City Council - Regular Meeting

six o'clock we will come back into open session. Mr. Tster, can you give us a readout of close session, please?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh the council did meet in close session starting at 5:30. The uh city council approved invoices for the litigations litigation items noted on the agenda. Beyond that, there was no other reportable action. All right. Thank you. At this time, uh, please rise for the pledge of allegiance and remain standing for the imocation. and Father, we bow before you at the beginning of this meeting because we depend on you for all things. Your word tells us that from you, through you, and to you are all things. Your word declares that the nation that looks to you as Lord is blessed. And so we know this moment of prayer before you is of utmost importance to the city. We humbly bow to you and look to you for help. It is our prayer that your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. And we specifically pray that your will be done here in Ripen. We ask you to lead the city council to wise decisions this night and during all the various meetings. And we ask you to lead and guide our schools, our teachers, our business owners, our police officers, firefighters to do what is right and good in your eyes. We thank you this evening for the harvest that's being brought in at this time which affects many businesses and organizations. May the harvest be brought in safely and may good flow from it. Father, by your grace, may all the

businesses of our city thrive. May all children learn safely without fear. May parks, athletics, physical exercise be enjoyed. May families, churches, and other organizations be blessed. We pray in the name of Jesus. Amen. All right, second me. Roll call, please. Council member Leo Zuber here. Mike Rusha, present. Dean Uker, here. Vice Mayor Gary Barton, present. Mayor Daniel Degraphth,

here. Okay, public discussion. Anybody that would like to speak on items that are not on the agenda, now is the time to do that. If you'd wish to speak, please step forward to the podium, state your name and address. If not, we will move on. Is there any other public comment? No. Nobody. All right, we will move on to the agenda as posted or amended. I believe we were pulling 1.2A and 1.2. Oh, no. I skipped that. Sorry. Approval of the minutes from the regular meeting August 12th. Second.

Okay. Click. There we go. All right. Now we'll move on to approval of the agenda as posted or amended which will be amended. Anything else? 1.2A and 1.2H. Yes. Okay. So we like to do those for all votes have been cast. Uh I'll click end vote. I don't know.

Says yes. Says yes. All in favor? I opposed as 50. Okay. For the third time, we will go to the agenda as posted or amended, which is amended. Leo was pulled 1.2A and 1.2H. Would you like to discuss those first or we'll approve the agenda as amended? Is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended? So move.

All right. There we go. All right. Well, let's do the regular consent calendar first then. Consent calendar as amended. Is there a motion to Oh, stuck again. Okay. Do a voice vote. Um, okay. All in favor of approving the agenda as posted or as amended. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion passes. Okay. Approval of consent calendar as amended. Is there a motion for that? move. Uh, Rushia moves. Leo seconds. All in favor? I. Any oppose? None. Okay. 1.2A.

I pulled it mainly for comment. Um, we got a report with a letter that wasn't in the agenda packet. Correct. I have to say after I read it, I'm still not sure what this organization does for us. I also was not impressed that they called us the city of Lup instead of the city of Ripen in their letter. But I think it might be appropriate to invite them down to either a meeting or a workshop, something so they can tell us what they're all about, what and what we could and should expect from them relative to what would be beneficial to the city.

That's it. We we certainly could um make that invite to Bob Gutierrez who's the CEO of the partnership. Do that.

I'll just echo uh much of what Leo said. Um my experience as our rep on the partnership has been that it is uh a not a particularly good use of time. Uh there is the the items that are discussed uh with very few exceptions have nothing to do with our town. Um it's not a huge dollar amount that we pay in dues and yet the return on that is essentially zero in my opinion. So yeah, I think it'd be good to have Bob here and tell us why this is an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars for this. And if I could just say I agree. I sat on the board for a while and nothing ever happened at the board meetings. It was a waste of time. I quit going after a while and all they talked about was Stockton and Tracy. Those that's where all the activity was. And so I think we do this to be part of the team, but that's about it. There's nothing that happens from them. I don't disagree with being part of the group. I don't disagree with paying the fee.

But this is as much to remind them that we're part of this group as it is for them to tell us what we should expect. We agree. Yeah. Because I don't think they've ever been down here. Not since I've been on. Yeah. They've never been down there. So, good point. Do we want to move do this one or wait and do them both? Well, it's got to be a separate motion, a separate vote. I don't know.

