City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay, we're going to come out of closed session and close that special meeting. But before we do that, we have some reportable action, and I'll turn that over to our attorney.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. In accordance with Government Code Section 54957.1, we're reporting that the council voted unanimously to appoint Michael Webb as the interim city manager.

All right. Congratulations, Michael. Thank you. All right. Some general reminders as we get going of city writing public participation. Members of the public are invited to participate in city council meetings, either in person or remotely using the city's online public comment platform located on the city's website and instructions are included on the agenda. Meeting agendas and staff reports are available at the website www.cityofredding.gov and also in the public view binder located on the podium on the north side of the chambers. We're going to call this meeting to order and we're going to start with the Pledge of Allegiance if you can rise with me. I'm just gonna say a few words before we get going today. We had a very tragic loss in our city. Our city manager William passed away and it's been very hard in the city, the family, the children. His wife, we think of them. William was a great family man. He loved his children. He loved his family. William loved the city of Reading. And we lost a very, very good man. We're going to take a moment of silence for 15 or 30 seconds. And then from there, we're going to transition to our invocation with Colin from the Reading Nazarene Church. So if you'll please rise with me, and we'll take a moment of silence for William. He's a great man.

All right, thank you.

Let us pray. Gracious God, as we gather to conduct the business of our city, we pause and we acknowledge the profound loss of city manager William Tarbo. We give thanks for his willingness to answer the call to public service. for the gifts he shared with this community and for the integrity, courage and dedication that marked his leadership. Today we especially lift before you his wife, his children and all who loved him. We ask that you would surround them with your comfort in these difficult days. May they know that they do not carry their grief alone and may they find strength, peace, and hope in the love of family, friends, and this community. We also pray for the members of the City Council, for City staff, and for all who worked alongside William. In the midst of sorrow, grant them wisdom for the decisions before them, courage to lead with integrity, and grace to treat one another with patience, compassion, and respect. Remind us that behind every title is a person, behind every public decision is a human story, and that our shared work is ultimately about serving our neighbors and seeking the common good. And so as this council begins the important task of charting the next steps for our city, may the values that William sought to embody, honesty, faithful stewardship, and a commitment to the future of Reading, may they continue to inspire those who follow. And may this evening's deliberations be marked by wisdom, humility, and a sincere desire to serve all the people of Reading. And in a time of unexpected loss, may we find renewed resolve to care for one another with kindness and hope. Amen.

Thank you.

Okay, we're going to start this meeting with a roll call.

Council Member Odette? Here. Vice Mayor DeNuka?

Present.

Council Member Munz?

Here.

Council Member Reznor? Present. And Mayor LaTaw?

Here. All right, before we get into public comment, just a couple housekeeping things and announcements. We are pulling item 9.11. It's Public Works. That's where we were going to consider the report of providing an update for the City of Reading Pump Station 1 replacement project that's going to come back to a future meeting. So if you are here for that item today and plan to speak, we just thought you should know in advance that 9.11F It is not going to be considered today. There's also a public hearing today. We are going to continue that to a future date, the second week of August. I didn't have that item in front of me, but if you wanted to give some remarks to that, continue into that item, Michael.

Yeah, thank you, Honorable Mayor. Item 6.4, I believe, is the item that you're referring to. We're going to be, staff is requesting a continuance for that item. We would recommend that you open it at its regular agendized schedule. However, we won't be discussing that in detail this evening. And we'll bring that back at a further meeting, very likely the second meeting in August.

Thank you. And just for the public, just so you know, item 6.4, that was going to be a public hearing to consider the adoption of a resolution to adjust the city's schedule of fees and service charges. And so that will be continued to the second meeting in August. I believe that's August 18th, I believe. And so again, if you're here for that tonight, it's good that we let you know that. All right, moving forward to our opportunity for public comment. We have six speakers here that I'm aware of. I'm gonna call your name. I'm gonna ask that you line up on the wall over there just so we can be respectful of time and we can keep this meeting moving along. And so if you hear your name, can you come on up and line up? We have Tiffany. I'm going to butcher that last name. I'm sorry, Otobani, or correct me when you get up there. I have Chris Begley, Michael, Richard, Robert, no last name, Leslie Sawyer, Nick, and a Kim Mousen. So if you guys could all please line up and make your way up to the wall. We'll start with you, Tiffany, and I'm sorry if I mispronounce your last name.

That's okay. It's Aduboni.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for allowing me to speak today. I'm a little nervous. I'm here to provide just basically a brief presentation on an event coming up August 1st and August 2nd here. It's called Lake Redding Regatta. I'm one of the co-directors. My other co-director, Danny Orloff, who is a tourism and marketing director for Visit Reading, is actually up in Oregon right now at a Destinations International Conference. In 2024, Danny and I revised a modernized version of the Lake Reading Regatta. That's an event that originally began in 1927 as the Water Carnival through the Junior Reading Chamber of Commerce. The original regatta first began in 1933, running annually until 1939. It featured jet boat and swimming races, diving competitions off the Diesel Horse Bridge. We will not be doing that. Beauty pageants, long games, fireworks, and dances in Lake Reading Park. And it drew thousands from around the region and became one of the biggest tourism draws for Reading. After the war and the construction of the dam, the event fizzled out. Today we're proud to partner with Shasta Historical Society to honor that tradition. This is a huge community celebration that we started two years ago to bring the residents together and just celebrate the Sacramento River there because it is beautiful and it's an asset to the community. We partner with our local public safety agencies volunteers other organizations and sponsors to provide a family-friendly event. We will have face painting for kids, interactive games for kids, food trucks, local vendors, a historic whaling ship exhibition, as well as classic cars. As far as the racing goes, we have crew racing, performance kayak racing, stand-up paddle boarding, competitions on Saturday evening with recreational events, paddling events, and the championships from the crew races and performance boating on Sunday. We just want the community to come out and enjoy this safe family event. Any questions?

All right. Thank you so much for coming. Thank you. All right, Chris, if you're here, you're up.

Hello, nice to see you all again. I'm becoming a familiar face, I'm sure, with some of you. But we're with the River Ranch subdivision, and as you all know, we're against the jail and the rehabilitation center for felons being built right next to our community. We have roughly 100 homes there. And we went to a planning commission meeting, and they freely admitted that they didn't do any research on the thing before they okayed it. Never went down there. Never talked to us. We came here and talked to you and almost all of you said that you didn't realize it was next to a community neighborhood. And we've been to the Board of Supervisors meeting. I wish somebody would listen to what we're saying. There's a lot of damage that's going to be done to our community and we're just kind of floundering thinking that Everybody that runs for this council or board is more concerned about bringing finances into this county instead of protecting your constituents. And that should be your main goal is make sure that your constituents are taken care of. I'm sure that if you put this out for a vote, Most of the county would say, no, we don't want it here. I don't know why the city is putting something like that in Ostrosity and to Shasta County. We don't need it. We don't want it. And I would really hope that you'd really think twice about doing that.

