal of this uh general plan amendment.

Thank you. Council member Shrebs. Um, yeah, just first question just on the uh the new general plan that's coming up that we we are having within it and then the zoning and the ordinances will be matched to a F of 4.0. That is the plan and that's what's in our coming documents. Is that correct?

As was noted that there is in the in the direction you've given for the general plan to come back to you, it's a 4.0 0 far and it's not just in the overlay area, it's in in the broader downtown area. Um and and we'll we'll follow the general plan when the council approves the environmental document and the general plan with the zoning ordinance update, which will have to conform to what's in the general plan. And part of that, the council will have decisions about do you keep some of those other features that are in the overlay or not? But but the FAR is is in in accordance with your current direction going to be 4.0 in the downtown if that's what the council approves when the general plan comes for formal action.

Okay. Good. Which following my line of thought here. So uh the current hotel even though it's four stories has an F around 2.5 even though it's almost the full lot still only has a FAR of 2.5 even though it's only four stories. So there's other limitations involved besides F. Is that correct? Right. There's considerations of lock coverage. The um the FAR calculations a little complicated because of things like you know do subterranean levels count and wall thickness and all that stuff. But we've we've looked at it very Stephanie looked at that very carefully as

so let's see where I'm going is um because I think we have to split apart hotel and the actual overlay what was pointed out earlier Mr. talked about that earlier. It's not just for the hotel, it's for the entire future building downtown and we needed build density and we said yes, if it was a sixstory that might work. Um, but if we have an F of 4.0, unless there's other limitations, um, could a, uh, condo or senior living situation be developed that was still six stories with a F of 4.0 0 in that downtown area. Could that still happen given the current regulations we're proposing in the future general plan?

I don't know. It does some Oh, go ahead.

But Brian probably does. Go ahead. Go ahead. Um, so so with the 4.0 proposal and you provided um, council member just a couple different scenarios. There are through state density bonuses the ability to seek the additional height. Um but as it stands um with the updated general plan uh once once it gets adopted F4.0 that's one constraint. The other constraint is the um is the height uh which is still um will remain the same um for um for the change. And so that would be the additional constraint. The only wild card or extra consideration would be um what the state density bonus would allow for um additional height

just for affordable housing. Right. Right. Residential. Yeah. Yeah. So um I'm trying to get the point of okay the hotel is a done deal. Wait, four stories is great. We're all for we it's all moved forward as far as I know. Uh that's the plan. But I want to go back to the actual purpose of the overlay which was to get more highdensity housing done. We just passed asked for eight stories by the train station. What F would that building next eighttory? What F might be there? Is there any limitations on that?

There is um I don't have it with me at the moment. I believe the um proposal was F6 if I'm not mistaken, but um we did go into detail earlier this year um where we went line by line uh based on each of the different proposed land use designations. So each of them have a new proposed F to go with um with the height.

Okay. So it's still possible to build an eight story. the F may be six because some of it's four, some of it's eight, but um the total average is going to be like probably 6.0 or less for for that structure there. So, we can still build all these things we want to build with the without this 6.0 overlay. Yes. Uh although I do want to clarify there's a a little bit of a context. So the um specific to the discussion that we had about eight stories 6.0 uh that was by the train station. So I don't know if I would compare that to the discussion the council had about uh sort of the downtown core which was a different um discussion. That's the one that's being proposed to go to a 4.0 F.

Right.

Yeah. So yeah, the currently like the overlay we have now and this is because there's nobody going to be building between now and um this end of the year or proposals coming in at for the downtown area. So So I'm just talking about the future that uh the next 25 years and the what we're putting together that um that if we just completely get rid of the 6.0 know now since I but we what is the future building that we could still do with the current plan uh that we're about to update? Can we get above a fourstory in the downtown area? Again, it depends uh how you're defining downtown area, but if we're just talking about our downtown and we're going to use the EKN site as an example, um the community city council planning commission or general plan advisory committee has had uh a very thorough discussion and the point has um we've gotten to this point of a 4.0 F. And so that would be one development consideration, but it really depends on what proposal would come in. So if it's a housing project, then they could seek that additional state density.

Okay. Good. I just wanted to get bit clear on on where we're going versus what we're doing. Okay. Good. I'm clear now. Okay. Um great. And uh do we have any comments down?

Uh just that I hope it gets built that you know a project approved is not a project built. We've got plenty of examples of those all over the city. And so I certainly hope that we can get up there and cheers on top of the the deck or in the speak easy or something like that. Um because if we don't I think we'll probably be back trying to approve a four um F something because we do want to see something happen there. So um yeah. Okay. So, um, you know, I I I u I'm happy that we're at this day and it's really fun to agree with Heather Krat uh that no more money should be spent after this thing now. I think we've hit the finish line on it and um it was a great opportunity. I think what we saw tonight with the animal service thing is our needs um our expenses are rising faster than our revenue and this council's got a responsibility to fund those human and animal needs that we're uh trying to fund. So, um, it's important that we find an alternate revenue if we're not going to have this revenue. It was well intended. I love that at this moment everybody that spoke so much vile online social media stuff and who, you know, who showed their worst selves on social media, uh, I hope that they're all back in the peace and love camp now. So, um, you know, so that council member now can can go into Dela and so, uh, you know, all of us can no longer be doing that hurtful thing. Um, and you know, I remember being in Jane's Jane Hamilton's kitchen with Tom Gaffy, Tom Lewis, and uh, Lydia Alen, uh, right at the beginning of this thing, and they said, "All we want is a four-story hotel and not not five, not six." And and I said, "But if you get that, will you back that?" And at that meeting back like, is that two years now? They said, "Yes, that's what we want." And so even though a lot of the public is still online trashing the hotel and everything, you

have to realize that the players who invest in being involved are credible people, be they on the council or in the audience. It's all about good people having differing opinions. And um so uh I'm very happy we're at this moment. We have a motion and a second. Barnacle and and Quint. And I'd like a roll call vote, please. I'm I'm sorry. before the roll call just to confirm and that's to adopt attachment three which is the resolution to repeal the general plan amendment. Right. And that's correct. Thank you. Thanks for re reiterating Barnacle. Hi. Kater Thompson. Yes. D Carly is recused now.

Yes. Quint. Yes. Shri. Yes. McDonald. Yes. Motion carries six to zero. Thank you very much. A very good day. That moves us to inviting our council member Q's council member in. And uh with that we are adjourned for the evening. Thank you very much. I haven't been able to go to eon because of anger but they were so but they were so intimidated all along.