Well, the and I pulled the other one for sort of the same reason. I remember when this item got put on for consideration by the council. It's been over a year ago. We had some of that COVID money and we used part of it to fix up landscape areas that we had required developers and stuff to put in and it over time had fallen into disrepair. And I have to say that the work that they're doing is exactly what we have hoped would happen. It's starting to dress the place up again. Bare ground is starting to have things growing there. And we work I think we work hard to get make sure that as a town grows it grows as a place we want to be rather than just some sort of functional thing and this investment I think is going to pay off rather quickly.

Let me just add if I can to that I agree with you and I think a lot of credit goes to you and your department for following up making sure they're doing what they're doing. With that, I'll move to approve 18 1.2A or 1.2A.

So, Mr. Mayor, I I would like to make a motion on 1.2A that we postpone the payment of that invoice until we hear from Mr. Gutierrez or representative from the partnership and then at that time we make a decision on whether to approve that invoice. My only question is there any issue with that as far as timing of I mean do I are doing is there late penalty and we pay more for being late to the party with the um you could wait till the next council meeting. Is there any

I don't have a problem with it as long as we're not looking at a six-month delay. I don't want to send a message saying something that later on we regret that we did it. I guess is what I'm saying. Well, if he blows us off for six months that sends him what I said. So, well, it would come back at the next board meeting. Hopefully, he can be there for that meeting. If he can't be because he's Tuesdays he does something else, then we're going to delay this thing for a while. 60 days sometime in the next two months.

So, there's two motions here, but we don't take Leo's Gary's motion first. I don't Mr. Attorney, what's the uh what's the rules on that? Yeah, actually, you uh you Well, neither. That clarifies things very quickly. Okay. So, with that, Gary has made a motion to I think I have to withdraw my second, too. Well, the motion's gone. Your second doesn't count either. So technically you got to do it. You guys are making this interesting tonight. So you want to restate your motion?

Yes. My motion is to postpone action on uh approval of the membership fee for Sanwaqin Partnership uh until uh such date as we hear from a representative from the partnership and then at that meeting uh we can have a vote to approve or disprove the $5,000 membership fee. Is there a second to that motion? Okay, we have a motion and a second and we don't have we're electronic. We'll go to the voice vote. All in favor of the motion say I. I. I.

Okay. Any oppose. So 4.5 it passes. All right. One 1.2H. Now approve 1. Second. We have a motion to second. All in favor. Any oppose? None. Motion passes. That was fun. Okay. Resolution 2A. Resolution City Council um designated the voting delegate to the League of California Cities. Gary, do you have anything to say on this one? [Music] Nominate Mr. Barton to be We can. He probably won't go.

Yes, Mr. Mayor. I do, but I'm going to uh withhold my comments. Okay. Given I don't know. I sense a cynical No, I just I thought you tone to your question to say on that one. So, I looked at it as being very respectful to him, Mr. Mayor. I thought so, too. Does anybody is Kevin? Do you or Lisa, do you have anything to say on this one? It's we're looking for whether or not we want to send someone to League of California Cities conference in Long Beach. We never or haven't recently in the past because we don't feel that there's utility in sending someone. Correct. Should we raise our hand if we want to go? Does anybody want to go? Does anybody want to make a motion? motion to not send someone to send someone.

I will make a motion to not send. Do we need a motion to not send someone? No action. Those things have always been a waste of time. Well, you can still make a motion. We can take a vote on it. All right. So, any further discussion? Anyone? No. Well, since you asked. Yeah. Sorry. Talk away. I'm kidding. Okay. Public hearing. Um we'll take action on the following which is a resolution approving the building department permit fee schedules. This a kin.

Thank you Mr. Mayor. Fellow council members. Um in your packet uh hopefully you've had a chance to go through the staff report um attached uh fees proposed fee schedule and justification study. I'll just kind of quickly do a brief synopsis of those. So tonight you're looking at a resolution to um establish a new building department fee schedule uh which would include an annual annual indexing uh to begin on January 1st, 2027. So since we're adopting this so late in the year, we're not going to adopt them and then adjust them a month later. So we would start the indexing in January of 2027. Um why the

26? No fees will take effect 2026 and the adjustments would the fees will actually go into effect 60 days after they're approved which would be mid November but we don't want to index them a month later so we would wait a full year for the indexing to start.