Thank you, Chris. All right, Michael, if you're here.

Hey, good evening. My name is Michael Reichard and first I'd like to start off with my condolences to Mr. William Tarbell and his family and then to the council and city members. I did watch a bunch of you on the news this morning. It's pretty heartwarming to see your affection towards that. Part of my speech wasn't involved in this, but after hearing the prayer earlier, you guys need to go back and listen to that prayer and listen to every word in there, what he talked about and how it affects you and this community. There's a lot of heartfelt stuff in there that will come back to you when you listen to it word for word. And that's my agenda. It's the same thing with this neighborhood, if you want to call it jail, the MCP, ACP, whatever you want to call it. If your words don't mean anything anymore, the non-transparency behind this agenda is overwhelming. So many citizens to this day still have not even heard about this until what's going on with media or social media. We went to a court hearing, I did, about a month ago, to see what the allowance was for a biologist to go in there and look on the benefit of the people that are trying to stop this going in. The city and the county attorneys asked for it to be dropped because it was costing money from the taxpayers and it keeps going up. So why are they fighting the taxpayers and the people that vote for you? People that are supposed to protect us. Second, the question was asked with Mr. Danuka. We had a meeting with him. What is the cap on the money spent to fight this? His response is there isn't. It's in the budget. So are we fighting with who has the most money? Are we fighting to do what's the right thing? We are fighting to do the right thing. Obviously, with this comment, the budget means you have no end of money. That's actually our money. We're the taxpayers. We don't need to coddle criminals in our county. This is a lose-lose for the city or the county. The plants running this on earth, why would we want this in our county? Our county jail, Doesn't need no imports. They're doing remodeling on it right now, today. Why are we going to keep spending money to start another one? You have the old courthouse, which was the plan by the city and the county when the new courthouse was planned. What happened to that plan? There are 58 counties in California. Only six or seven agreed or asked for the money for this program. Why are we, the people of this county, asking for this? We don't want it. This program in our county, yet alone on this property, the city council at the time of the building of the treatment plant promised it would always be a buffer zone. Back when a man's word meant something. You guys have the authority to revoke the lease. We're asking you to revoke the lease. We do not need this in our county. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Michael. Robert?

Good evening, board or council. We need a jail. The county has kicked the can down the road for many years. Time would be better spent in education on how to become a self-sustaining community which takes responsibility for their own public safety and the accompanying value and necessity of a minimum sales tax set aside just for the jail. There's no other way. The majority of our current county and our city politicians, in my opinion, haven't the will to do the right thing for the people they're called to serve. It seems they're more interested in re-election. If I'm wrong, councillors, I'm open to meeting with you offline. Here are some things to consider. Instead of pushing an adult daycare center for low-level male offenders, which nobody wants here, promote the jail concept, which was unceremoniously dropped a couple of years ago in favor of distractions and non-essential items. We've lost a few years' worth of momentum in actively working towards a jail. Because it was not placed on the ballot for the people to decide in foster education on weaning off the county, off the government dole, the ball dropped. As I'll say to the board and to you, please do everything you can to get the momentum back. True public safety is mission critical and must come before non-mission critical projects. There's someone who's fairly new in the county who ran for representative position. She's a dynamic leader for government or corrections. I'll put you in touch with her to at least meet and chat. Thanks.

All right. Thank you, Robert. Leslie.

Hello, welcome, thank you for having us. Mr. Tarbo was a huge loss to our city. We needed him so badly and he was here for such a short period of time and did so much. probably more than our last study manager did the entirety of his career here. So huge loss. And I hope you guys all understand that. Congratulations, Michael. You've been here. You're working. I hope we can work together and kind of address some of those issues he was working on and see that same sort of progress go forward. Because I would really hate to see it stop while we're in the search for a permanent manager. And if you can keep that progress going, maybe that can help you get to that position if that's what you're aspiring to do. I'm going to try to come at this from a different angle from here on out. I've been absent a lot because I am taking on some state legislative positions where we're tracking legislation and working at the state level. Because every time we do something here locally, the state comes back and says, huh, nice try, no thanks. So rather than banging my head against the wall trying to get local control, which is how our government's supposed to work, to work for us, I'm going to take our battles to the state. That being said, I think there's some things that we need to address at the state level. We have some representatives here representing the North State that are not doing such a great job representing the North State. In fact, they're absent on a lot of votes and that's very unfortunate. But the good news is we have people who are representing us. And I think that the entire North State owes a great debt of gratitude to Joe Patterson, who picked up James Gallagher's mantle when he left to become our congressman in place of the great Doug LaMalfa. And he is carrying forward AB 2700-2700. That is the one that holds utility companies accountable when they do massive... damage to communities, and I think that that is great. That has passed the Assembly and the Senate completely, unanimously, no opposition, and I hope that that carries forward, but that's going back in about a week and a half, two weeks. And I think that all of our communities owe Joe Patterson a great debt of gratitude. Also, since we're speaking of James Gallagher and his short-term filling Doug LaMatha's big giant shoes, he has brought $155 million to our Sacramento River Basin. I think we all need to pay attention to that and be grateful for that. But also, he's working to push through H.R. 845, which would delist the gray wolves. So I think that we have some great people working for us. We have some other people we need to hold accountable to represent us a little better. And I think that us as a city need to start coming together and fighting the state because that's where they're holding us back. Thank you.

Thank you, Leslie. Nick.

Well, I just came up here to thank you for keeping the field house open out at Big League Dreams. The hockey program's just really doing a great job out there. My son started playing hockey when he was 10, and it was a struggling entity that hadn't been going but a couple of years, and they were begging people to coach, and I didn't know a damn thing about hockey. coaching hockey or hockey, but I coached. And the kids that I coached, they're adults now. My son's 37. And all the kids out there, they've got kids now, and they're running the program. And it's going great guns out there. And I just wanted to give you guys and... The recreational department, a pat on the back for opening that up and keeping it going because it's quite an asset to our community, and I wanted to let you know it's appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you, Nick. Did you try the food?

Did you buy a beer?

As a matter of fact, I did. It's really good. Good. That's who I wanted to mention. Thank you, Travis Mance. For some reason, your first name slipped my mind. Things slip my mind anymore, but I usually catch up with them. But no, the Black Sheep Gastro Pub, that's a really nice setup out there, and I hope it goes full guns because I understand it's important that it does well to keep it open. But pay attention to that hockey. That's a major asset to our community. Thank you.

All right. Hockey and food. Thank you. Kim.

