City Council - Regular Meeting

There is nothing to report out at this time. We are going to be continuing closed session after our regular session, which at this point I will now call the general session to order, and we will start with the Pledge of Allegiance. If you all stand, join me. All right. Start with agenda review. Anything to review? Seeing none. Moving on to citizens addressing the city council. It's an opportunity for public comment on matters not listed on the agenda. Public comment on items listed on the agenda will be taken as we bring the agenda item up. I do want to remind anybody that we cannot have a dialogue together. It's more of a one-way street. Do we have any comment cards?

Mayor Bass, we do have two comment cards for general public comment. Okay. The first is from Mr. Benjamin Yorkman.

Great.

Good evening. Good evening. Good evening, council members. Benjamin Yorkman, lifelong Rockland resident. It's common for many background duties that only poor jobs get news coverage. I want, though, to commend the exemplary performance of Placer County elections. By the end of election night, they had already counted 106,000 of what would by June 5 be 115,000 votes. For each District 6 candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives, the vote share between those two dates differed by no greater than a third of a percent. To confirm this, I had written down certain numbers but forgot to save the original reports published on the Placer County Elections website. When I called them, they gave me not just the documents I requested, but additional materials to use in my data analysis. Placer County Elections is efficient. Placer County Elections is consistent. Placer County Elections is transparent, measurably. And so Placer County Elections is reliable. Their protocol is the gold standard for a state, if not the country, if not the world. And they should be both very pleased and well rewarded for this exemplary performance. I wish I could say the same. I wish I could say the same. Um. Excuse me. I wish I could say the same regarding the Sacramento County elections. In the early morning of June 3rd, they reported a count of 184,000. By the afternoon of June 5th, this number spiked to 262,000. Most curiously, these new votes disproportionately favored Richard Penn, the Democrat frontrunner who struggled and failed to break into second place by the election night count. In Sacramento County, Richard Pan's vote share shot up by two full percentage points, a boon far larger than those of his fellow Democrats, a couple of whom lost vote share. Foster County elections shows that vote by mail favors Democrats, and yet even that difference cannot account for Richard Pan's two-point vote swing. He had a vote-by-mail bump of 1.3 in Placer County. The most charitable interpretation of these objective facts is that Sacramento happened to favor precincts that were statistically significantly biased against Richard Penn on election night, then over the next days counted votes biased specifically towards Richard Penn. Because these problems were not shared by Placer County elections, I must presume these problems do stem from systemic malpractice. Sacramento County elections is sluggish. Sacramento County elections is inconsistent. Sacramento County elections is opaque, measurably. And so I cannot defend Sacramento County elections against accutations of corruption and election fraud, nor can I trust them to oversee the transition of my representation. And when critics cite the convenience of the Democrat frontrunner being the primary beneficiary of these late counted votes, I cannot disagree. I'm inclined towards incompetence over malevolence, and I wish I had help from Sacramento County elections to back me up. I have previously voiced concerns about being yoked together with Sacramento County. The stark contrast in culture and heritage between Sacramento and Placer warrants no shared representation. The performance of Sacramento County could have assuaged my concerns, but instead affirmed my convictions. I advise that the city of Rockland push for the oversight of Placer County elections across all District 6 for a general election. They have earned it in objective metrics where Sacramento County elections falls short. Thank you.

Thank you, Benjamin.

Next speaker is Mr. David Patterson.

Good evening, council members, the city manager Zimmerman. I'm Dr. Dave Patterson, 30-year-plus resident of this wonderful city, and also sitting on the Placer County Board of Education representing Rockland. I'm here tonight. Well, first, do you know what today is? Anybody have any idea what today is? Well, I'll tell you. Today's my birthday. So what am I doing here on my birthday before you in public comments? Well, quite simply, it gives me a time to reflect. It won't go. It's 71 years of my life. But I'm here to reflect and first thank you for the level of activity, interest, and work relating to the Sierra Wilds project, which is pending before the city council. And the years are important because unlike a decision to buy a set of textbooks, which is what schools do, to even buy a bus, which may last 10 years or whatever, you are faced with a decision that will have implications for our for our community for 10, 20, 30, 50 years potentially. And what I want to say is we all are working to try to find good solutions to a difficult problem. I want first to commend you for your continued work on it, your persistence in asking the right questions. And the search for both answers and hopefully good resolutions for all parties. I do think that the, I also want to encourage you to keep it up. Because this is in fact a situation that doesn't have a lot of precedent. It's a new territory where the state has in fact made so many changes that take away the local control. that there is a struggle not only in this city but throughout the state about how to find the right balance. And the circumstances with Maria Montessori Charter School and Sierra Wilds is bringing to light a lot of things that weren't known before or hadn't been contemplated, certainly weren't being contemplated. weren't being considered by our colleagues down in Sacramento. So I urge you to keep at it. I will tell you that at our next meeting in a week and a half for the Placer County Board of Education, we will be considering a resolution that shares the same concerns that the county superintendent shared earlier about the need to, in fact, get to the bottom of all the questions and to make sure that there is the single best set of solutions that we can we can craft for our state and for our community, especially Rockland as a city. So with that, I'll stop and say thank you. And we're going to dinner and having a birthday celebration. Good evening.