Um so why the why the um update is needed. So the building department basically u operates it safeguards to health and safety and welfare u by enforcing codes uh reviewing plans and performing inspections. Uh the services are funded by permit fees, not the general fund, but at this particular moment, a good portion of the building department is funded by the general fund. Um basically about the current fees are only covering about 57% of the department's uh annual expenses uh which is requiring uh the general fund to sub subsidize the rest of the department. Um the Ripons fees, they have not been adjusted since 1996 and are still based on a an outdated 1994 um building department um valuation tables. Um the proposed fee structure in front of you tonight um basically we are we're shooting for a 90% cost recovery target. um a detailed analysis was uh was done and like I said only 57% of the department expenses were covered and the new fees schedule in front of you tonight uh does accomplish a 90% recovery rate. Um might be asking why not 100%. Um you know not every activity in the department there can be tied directly to a permit. um such a um such as public counter inquiries, code interpretations, ordinance updates um and safety outreach. Um the 90% goal is consistent with best practices statewide. Um it ensures applicants cover most costs for services they directly use uh while keeping projects affordable and services well staffed. Um we are looking to as part of this adoption um use the ICC valuation standards um which is a more current um standard international count code council um they publish annually a valuation table. So the valuations for

projects when they come in and they're based on valuations will be based on most current information and most current uh valuations. Um, it's widely recognized across uh recognized and adopted across California. Like I said, they are updated yearly and and they reflect real market conditions. Uh, they ensure fairness and transparency by tying fees directly to construction values and project scopes and most of the contractors are very familiar and design professionals with with using the ICC valuation tables. Um, so it reduces any confusion, any disputes of of valuation. Um, and then again the last part of that would be the annual adjustments beginning in 2027. I kind of explained that a little bit, but we would tie it to the consumer price index um that which we currently use for adjusting some of our other fees with exception of the technology um maintenance fees which does cover our building software cost and that does go up by 5% every year. So we are u requesting that that would be a 5% annual indexing on that fee. Um we did do a regional comparison. So even after the adjustments, RIP Rippen's building permits and plan check fees remain very competitive. Um in most scenarios that we ran, Ripons continues to rank within the lowest three jurisdictions in the region as far as those fees are concerned. So, in closing tonight, um you know, the the fee schedule in front of you this evening modernizes Ripon's outdated fee structure um after nearly 30 years achieves a 90% uh cost recovery uh while allowing for limited communitywide subsidy um implements a transparent, fair, and recognized valuation method and uh keeps fees regionally competitive while maintaining stable and high quality services for the community here in Ripen. So, with that, Mr. Mayor, I would uh turn it back over to you. This is a public hearing this evening if anybody

wants to comment on that item, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. All right. Is there any questions, comments from the council at this time? I just have a couple comments if I can. So, as I always ask every department head that comes up to present something like this, are we covering our cost? Because I don't want everybody in town to subsidize a builder. And the answer is yes. Because the 10% if there's no building going on, we still got a building department. So, that cost is there. So I I'm glad you did that. Thank you. I'm glad you're um taking a look at increasing these now because we want to continue to maintain the quality of Ripen as it has been. So I applaud you for doing that. That's not an easy study to do. But my main thing is are we covering our costs that the city itself isn't subsidizing or the other residents and sounds like you've done that. So that's all I say.

Okay. Any other questions, comments by the council? No, it is a public hearing. So we will open the public hearing. Lisa, I believe you had a comment on this. Yes. Yes. I received a um public comment on this item via email, so I will read it into the record.