Hi. Thank you so very much for letting me speak. I am also a resident of the River Ranch area, and I am here to tell you that I would really like to introduce I would like to tell you that I really don't want this jail to come into our area. There is a large, not only is our little neighborhood right adjacent to it, but there is a nice neighborhood right across the 273 that's going to be impacted also with these people just wandering around out there. It's a bunch of young people that live in that area that are just now starting their families, and it's places that they can afford to buy. So I really think that we need to think twice about putting this jail facility there, where we're going to be bringing in all these other... inmates that are going to be just a day program where they can come out. I don't know where we're going to get the jobs for these people or where we're going to get the housing for their families and friends as they're going to want to come up while they're in the program. So again, I just want to let you know that I'm against this jail facility going in next to our little neighborhood. And we're all a little afraid. And we're actually losing revenue from our homes. The prices of our homes have already dropped tremendously. So thank you again. And I just want to reiterate, please don't put this jail next to our neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you, Kim, for coming. That closes our public comment. We're going to move to our consent calendar. The consent calendar contains items considered routine and or which have been individually scrutinized by city council members and are anticipated to require no further deliberation. It shall be the prerogative of any council member before the consent calendar is acted upon to, one, comment on an item, two, respond to any public comment on an item, three, request the record, reflect, and Abstention or nay vote on an item or four, remove an item and place it on the regular portion of the agenda for delivery of a staff report and or an extended discussion or deliberation. I don't think I saw any public comment on consent calendar today. I'll entertain a motion from council or any questions.

I'll make a motion to approve consent. I'll second.

Okay we have a first and a second. I don't see any other comments so we'll take a vote. All in favor? Aye. All right very good. We're moving along. We start with our public hearing 6.1. City manager so or good. I'm sorry.

We got good evening members of council My name is Jason Jablisco management assistant to the city manager and I will be presenting on item 6.1 So this item is a required public hearing under the federal tax equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act or TEFRA Reading School of the Arts has requested that the California Enterprise Development Authority issue up to $13 million in tax-exempt revenue bonds to finance improvements and expansion of its educational facilities. The council's action tonight is limited to satisfying a federal requirement that a public hearing be held and that the governing body where the project is located approve the bond issuance for tax-exempt purposes. This action does not approve the project itself or any land use entitlements. Additionally, there is no fiscal impact or liability to the city. The bonds are the sole responsibility of the borrower and all repayment obligations remain with the borrower, not the city. Staff recommends conducting the public hearing and following its conclusion, adopting the resolution. I am available for any questions as well.

All right, thank you.

Thank you for that. We're going to open up our public hearing. And there is no comment that I'm aware of, so we're gonna close this public hearing. And I'll entertain any questions or a motion from council.

I don't have any questions, but I'll make a motion to approve staff recommendation and adopt resolution.

I'll second. We have a first, second. I don't see any other comments. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. All right, that passes 5-0. So we have another public hearing. We get to do a lot of these. 6.2, public hearing to consider adopting resolutions regarding the Landscape Maintenance District's annual assessments for fiscal year 2026 and 2027. Let's see if you can be a little faster.

I doubt it. Thank you, Honorable Mayor, members of the Council. I'm Travis Minney, Director of Community Services and Airports. And I can talk really fast, but I cannot get through this any faster. because we are here tonight to adopt our annual LMD assessments. So we'll just go through kind of what LMDs are, how they work, and some notable changes. So LMDs are property-based assessments that are authorized by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. They consist of things like frontages, parks, open space areas, fire fuel management. They can be medians. Most are found in subdivisions but some are actually associated with things like shopping centers or other kind of commercial developments. We currently have 53 LMDs that require a yearly assessment adoption which is what we are doing here tonight and there are 68 locations and these LMDs benefit 5,963 properties. So how do these work? What are the mechanics of LMDs? It's essentially a cost split between benefit units. And benefit units are the individual properties that receive the benefit from the associated improvement. That can be landscaping, that can be trees, that could be a park, trails, things like that. So each year, our staff prepares an engineer's report, which is required to establish the maximum assessment and the levy by evaluating historical cost to maintain the improvements and the estimated cost to maintain in the next year. So we're setting fees now for the next year. So it's a little bit of a predictive game based on our historical numbers. Individual benefit units pay the levy through their property taxes. So this would come on your, I think every six months you'd get a property tax bill from the county and there's an LMD assessment that is attached to that. The assessment is normally, it cannot be above the levy, but it can match the levy, and there's a few cases where that does happen. But essentially, the levy is the maximum allowable, or sorry, the levy is the cost that you pay. The assessment is the maximum allowable cost. So that maximum allowable cost for most LMDs will continue to march up through the construction cost index escalator. And There's a few exceptions to that that we'll go through. But essentially, the important part is LMT members pay the levy, not the assessment. Most assessments are adjusted annually by that CCI number. Three years ago, that was 8.9%. It was a big year. Two years ago, it was 2.7%. Last year, it was 1.9%. This year, it was 2.7%. So it's more of a regular adjustment that we're seeing. So a couple exceptions to the way the LMDs function are LMDs A, B, and C. so these ones are a little odd they do not have an escalator built into them so there's no way to raise the assessment so the levies and the assessments are flat which causes issues in those lmds so these are lmds that would struggle that actually can go negative and we're working to correct those by curtailing services in order to make adjustments we intended to reform those lmds in this fiscal year we had some staff turnover and we were not able to do that that is a project we will undertake in the next fiscal year The report, levies, and assessments must be approved by council and filed with the county to make it on the property tax roll. So that is why this item has to go tonight, because there is a timeline with the county so that they may be enrolled. So you might be asking what it pays for. The actual fee that a homeowner would pay or a property owner would pay is the direct cost of maintenance, repairs, utilities, and some administrative fees for the city and the county. Most maintenance is actually handled by a contractor, and our current contract is held by McIntyre Landscaping, which expires this year. So we're looking to figure out the next steps on that as well. My next slide here. So the difference between the maximum we can charge and the amount that the levy, that we actually levy is in many cases very substantially different because like I said, the assessment will continue to march up while the levy actually reflects our true costs to maintain those LMDs. So as with last year, the average levy is 32% below the assessment. And in some cases, it's 70% or more below the actual levy. Or below the actual assessment, sorry. Even I get them confused. This is done to keep costs down and allow us to respond year over year as our needs changes in those LMDs. So imagine a car takes out a fence or a bunch of landscaping. Sometimes we can recover that from an auto insurance policy. Sometimes we can't. So if we want to bring the LMD back into... what people expect it to look like and the expected amenities, we'll have to change the fee up or down and sort of modulate that over the years to meet the expected target for the funds that we need to make those improvements. So, and I'll actually give you a case of how that's working over the years in a specific LMD. So on average, if you look at all of the LMDs, they've actually increased this year by a little bit over that CCI amount, 2.9%. But if you weight that by the unit count, because some LMDs have one unit. Like if you look at the Lowe's LMD, it's one unit. So when you weight that, it's actually a 1.76% across the board. There's obviously differences in every single LMD, and we'll go through a few of those. But... In total, it's not that big of a swing. So if we want to drill down a little bit, 16 LMDs are going down by an average of 11.21%, 30 are going up by an average of 9.84%, and seven have no change. We did touch on LMDBs. Those are quite difficult and we will be working to reform those, but we're going to match our expenses to our revenue this year in order to start marching toward zeroing that out so that it is self-funded while we are reforming that. So we're trying to stop it from going more negative this year. So it will have some effects, but unless the city wants to take over that LMD and be the funder, which is not proposed tonight, we have to reform that LMD or find a different mechanism for it. So we will continue to explore that and bring something back to council in the future about LMDs. So let's go over some notable changes. We are going to go through a handful of these. I say notable changes are anything over 10%, which for some LMDs, that could be $10 a month different, up to several hundred. But it really just depends on the size of the LMD and the amount of units in it. But what I want to track specifically for you that isn't over 10% is the 2% increase to River Park Highlands, 2.7. So last year we actually increased that to the maximum that it could be because it has substantial irrigation failures and you have to build up a reserve fund over several years because you cannot exceed the maximum assessment. you have to slowly work your way up to get enough funds to be able to do that project. So that levy is up again by the CCI amount and it will remain there until the fund is built up at which point we can do the project and reduce the actual levy again. So I just wanted to track that one because we've been talking about that for a few years now so we'll continue to report on that every year. A handful of other notable changes are an 11.9% increase to Shastina Ranch. We are building up the equipment replacement fund. As you know, we have a park out there. It was actually reduced 48% last year, so it's a slight correction to make sure that we maintain that fund balance when we need to replace that equipment. That is built up over the years, so you would be able to replace a playground or swing set or whatever other feature ages out over time. Roll the button. River Heights, the levy increased 15% to build reserves for a future anticipated mulch replacement. So this is how we maintain our LMDs and build up the reserve again to buy the materials. Luke Estates, the levy increased over 25% due to a negative beginning fund balance. That one is essentially trying to true it up. So it has to keep growing to be able to true that up and then build up that reserve. That way you can have those modulations over time without affecting the LMD rate because you have a little bit of a buffer in your account. So we're attempting to do that and start building that up this year. The Nicollet Estates LMD increased 37% for a similar issue. It had an unbudgeted fence replacement in 2019, or 2020, and the district didn't have sufficient reserves, so we had to basically support that expense and collect the fees back over time. Clover Acres, 18% increase, or sorry, decrease, this is a good one, because the reserve actually met its target. So we're able to go back down now that we have a healthy reserve and, again, weather the storm if things happen in that LMD. A few other ones, the Sonata LMD decreased 13% because the existing fund balance is sufficient to cover anticipated operating and maintenance expenses. Rivercrest Estates also decreased 14.7%. We had a project out there. The project is complete. Irrigation replacement is now done so we can bring that fee back down. Westside LMD decreased 12.7%. The current balance was brought up over the years and now it exceeds the annual expenses so we're actually able to turn that back down. so that we can again true that up. So that's kind of the case with most of these is you make a prediction based on historical data and you try to have a healthy reserve. That way if there's something like a major failure, you are able to absorb that and then you have to make adjustments throughout the year or through every year that we take this item to be able to predict those changes. and true up where we need to. Windham Point, the Rio LMD decreased by 13.8%. Again, sufficient balance. And the villages at Shasta View, the existing fund is sufficient and we can now bring that back down. So those are really the over 10% changes that I like to highlight. And really, unless there's any specific questions on those, I would conclude my presentation by recommending that council holds the public hearing and approves the resolutions affirming the maps of the districts and the annual assessments and levies for fiscal year 2026 to 2027 and authorizes the city manager or their designee to appropriate the revenues and expenses accordingly by each LMD within this report. And with that, I can take any questions or wait till the end.