Thank you. And just for the record, that item is not before us today, which is why I did not make any comments about it being in public comment and had nothing to do with what we discussed on closed session. Anybody else that would like to say anything for public comment? Seeing none, we will now move on. We'll start with reports from City Council and the City Manager. I will start to my left, Council Member Broadway.

Yes, Mr. Bradley, the only thing I want to say is AFTER OUR LAST MEETING, MY WIFE AND I ACTUALLY LEFT FOR A VERY LONG VACATION, HAVING JUST RECENTLY RETURNED. AND SO I WANT TO THANK STAFF, THOSE STAFF MEMBERS WHO DID ASSIST ME DURING THAT TIME IN RESPONDING TO ITEMS AND ADDRESSING CONCERNS FROM THE PUBLIC. SO STAFF DID A FABULOUS JOB OF COVERING FOR ME WHILE I WAS TRAVELING. SO APPRECIATE THAT. AND THEY MADE IT EASIER FOR ME TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF TIME AWAY WITH MY WIFE. SO I WANTED TO THANK STAFF.

EXCELLENT.

Thank you. Not too much. I do want to first off commend the Rotary for an incredible event that you had this with their Brewfest Festival this last Saturday. As a non-brew drinker, I had a blast anyway. I think I heard this could have been a record setting, and I know a lot of you were there working, and so thank you so much for what you did. I heard so many positives about the city, and I appreciate how hard everybody was working. Just for reports, I did have the opportunity Wednesday through Friday to attend the Greater Sacramento Economic Council Annual Conference on behalf of the mayor. And a lot of the focus certainly was bringing the Sacramento State downtown to Sacramento to fill some of those buildings as they discuss how they're dealing with bringing state workers back. CERTAINLY A LARGE GROUP, A BIG PITCH FOR THE SACRAMENTO PITCH, WHICH IS THE MLB, THE GROUP WORKING TO BRING THE MLB HERE. THEY FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE THAT THEY HAVE A DECENT SHOT AT THIS AND A LOT OF CONVERSATION SURROUNDED HOW ARE WE INCLUDED IN THAT AND WHY ARE WE INCLUDED IN THAT AND HOW THE REGION CAN BE MORE SUPPORTIVE. Great there, and then just to make you feel very comfortable. Mr. Mayor you were voted in along with several others finally now in June for to be a board member officially and I think And then just the only other thing is we have begun the process I'm working with Vice Mayor Holden and I did the first group round interviews for our boards and commissions and I very much appreciate the quality of folks that we have that are interested in serving and I know we still have more to go because There is a large number for all of those, but we completed that on Monday. That's it for me.

Thank you. And then to my right, I'll go Council Member Janda.

Vice Mayor Holden. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a couple things to mention. I did go to the announcement on the Sacramento pitch for the Major League Baseball. There's a lot of excitement there, a lot of speakers, but the showstopper to me was Dusty Baker talking about his moving to Sacramento in 1965 and the history of baseball in our community. So if they listen to Dusty, we're going to get a team. But he was quite animated through the whole thing. So I just want to mention that we have a Western Placer Waste Management Authority board meeting coming up on Thursday. And we have two major contracts. We're amending our contract with FCC. That's the operator of the materials resource facility to address some issues with them. We also have a contract. for monetizing the gas in the landfill to make a lot more money than we have been in the past. And all of that goes towards keeping our rates as low as possible. So big things at WAPMA this week. That's it.