It's from a Marty Harris. My wife and I live and own a home in Ripen, and we're joined by five of our children, their spouses, and 21 grandchildren. On June 30th, 2025, California lawmakers roll back environmental law. Why is high techch manufacturing and water infrastructure now exempt? as detailed in the 7125 cal matters article by news correspondent Rachel Becker. Also, this was published on page A3 of the 7125 Mantica bulletin. He also included a link to this said um article question. What broad range of powers does this law give to the city of Brien and others to examine and correct the full range of drainage and other impacts involved? Who determines the array of impacts and whether SQA environmental rules apply? Who is ultimately responsible for any and all drainage impacts to downstream properties? Example, fed, state, county, city, individual property owners. What higher taxes may apply? Then he has a header that says roll back of an environmental laws, public safety, suspect water delivery and drainage and fire services when looking at one SGMA goals and mandates. Two, Increased demand for affordable housing. Three, currently understaffed firehouses. Four, suspect water delivery and drainage infrastructure. Five, apparent abandonment of SQA environmental laws. I believe our best outcome can only be achieved by banding together to share critical infrastructure and public services capacity while preparing for each of us to pay more in taxes. Question. If developers in Ripen do not contribute in the form of higher of paying higher fees, who is protecting and taking control of our rights to flood protection, groundwater, and SSJ surface water? Thanks, Marty Harris.

Thank you, Lisa. Is there anybody else who would like to uh comment on this one? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Any further questions or comments from the council? Seeing none. Is there a motion? I'll move to approve the resolution. We have a motion and a second. Um, do we have to take a voice vote on this one or Okay. Doesn't have to be individual for a resolution on this public hearing. Okay. Anyways, all in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Okay. Item number four, discussion trash implementation plan. James, what good news do you have for us?

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hope you hopefully you've all had a chance to um read the trash implementation plan that's attached to your packet. I I'll just go over the staff report that I put together and if you have questions, feel free to ask. Just some background. State water board adopted the trash provisions back in 2015. Essentially, they wanted to eliminate trash heading into US waterways. In our case, that's the Stannos River. That's where all of our storm water enters to. In June 2017, we received notice that we had until 2030 along with other cities and counties to fully comply with the trash regulations and regulations were developed at that time. Uh we were offered two methods to comply. A tract one or a track two. Track one in act uh involves installing actual physical uh full trash capture systems in priority land use areas. And those priority land use areas include highdensity residential, industrial, commercial, mixed urban, which is any combination of those three, and then public transportation. So those physical structures would actually filter the water, remove all of the trash. Our staff would then go uh collect that trash, remove it um prior to that water entering the Sans River. Track two involves developing an implementation plan, which you see here in front of you tonight. Um and and essentially that would uh allow us to determine where our problems exist and it provides us an outline to how to fix these areas. So in 2018 the city initially did select the track one method and the thought was that we would install these large structures uh out by the river. Uh we felt that that was the easier path to ensure that we would not have an issue moving moving forward down the road. Um but estimates were in excess of about $2 million uh in order just for the initial capital to install those. Um our annual maintenance was approximately $80,000 moving forward. Um in 2023 staff looked

at switching methods to track uh track 2 for compliance. We spoke with uh several consultants. We spoke with uh cities um and counties that had also switched tracks. um looked at our options and and even with conservative estimates, we were we would look to be spending somewhere uh in the in the range of about $200,000 by 2030 in order to reach compliance um if we headed down that path. So, the real reason it makes sense for us is the fact that there's really just not that much trash in the city of Ripen, right? Um we don't see this as a a major issue. Um u so our approach kind of with this and why we switch tracks is just you know how do we comply with the regulation without breaking the bank. So we uh we hired Stone Creek Environmental in December 2023 to develop this trash implementation plan. Uh we informed the state water board in 2024 uh that we were going to switch tracks and what you see here in front of you today is is the uh completed trash implementation plan and the results are right where we expected in the be based on the amount of trash we have. So the city was split up into 53 different priority use land use areas. Um and you could see that within the packet there. Um there's 53 areas. Um they are all walked uh by our staff and the consultant staff. um they're physically walked and and viewed for trash along those segments. Um and they're rated they're either a low, a moderate, a high, or very high. Um of those 53, 51 of those were rated at a low trash generation level, which demonstrates full capture or full trash capture uh equivalency and then no further further action is required according to the state water board for compliance. Uh two areas were identified at the moderate trash levels and that's the Santos and Jack Tone area near one of the truck truck stops and then um the