Well, we, do you have a question real quick? Well, let's do our public hearing and see how many people come from the public. So, we're going to open up a public hearing. There's no speakers. We're going to close this public hearing. Travis, you must have done a very good job explaining all that for the public today. So, very good job. Council Member Munz, you had a question?

I have, yes, I have two. Who does the work for the LMD? Who hires them and who holds them accountable?

So the LMD work is generally performed by McIntyre Landscaping. There is some city staff that does some work like gardeners at specific parks where we have a playground, things like that. They don't do that maintenance at McIntyre. The person that holds them accountable is my department. That position lives within the parks division and they are constantly investigating, inspecting the work. And we are in charge of utility bills and everything like that. And when we hold them accountable, it's, you know, a phone call, this LMD isn't up to standards or the work isn't, you know, if you're missing an area, something like that. So we actually investigate those continually.

So I just call you or have somebody call you if you're.

Yeah, we actually call the parks main line for that.

Okay. All right.

There's a phone number on our website and that we get you to the right person.

Thank you. I don't see any other questions. I'll entertain a motion from the council today.

I'll make a motion to approve items 1, 2, and 3.

I'll second. Okay, we have a first and a second. Let's take a vote. All in favor? Aye. That passes. We've got a little thing going here. Thank you. Thank you, Travis. We're getting really good at these public hearings, so we're going to do another one. Public Works 6.3, public hearing to consider the resolution regarding sanitary sewer maintenance district, Hope Lane and Seven Bridges. All right.

Good evening, Honorable Mayor. Brian Bailey, Assistant Director of Public Works, will be giving this presentation this evening, so I'll hand it over to him. Okay. Thank you.

Good evening, Honorable Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Ryan Bailey, Assistant Director of Public Works. As you mentioned, we'll keep the ball rolling with maintenance districts and public hearings. Real quick, we'll review briefly what a sanitary sewer maintenance district is, the ones we have for the City of Reading, and brief assessment and levy information. Sanitary sewer maintenance district are used for funding the maintenance and operational costs of local lift stations. Lift stations are the facilities that collect wastewater at a low point in an area and then pump it up to a higher point where the sewer can then continue to gravity feed down to eventually our two wastewater treatment plants. Lift stations aren't very common in our subdivisions. And so therefore, for instance, what we're here tonight for is the maintenance districts are formed. So the upstream parcels of that subdivision are only affected and or bear the costs of the maintenance of the lift stations. The two sanitary maintenance districts we're looking at tonight are Hope Lane and Seven Bridges. Both were conditioned when they were formed at time of development and were approved and for the respective subjects. So essentially at the time their map was approved, the assessment districts performed during development period. Formation was accomplished under the Improvement Act of 1911, which authorizes local agencies to fund the maintenance of infrastructure. So basically, property owners within these districts are levied on an annual assessment, very similar to the landscape maintenance districts, and they're on the property tax bill, and they all share the cost. Only the costs associated with the maintenance and operation are charged. So essentially the monthly inspection for our crews are out there on a monthly, weekly basis for routine maintenance, utility costs. There is a reserve for larger replacement projects, such as pump replacements and whatnot, and then administrative fees for these assessment districts. The maximum assessment has been imposed on the districts at the time of their formation. So it's an estimated cost. And then from there, they're increased on the construction cost index. The actual levied amount will vary depending on the anticipated cost of the fiscal year. Essentially, we look at the year prior to what the costs were for that lift station and then adjustment there for the next year. First one, Hope Lane, was formed in 2008. There's 52 parcels associated with this lift station. There's a picture of it there. As you can see, it's a little tucked away. Many people don't even know it's there. For this fiscal year, 26-27, the maximal assessment per lot would be $546,000. However, the levy per lot is $278,000, which is the actual cost to maintain that lift station.

The second maintenance district was Seven Bridges.

It was formed in 2019. There's 74 current parcels associated with it. It will have a future build-out across Oasis for an additional 53 parcels or so. So total future build-out will be 127 parcels. The levied amount per lot is $198, which is also the maximum assessment for this district. The other assessment district we have, which currently there's no levy for, is Salt Creek Heights, essentially. As you can see, kind of similar to the picture, there are currently no homes built for this subdivision or in this, essentially, unit. Therefore, the station is city title. It's not being used, so therefore no levy being used. At the time those homes are built out, the assessment district will start, and then the levies will start being built out to the parcels. For basically the past five years, kind of historical assessments, you can see Hope Lane has the levy has been less than the maximum assessment. And then versus Seven Bridges, which is basically the opposite, the maximum assessment has been the levied amount each year. Kind of chart of it, you can kind of see based on the CCI what's being levied in the maximum assessment. And just some people may ask why Seven Bridges is less than Hope Lane. Just for example, Hope Lane has less homes in that subdivision, 54. So that levy gets spread out a little bit less or more based on Seven Bridges. There's also been some different upgrades being there roughly 12 years old or difference in age. So different requirements from the city on the lift stations and whatnot. with that. Any questions? So essentially looking to confirm the map and assessment district as contained in the engineers reports and then approve and confirm the annual assessment of ordering the levees amounts.

Thank you for choosing appropriate graphics for all your slides today. We're going to start with the public hearing. There is no comment. And so we're going to close this public hearing, and I will entertain comments or a motion from the council. Motion to approve.

Second.

All right. I see no other comments there, so we'll take a vote. All in favor? Aye. That passes. Thank you very much. All right, again, a reminder on our public hearing for 6.4, public hearing to consider the adoption of resolution to adjust the city's schedule of fees and service charges. We have continued that to a future meeting. Do we need to open that? Yes. We still need to open that? Yes. Okay. Before we do that, was there going to be any comments taken from council before we open a hearing or?

Yeah, it would be, good evening again, Honorable Mayor and Council. It would be my recommendation that after opening the public comment and then taking any comments from the public, that Council provide any direction or any subsequent information they would like to see when staff brings this back at the subsequent meeting, which would be on August 18th. So it's my understanding that a few of you do have a desire for some additional background or context, so getting that would help us as well. Thank you.

There might be comments from others, but I might start with a question I'd like to see come back as I understand that with the current fee structure there is a hit to our general fund of about one and a half million dollars a year to our general fund to help subsidize the gap. Is that about an accurate figure or is that, am I understanding that correctly?

I don't have the numbers right in front of me today, but the number that I have heard is approximately around $1 million, yes.

$1 million, okay. I thought I heard one and a half earlier. My question is, which I'd like to see come back, is if we do increase the fees, is that going to close the gap of the entire $1 million, or is it just going to make a dent in that? Because I would have consideration to say if we don't increase the fees and if we do nothing, and if it's really not going to make that much of an impact to our general fund, That would be part of my consideration there. So I'd like to have a little bit more data as far as how much that is going to actually close the gap by increasing the fees. And I know the increase is minimal in some areas, but everything adds up and things do continue to cost more. And that's just part of my feedback as far as I understand how it closes the gap there.

So, Councillor Audet, I see you there for a comment.

There was nobody.

There was nobody to speak today, so.

Okay, so it would be really helpful. We do these yearly. It would be helpful to see the last few years the increase to these rates so we have some perspective on the escalation of these costs. So I would want to see maybe the last three years of what those incremental increases have been just to see how far we're actually going. with these fees. And then I would like a recommendation from the developers or DIYers that whatever that working group was, I'd like something from them. So if they approve, if they don't approve, if they have notes for us, I don't want to, I want there to be something that comes from that working group. that gives us some direction on what their thoughts are for this. So I don't know if you then need to call them in or what needs to happen. I know you're saying you didn't get a response from them, but I wouldn't want to move forward without that happening. So if those two things can try to be addressed, that would be great.

Certainly. And just a clarifying question on the second suggestion there. Are you referring to the working group that you, I, Director Pagan, and a few others sat down with maybe 18 months or so ago with some contractors and developers, or are you referring to the development impact fee stakeholder group that we're currently working through for impact fees?

When I had asked for it the first time, Jeremy said that he had a group that he had reached out to before. I was not aware of who that group was, but he said he had a group that he had done some, I would have assumed maybe similar feedback because we do this every year for the fees, said that he had in mind a group I just have not heard from that group, and I don't know who that group is, but I'm assuming Jeremy knows who that is.

Yeah, Mr. Pagan worked with the group, I believe it was around 18 months or so ago. It was a mixture of developers, engineers, architects.

The one that we sat down with?

That's correct. Okay. I believe that was the group. Oh, okay. And we can certainly reach out to them again and prompt a response from them.

Okay, that would be great. I don't know if there was any DIYers in that group.

I don't recall because if my memory is correct, I believe that.

focus of that meeting was specifically around development not necessarily the di wires replacing a hot water heater right or that type of stuff so we'll just maybe we can meet with jeremy and figure out a good mix so we can get it so we can we can get you know some perspective um and then yeah then we can go over the details of it at the next meeting certainly thank you

Thank you, Councillor Odette. Was there any other questions or feedback, Councillor Muntz? Yes.

From my simple brain, this was from both these fees were quite a bit to digest in the short period of time for myself. Do we have longer or maybe segmented and given it shorter? I mean, I went through all of them and it took me a considerable amount of time. And the one that I, do you need further on what I spoke with you earlier today, or do you reiterate that? The response for the fire department on DUI accidents?

No, I have that jotted down, thank you.

Okay, all right. I have others at home that I'll call you about, but I was just, it is pretty extensive, and they're just all over the place, and just trying to figure out, I mean, I got it, it just took me a long time, that's all.

I'll work with staff to strategize to figure out what would be the best way to share the information with this body and the public. But keep in mind that the official ordinance will be the long laundry list, for lack of a better term, of all the various fees. And I can definitely sympathize and understand that it is a lot of information to process, but we do have to list it all. And if my memory serves me correctly, there are a number of fees, specifically in the development services arena or building, that were being removed. and consolidated into one fee. So yeah, that does get confusing and we will strive to find a way to relay that as efficiently as possible. Yeah, thank you.

Thank you. I just want to comment that cost recovery of what we subsidize to development services doesn't just come from fees that we charge. There are lots of ways to fix the gap in the budget for development services other than fees.

Yeah. No, I think that's important feedback, and I think that's a shared concern that we have here is things are getting more expensive. So, yeah.