front engine Milio area near 99 they offer on and off ramps. Um so there's only two areas in town that we we identified as having some sort of problem. Um in order for us to get into compliance in those two areas, we've got to continue to monitor those two areas. Um and we propose to do that through uh walking these locations three times annually. Um if if we are able to evaluate those areas u three consecutive times or assessments in a row then that would meet the uh low level um trash generation level and um that would meet the equivalency of full capture full trash capture systems in those areas. Um the plan is for us to increase our street sweeping activities. Uh we'll reach out to the businesses in those areas where we we think the trash is coming from and kind of see how that see how that goes as we work toward 2030. If we start getting to the end of 2030 and we realize, hey, this is not happening. This is not working. We're still at these moderate or if it increases. Um worst case scenario, we would have to install some localized uh trash capture devices at some of the inlets to protect those areas. Um, it's not a huge investment because it's not a huge area, but it is still an investment that we'd be looking at somewhere in the neighborhood of $80,000 for initial uh capital and then probably about $10,000 maintenance annually. Um, and just to give you an idea of where we're at, so table three on page seven of the plan, um, it it goes into how much trash we're actually talking for these moderate areas. I don't know if you saw that level in there, but those two moderate areas, it is saying that we would generate 228 gallons of trash annually in in those two areas that we have a problem. So that is two and a half of our 90-gallon containers, right, for the entire year. So that's

really what we're talking about here. Um so we do think we can, you know, we can get there through outreach, through additional sweet street sweeping activities. Um, and then moving forward, this plan will be submitted to the water board. Um, and then and then that'll complete our task for the trash provisions. I will say this, the state is working on the new update to the general storm water permit. Um, they're expecting adoption sometime in late 2026. Uh, there is definitely going to be additional trash provisions that are included in that. So, we'll kind of have to wait to see what that looks like. Um, that's really all I have at this time. Questions?

Yeah, I applaud you for your approach and study of this and um pursuing uh an avenue that is uh effective and low cost. Um do have a question about your monitoring of these sites. Uh you mentioned three times a year. So ostensively every four months. Uh would it make sense to calendar something that you've got someone in your department who does drive at least drive by them uh you know once or twice a month and see if there is there are any issues that are starting to build up and in other words you can be more proactive before you have to uh you have to identify that and put it on uh on the record.

Sure. Yeah, it is definitely something that we're going to monitor. We're going to take a look at. We can we can go out there and talk with those businesses, you know, um or see Yeah. see what our our activities are doing in in the area. See if those areas are are continuing to accumulate trash. Yeah. Yeah. Right.

Yeah. And the idea and the intent would kind of continue doing whatever we're doing at that point if we get there, right? Um those activities. So, and our staff, they actually walked it with our consultant staff to understand the state approved method of how to how to assess these areas. U that is all documented as well. Um, so our staff will be, you know, handling those moving forward just to just to help reduce costs.

Yeah. If I can just make a comment, like everyone, we want to see the lowest price we can get for the best quality we can because this will all go in the rates. So, somebody just said they want to pay more taxes. It's going to have to be advertised over all the residents at some point when we do our next rate study. It's got to be paid for. So, I'm glad you, you know, 200,000 is not going to be as big an impact on everybody as $2 million. So, I think that's a good avenue to go. Yeah. And, you know, you got to compliment the people in Ripon because we've kept the town clean. We don't have a lot of trash like some cities do. You do. You're right. So, Yeah. Yeah. And the two areas identified are heavily impacted by people from outside of town.

Yeah. 99 and and a lot of outside travel. So, good work. Any other comments? We care about our town. Liam, nothing to say. All right. Well, we will move on to department head reports. Chief,

yes, honorable city council, I just want to report out on our step operation, which is saturation traffic enforcement program that we conducted on August 19th. It consisted of multiple agencies from San King County that participated in the traffic enforcement operation within our city. It was officer 12 officers in total from Britain PD, uh, Mantika PD, Stockton PD, and the San King County Sheriff's Department. So, this operation aims to reduce collisions by enforcing hazardous moving violations. The officers enforce red light, stop sign, speeding, and distracted driving violations. So, during this operation, a total of 131 traffic stops were conducted. uh resulting in 117 citations and the operation lasted for about eight hours. Um this operation is a rotating monthly initiative in which law enforcement agencies focus on different cities throughout the county to improve traffic safety. Besides that, nothing else to report.