I just want to encourage the public, whether they are present here or they're watching online, to go through these fees, and if you have any feedback, please reach out to us, city council members, anyone you feel comfortable with, or the city, because If you have a feedback, the time to give that feedback is now, not after it is adopted. And it's incumbent upon us as citizens, I count myself in that, to be engaged in looking at these things now when they're being processed. Thank you.

Okay, I don't see anybody else. Do we need to officially open the public hearing while we continue that? Because we're not closing the public hearing today. We're continuing this to a future date. Is that how we do this?

Yeah, I believe we just need an action from the council to continue to a date certain.

Okay.

I'll make a motion that we continue to a further date.

I second that.

And do we need to be specific to that date from our earlier conversation or... Yes. Okay. So I believe the date that we talked about earlier was August 18th.

I would like to continue this item to August 18th.

Perfect. I second that.

Yes.

Very good. Thank you. Okay.

All right.

All in favor? Aye. Okay. Thank you, everybody. All right, moving on to our regular calendar reports and communications of departments, boards, commissions, and committees. 9.1b, they consider resolutions approving our interim appointment of Robert to the position of Chief of Police for the City of Reading pursuant to government codes. Yeah, good evening, Honorable Mayor.

Oh, excuse me. Yes. And Director Kibler will be taking this item this evening. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Member of the Council. Carrie Kibler, Personnel Director. As council is aware, current chief of police, Brian Barner, announced his retirement effective September 22nd, with his last day in the office being June 30th of 2026. The recruitment process is currently underway for our next chief of police, and we anticipate having a new police chief in place mid-September or early October of 26th. City Manager Tarbo selected Robert, who goes by Hank Schroeder, a CalPERS retiree and former police chief, as his recommended candidate to serve as the interim chief of police. Mr. Schroeder retired as a police chief from Santa Rosa in 2019 and has completed three assignments as an interim police chief since his retirement. Mr. Schroeder would be employed for a limited term until such time as a new chief of police is selected, but no more than 960 hours. His rate of pay while serving in this role would be $139.63 per hour based on his qualifications and experience. Because the status of the chief of police position will change upon Chief Barner's official retirement, CalPERS is requiring two separate resolutions to take this action. Government Code Section 21221G authorizes the appointment of a retired annuitant while an incumbent employee is on an approved leave of absence. This authority would apply only during the period in which Chief Barner remains employed by the city is on approved leave, which would begin August 3rd, 2026 and continue through September 21st of 2026. Then upon Chief Barner's retirement, effective September 22nd, the chief of police position would become vacant. And at that time, government code section 221H would become the appropriate authority, which would allow the city to employ a retired annuitant in a vacant executive position while we continue the recruitment for a permanent replacement. Accordingly, separate council approval is required for each of the appointments based on the statutory authority. The estimated total salary cost for appointing retired annuitant Robert Schroeder on the interim basis to this position would be approximately $133,000 if he were to serve the full 960 hours. I'm also available to answer any questions that you may have about these actions.

Thank you, Carrie. I do see two speakers before we get there. I have a couple thoughts. I know this is a really, really difficult transition, Liz and William. The path forward, we've started the process for interviews for the future police chief. There's plans moving forward. I don't know if you might be able to give a few comments to that, what we plan to do moving forward. And your thoughts, yes, if we can. Michael, if you can speak to that. We've had some dialogue, so.

Yes, certainly. So as Director Kibler lined out, Mr. Schroeder, if I'm pronouncing his name correctly, will jump into the role as a retired annuitant here very soon, likely around August 3rd, based on the few little things that need to be completed for him to officially start. In the meantime, we are working with a recruiter, and we have a number of candidates that we would like to interview. That process is scheduled to take place next week on Wednesday, if my memory serves me correct. We have both a technical and a community panel for that. And I'll be participating in that with a few of the council members as this position, as council and the community is aware, is very instrumental to a healthy community. And we want to make sure that we get this right. So it is definitely a high priority and something that all of us are taking very seriously and One of the next critical steps in the process will be next week on Wednesday.

All right, thank you. And this is a very critical timing, and it's important we push forward to continue the interviews to hire the police chief. I think it's just a good reminder, just so the public knows, is that there has been some earlier discussion, and we just felt in this transition with our interim city manager, Michael, that we would want two city council members to be part of the interview process. And... And I believe if the plan goes forward, as discussed, that we'll see Council Member Audette and Council Member Munns participate in the interview panels to the pleasing of our interim city manager if he decides to do that. But we think we need a lot of help moving forward. This is a very, very difficult process. This is not how it was planned to do, but We want to be alongside our interim city manager with full support, with guidance, to be able to be available for advice and check-ins. And this is just the most appropriate thing we can do during this transition to be of support during the interview process. And I thank you to the council members for taking the time to be able to participate in this. This is very meaningful and important for you two to be part of that. Thank you for doing that. There's a couple comments here, Council Member Audet, if you'd like to. Do you have some comments or questions? No.

No, I appreciate all that. I think I would just make a motion to accept. You guys have a question?

We have two members from the public that are going to speak. Sorry about that.

Oh, I thought you meant us too. Sorry.

I'm sorry. Did you have any comments?

I just wanted to thank our acting chief and interim chief, acting chief of the police, all the three captains who have taken turns to really continue the work and lead the department in these difficult times. So I personally thank you to each one of them. Thank you.

Council Member Munson, do you have some comments?

Thank you.

I can wait.

Okay, so we'll go to our speakers here. So let's get to our speakers here. I see Robert and Leslie, if you'd like to make your way up here.

Thank you, City Council. We seem to have a division... in RPD, which I was only recently made aware of. Remember that a house divided cannot stand. Ladies and gentlemen, whomever you choose, let that person exemplify professionalism, team spirit, respect for all, unity and singleness of purpose. No one is perfect. Welcome in advance to soon to be new interim chief, Robert Schweder. I'm hoping that Mr. Schweder can be the catalyst for the needed unity. We have two outstanding captains who I'm sure will do all they can to support the new chief. Thank you.

Thank you, Robert. Leslie.

Sorry, I'll be super quick. I'm 100% pro law enforcement. I think the majority of our RPD department is amazing, fabulous. I have so many of them that I love and respect personally. I think they're great. Dr. Danuka, I love you. Taking turns is a really bad way to phrase that because it seems like that's what we've been doing to pad people's retirements in the last 20 years. I just looked up the stats and the majority of them last about three years. So we're taking turns to pad retirement. So my only ask and request, yes, I understand this has urgency. Yes, I understand we need to move forward. And thank you, Mr. Charbo, for selecting somebody because I'm sure he did his due diligence to make sure it's the right person. But as we move forward, can the number one question please be, do you intend to stay in this position long enough to make a difference, not just long enough to pad your retirement? That's my greatest concern. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Leslie. Council Member Munz, you had a question or some feedback?