All right. Thank you. Oh, got a question for you. has to do with kids on scooters and stuff. Lock them up. Are we still working on them?

Yes, obviously you still see violations out and about, but there's been a huge reduction in that. Um, so yes, we are still enforcing that and still concentrating that on that and still providing education. So yes, we we still are doing that. I agree. And I think the only Well, I don't think the only place I still get comments from adult residents are kids screaming literally up and down the sidewalks on scooters and bikes. Other than that, they acknowled that there's more helmets being worn. There more places that that they're where they are. But I still I probably get three or four a month of people who I thought they were blah blah blah and this kid almost hit my

dog or almost hit me and so I hope we're still I'm glad to hear we're still on it. Yes, sir. We definitely are. And saying that there'll always unfortunately be those violations, but I I agree 100%. Uh we need to concentrate on it. It's a safety issue and we will for sure continue to do that. Thank you. There's a bunch of kids in my neighborhood. They got helmets on. There's about six of them that always come around, but they're always very polite. They stay on this right side of the road. So, either you guys have disciplined them or somebody has because they're look like they're following the rules. At least in my neighborhood. Most most are following.

Most. Yeah. And by the way, I didn't get any phone calls on your saturation either. Usually I do. I got pulled over from a Tracy cop. I did. You You got Yeah. Well, that's because I referred him to you. Yeah. I had a foring number. All right. Nothing to report. Uh, really quick, after a rather lengthy hiatus, the planning commission will be back in action on Monday night. What? Wow. Exciting news. Yeah. If you'd like to come out and join them, um, they will be considering a parcel map on the off of North Jack Road. So, really exciting stuff on Monday night. Really? Good. James,

part two. I noticed there's a fence that's been put up around that vacant lot behind Angle. Does that mean they're finally going to start doing something? That's a good question. Um, they actually pulled a grading permit some time ago and they're just kind of slowly getting started on things. So, I'm not 100% certain when they're going to start, but uh they're kind of playing that game of let's do a few things to keep the permit active. So, we I think they're trying to just um lengthen out the time to start construction so maybe interest rates come down a little bit, but that's my guess. Hey, at least it keeps the trucks from turning around. They're making a dust bowl.

I noticed the same thing and I thought they're waiting for the cost of money to come down. Yep. James, any good news for us? Uh, two quick things. Our water usage for the month of August was at 13 and a half% lower than our 2013 numbers. 1% lower than last year's numbers. We're at 504 acre feet. Um, and then this is the last month that we are doing the large item pickup program. So, residents can still uh come into city hall and sign up or they can sign up online, but that'll be ending right at the end of September. How about the brush pickup? When's that start? That'll be October 15th. Okay. A little while. Yep.

Quick comment to James. Yeah. I wanted to compliment you on uh the newsletter that came out and the headline of which was how you've implemented implemented the state requirement on trash separation which we've discussed here but that was well done and uh I think is a great example again of how uh staff in this city tries to uh comply with state mandates and to do so at as low a cost as possible. Uh and that that is a great example of that. So yeah, compliments to you and your staff.

All right, Tommy, Kevin, nothing to report. Leo, nothing. Nothing. Somebody's got to say something. Here it is. Okay.

Yeah, I am. Uh I'm just going to uh Well, the the backdrop is uh a lot of the uh news of late but is constantly in the background of crime often violent crime in major cities in this country. Something that we are incredibly blessed to not experience in this town. And u so I just want to implore people here uh in the audience to pray for our police department. Um these guys are out there in and gals ensuring that we do uh stay a very safe city and it's something that is u and I'm guilty of this. It's easy to take for granted in Ripen because we don't have violent crime or almost no violent crime and we never want to turn into a town where uh in many cases now you see people just take it for granted and it's not like it's even that big a deal and it is a big deal particularly when you're a victim. So, thank you, Chief, and your department. And u yeah, let's uh let's pray these guys up. That's it.

Well said. Thank you. And everybody, um I don't have much to add, but thank you all for being here and giving us an audience and for listening and um feel free to come and speak next time. You know, you can say things too, but no, we appreciate you being here. Appreciate input from the public. And that is it. A meeting a journ.