Well, I just wanted to say briefly that I spoke with both candidates, and both of them were very responsive and very qualified, and I think both would do a great job. But for me, Robert Schreeder, however you want to put it, was... Considerably above the other gentleman. So I fully support this. Did you did you make a motion to support? So I'll second the motion. I can I just quick statement.

You can see absolutely. Oh, you're here.

So yeah, I don't think that any of the captains got any benefit from leading the department for a short time.

Maybe a few cookies or something like that, so maybe something. We have a first and a second. We'll take a vote. All in favor? Aye. Okay, that passes. All right, moving on to our next item. Community Services 9.6B, consider short-term funding for the City of Reading's maintenance of the Reading Civic Auditorium. Travis, you're up.

Thank you again, Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council. Assuming with some of the business people we have up on City Council that y'all are aware that when you own a building, even though it is vacant, maintenance does not stop. And our current tenant of the Redding Civic Auditorium is set to vacate said Civic Auditorium on July 31st. So just... 10 days from now. And so following that, as we search for a new operator, we are requesting some maintenance money so that we can provide some what I like to call short-term stewardship of the building. And so what that consists of is a six-month period of time at maximum where we would have regular staff checks, contracts in place, some temporary hardening of the structure. We did a site walk. We actually found some things that we think that there's some potential vulnerabilities that we'd like to address with a few small little projects to make sure that the building is secure and as is for when a new tenant arrives. gets on board. And so what we would like to do is set up contracts for things like fire alarm, security system monitoring, pest control, HVAC, fire extinguishers, security. We also do have some utility expense that's laid out in the staff report. We do need to keep the building heated and cooled to a certain degree because all building materials have a specified temperature range with which they should exist in otherwise you can see failures we also need to be able to fund some building maintenance staff time that will be to run systems to run water to check an unseen or unmitigated leak could cause very severe damage if not seen quickly enough and so we want to make sure that we are able to preserve the integrity of that building We anticipate the costs for a month of maintenance based on quotes from our vendors, utility costs that we've examined the bills, and staff costs to be about $17,000 per month at maximum. And we would have a one-time materials maintenance budget for things like some fencing and miscellaneous parts and pieces as things break. And overall, we think that that cost would be about $107,000. And so we would request that Council consider authorizing and approving funding for the short-term operations and maintenance of the Civic Auditorium. at $5,000 in one-time costs and $17,000 per month ongoing for a total not to exceed $107,000 and adopt the resolution appropriating $107,000 from the general fund for the short-term operations and maintenance of the Civic Auditorium. And with that, I can take any questions.

All right. Before we get into questions, we have one speaker, so let's hear from our speaker, Leslie, and then we'll get into questions and feedback. You're good?

Okay.

Shortest speaker of the day, so all right. I have talked to you earlier about the fencing. I do have concerns about the appearance. It being an eyesore, you've explained to me where the fencing would be. It would not be fencing around the entire perimeter of the Civic. One question is when would the fencing go up? We have Iron Man coming up. We have, I think, a few community events happening, so when would the fencing be up?

We don't have a specific date we're going to go and make sure. I mean, we have to do like a key exchange and things like that. We wouldn't put up the fencing right before Ironman just to take it back down. But things like the loading dock, we can certainly secure. The front end of the building, we'd probably leave open for a little bit. It's not a set date, but what we're going to do is harden the building enough to where we won't have ongoing issues. And so in conjunction with security patrols, we believe a little bit of hardening will help to avoid issues and the replacement of things like glass and doors, which can be vandalized. And, you know, we don't want to get any break-ins. So it would be essentially, I'm not being super clear about it, but within a few weeks.

Okay. Councillor Reznor, do you have some questions?

I do have a couple of questions. One of the things I thought was good news, bad news. Good news, $107,000 appears to be about 30% of what I believe the council was told when we were estimating maybe in January. Could you tell me what changed between there and here? Give me just some insight there.

When we initially came up with an estimate, we were told to essentially board up and decommission the building. That still required all of the utility expense, which we didn't anticipate any major changes. We've since learned a lot more about the building and the temperatures at which things need to exist. We've been able to adjust that a little bit, but we were told, you know, We're directed to have a lot more robust closure. And in addition to that, we also had TOT and things like that, impacts that we were quantifying at that time. The desire and the tone of council at that time was that we were not looking to expend that much money. So we've turned that down to what we think is a minimum sustainable amount for this period.

So this amount obviously does not include what we believe TOT is. or what TOT impacts could potentially be.

This is just city expense, and we're not calculating any potential revenue loss.

Sweet. It says in our staff report we're expecting July or August for RFP to be finalized and out. Can you share what we have left to do? I feel like council's been beating that dead horse for months.

Yes. So we did a few city attorney reviews and we've completed those. Those took a little bit of time because we have a lease in there. So things like that need to go through the attorney to make sure that we're going to be able to actually use that document at the end of the day. Now that we have all those done, we're actually just working on one final bit that went to We wanted to get permission to use a photo, and that was the last email that was sent. After that is back, we actually forward it to purchasing, so it should be within the next couple weeks that that's done. There's some review that happens at the purchasing level, maybe a little back and forth between staff, but generally that's less than a week or two.

All right, thank you.

All right. Council Member Audet.

Um, so once, so we're anticipating that the RFP is going to go out by mid August, the latest. Okay. So if it goes out mid August, it's going to be out for 30 days.

Correct.

Okay. And then, so this is for six months. If, if we're able to execute an RFP with a vendor, do we still, or is this still going to be what we do as far as on our side at the city, or will this actually change how much of this we actually have to spend if a vendor is in there by like

september or october yeah it's definitely um a maximum and so we anticipate this 17 000 per month anything that is left gets pushed back to the source of the funds so we don't anticipate it carrying these duties or anything like that certainly an operator could negotiate for that and that would be brought to council because it's substantial difference in what we authorized in our last item for the rfp so we bring that back if there is any changes but as of now no this would not be ongoing and those funds would be put back to where they came from okay so in anticipation of people that are going to respond to the rfp it's going to be out for a month and then that process begins they could be in as early as september october September would be a stretch. It'd probably be like October, November. Okay.

Yeah.

Okay. And if anything happened, we would come back, say we weren't successful with the RFP or we needed more time than we would.

Or it is super successful and fantastic and great and we don't even have to spend all of this money.

Exactly. Okay.

Let's go with that one.

Yeah. But like I said, any unspent funds, go right back.

Okay.

So everybody that's talked to us so far, apply quickly so we don't have to spend as much money. Correct. And you've shown interest. We hope you apply the first day. Council Member DiNuca, you had some comments.

So first of all, I'm very pleased to see that the cost is much less than we were told by, which was anticipated, but also what we were told by advanced threading. So I'm very happy to see that. Second question, I have a question for you. In this period, if any vendor wants to use the facility for a day or whatever they want, do they have a mechanism to come to you and rent it for some time? And do you have that information available somewhere?

It is very difficult to engage in programming. City Manager Tarbo had previously authorized one event that the building was going to be set up for. The city does not have the expertise nor the ability to contract for the expertise with reasonable assurance of safety and mitigating risk that we could change the function of the building. It's not set up in a way that is permanent. So every single event requires configuration, which could be installing seats. There's actually a specialized custom piece of equipment that raises the seat platforms. It's quite a process from what I'm told. We do not have the expertise to do that, nor is there a contractor specifically set up with the knowledge to do that. So it would be difficult for us to engage in other events. We chose to... court one event or continue one event that was already sufficiently down the road with contracts in progress and advertising that behooves the city, it would behoove our I'm not using that correctly. It would be good for the city of Reading to do this event. So that's the Fly Fishing International Conference. The city stakes its reputation on being one of the top fly fishing towns in the world. Hosting the Fly Fishing Conference would be a very smart move to make. So we're kind of bending over backwards for that one event. And I know that other operators may not love to hear that we are doing that for one event, but it is set up for that event and we do not have the ability to set it up for anything else. So in the short term, because of the length of time these agreements take and the amount of expertise it takes to flip over the building, we would not advise any other potential operator, promoter, event holder to try to do another event.

So even something simple like a fundraiser or a church event, even that is going to be too difficult to manage?

essentially the building is set up for one thing right now, and we would have to unset it up.

What is it set up for?

It is set up for a trade show slash conference. So that means walls move, electrical comes from the ceiling. It's actually quite the operation, and Advanced Rating was doing an amazing job doing that. Once I got a glimpse at what it takes, I was quite shocked and hope that I don't have to do it myself.

Got you. But Just one further question on that. So whatever it is set up for, if someone comes along which can use the same setup, then they could still rent it out?

We would take direction from the city manager on any further business. We do not have staff for it. So that's kind of the problems. We're not staffed up to do additional events.

It's three months.

Okay. All right. Thank you. So again, I just want to circle back in the fencing. I just want to see if there's any council members that might have some shared interests or thoughts. We already have security at the rodeo. Would there be an option to use the same security company? Maybe we would get more bang for our buck to where we wouldn't have to put up fencing. They can do more rotation, more inspections, more walk-arounds. I just don't like the optics and the looks of chain-link fencing going around doors and perimeters of the Civic and the optics of it, and if there's a better way to do it. And it does sound like, to me, like maybe the fencing won't go up in August for Ironman or the event for September, so at least we can hold that off for August and September. But if there's just another way to do this, either, I don't know if part of that building materials budget was for construction or fencing, we could save some of that money to invest in more security. But I just have a really, really bad feeling time thinking about the optics of the fencing around the Civic Center, which is supposed to be one of our pride and joys of the city. And I think the fencing in some ways can also just attract more vandalism. It says, oh, it's empty. So how about I just climb the fence and break in the building? So if there's other alternatives that the council has some shared concerns with me, I I'm grateful we're holding off through September, but I really don't want the fencing up at this point.

So the fencing goes in a couple of strategic locations. There are some essentially areas that do need to be barricaded where there are some vulnerability.

Oh, my God.

vulnerabilities in the building. I would really like to address those. Those actually, we will have to, but they won't be publicly visible. There's a lot of hidey holes. And so we want to address that. The fencing along the front is actually quite hidden. It will not be up for the Ironman event and everything will be removed for the fly fishing event. It won't be something that is super easy to see publicly. Certainly we could adjust the budget and increase security patrols. The city has a contract for security and the contract allows for additional hours. It's quite affordable. And this budget was based on our needs with a little bit of contingency funds. So certainly we could authorize a tiny bit more to adjust that or double that. Right now it is a handful of patrols throughout the day, both inside and outside. But it is not, you know, initially when you asked what changed between last time and this time, it was 24-7 security. and now it is a couple checks throughout the day which is common with our other facilities so we can certainly put a little bit more behind that but there is still need for some fencing

Is it possible that we, because we're not going to have it up in August for Ironman, September's going to be that. So maybe after September you come back with an update and we can give feedback on if we can see it. Maybe we have some suggestions and we just sort of get the progress of where things are at as far as how many responses we got to the RFP. You can just do an update on where we're at with that RFP for the public's sake too to just know if there's progress being made, what the anticipation is. Maybe we haven't chosen, but just an update and on the perimeter and and what we're seeing. Is that possible?

Definitely, we can give you an update.

When is the date of the fly fishing?

That is September 20-something.

Is it in the 20s?

It's like a Thursday through Saturday. I can't remember off the top of my head.

So maybe sometime after that. Maybe right after that at the beginning of October.

There will be a brief period of time between events that we harden the facility, but it will just come right back down. We're trying to make it not noticeable. I understand your concerns, and we won't make it an eyesore.

If we can get that Disneyland fencing, that always looks very entertaining for what's going to be behind that wall, what's coming. But I would be fine with that appearance.

Coming soon.

Yes.

So maybe the 1st of October, sort of an update.

Yes, we should have a pretty good indication of what's going to happen 1st of October.

Is that a good check-in or do you want September? No, I like the beginning of October.

I'll make a motion to authorize and approve items one and two and adopt the resolution.

I'll second. Okay, we have a first, second. All in favor? Aye. Oh, I'm sorry. You're back, Jack.

Just so you know, security is really only good when they're there. Most of the time, security is good at, did you say that? I'm sorry.

No, I'm just saying, like, let's just not advertise what our vulnerabilities are.

I mean, just, it's obvious that, you know, they just report the break-ins mostly is what happens, you know, generally speaking. All right, I'll shut up after that.

I think most of us already voted, but- Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Moving on to council travel reports. Anything to report from anybody?

I did not travel on city's behalf, but I would just like to say for, you know, the like seven people who are watching online, if you've never been to South Dakota and done the Mount Rushmore illumination, Like ceremony, you really should do that. It is like just a beautiful thing. I did that during Fourth of July week with my kids and the rest of our family. And it is just a beautiful thing. So if you haven't explored our national parks and all the beauties of America, get in a car, go do it. Okay, bye.

Okay. All right. Any suggestions from council members on any future items at all?

I would just like to know if that finance committee was going to be emailed this month to have a meeting.

I didn't hear that. I'm sorry. What was that?

The finance committee was going to get an email about having a meeting soon.

There was a nod. I see a nod.

Yes, we will get that information out to the finance committee here very soon on the first meeting.

All right. Thanks.

All right, everybody, as we prepare to adjourn, again, this was a very difficult time for our city. We think about William. We thought as we adjourn, we would... dedicate this meeting to William Tarbo our city manager who passed away again and we are dealing we're grieving we're grieving for his wife his children and let this meeting be an honor to him today and as we adjourn if you choose to leave quietly to tell stories about William let's use an opportunity as we adjourn today and we leave to honor William a wonderful man a family guy he loved his children he loved his wife he loved the city of Reading. And thank you for everything you gave us, William. We honor you today. Thank you. We are adjourned.