Thank you. Just a couple items. The first being thank you for going to the retreat. I appreciate that. I am excited to see if we can get a professional baseball team, although I will say the other two that are really in the running for it, which is Portland and Utah, just both got professional female softball teams, so maybe they should consider that and look at Placer County to put that professional team. That might be a Another thing we can attract a professional team for Major League Baseball. Just two future items. Rivian is having their house warming on Friday, 5 to 7 p.m., and then also a Saturday, 11 to 3 p.m. this weekend. And then just to remind everybody, the farmer's market is still going strong. So on that, I'll leave it to the city manager to finish us off.

Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to remind everybody that now that school is out, Open Swim is in. So Open Swim at Rockland High School started yesterday and runs five days a week until July 31st. So Monday through Friday, 1130 to 330 p.m. at Rockland High School for our Open Swim program. And then this coming weekend here at Quarry Park Amphitheater, Take Note Troop will be offering free Shakespeare in the Park. It's Taming of the Shrew. I think there are a couple of shows each of the days. All of that information is on the city's website, rockland.ca.us. And that completes my report.

Excellent. Thank you. Moving on to the consent calendar. These are items on the calendar that are considered and acted upon by one motion. Anyone may request an item be removed for separate consideration. Looking to the council. And city manager, nothing to be pulled. Okay. Then I will be looking for a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval of consent calendar items C1 through C10. I'll second. All right.

Having a motion and a second. All in favor, aye. Aye. No. Abstentions? The ayes have it. It passes unanimously. Now we're moving on to public hearings, which we will start with PH1, which is the public facilities impact fees annual inflation adjustment. This will be presented by management analyst, Megan Bresum.

Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. Megan Bresum, management analyst in the administrative services department. This evening's item is for the annual inflation adjustment to the public facilities impact fees. The public facilities development impact fee was established to mitigate the impacts of new development on public facilities. The fees are adjusted annually to account for inflation on construction costs. THE INFLATIONARY FACTOR FOR THE ENGINEERING NEWS RECORDS CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX FOR MAY 2026 IS 2.44%. THE ADJUSTED FEES WILL BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2026. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE ANNUAL INFLATION ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEES. AT THIS TIME I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

NEW SPEAKER THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS? I will now open the public comment period. Do we have any comment cards? No comment cards received. Anyone that wants to say anything on this item? Seeing none. Final questions, council members? All right. At this point, I will close the public hearing and any further discussion? Seeing none, I will now ask for a motion on, it looks like we only have one item for this one.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval of public hearing item one, adoption of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Rockland authorizing the annual inflation adjustment of the public facilities impact fee. I'll second.

Having a motion and a second. All in favor, aye.

Aye.

No. Abstentions? The ayes have it. It passes unanimously. Moving on to PH2. This is a levy and collection of assessments for Lighting Maintenance District Number 1 for fiscal year 2026-2027. And once again, Management Analyst Megan Bressam.

Good evening once again. Megan Bressam. This item is the final step of the annual process of adopting the assessment levy for Lighting Maintenance District Number 1. or LMD1. LMD1 was formed for the purposes of funding the maintenance of streetlights and safety lighting within the district. On May 12, 2026, City Council adopted resolutions which approved the annual engineer's report and set a public hearing for this evening, June 9, 2026. The proposed maximum assessment for the district for fiscal year 2026-27 is approximately $251,800. Expenses are budgeted for the same amount, $251,800. Tonight, there are two resolutions before you. The first resolution orders the levy and collection of assessments. The second resolution requests Placer County to collect taxes on the city's behalf and also indemnifies the county. Staff recommends approval of both resolutions. At this time, I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

All right, so we're opening the public hearing. Call for questions from council members. Seeing none. Now we'll open public comment. Comment cards? No comment cards. Anybody in the public that would like to comment? All right. Seeing none, I will now ask final questions. Council? Seeing none. Close the public hearing. Any further discussion? Seeing none. Now I'll ask for an action item or action on these items.

Matt, just to confirm, we can take these together, correct? Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval of public hearing item 2A and B. I'll second.

Having a first and second, all in favor, aye. Aye. Oppositions? The ayes have it. Passes unanimously. Moving on to PH3, Levy and Collection of Assessments for Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 for Fiscal Year 2026-2027. Management Analyst, Megan Bressam.

Good evening. Megan Bressam. This item is the final step in the annual process of adopting the assessment levy for landscape and lighting maintenance district number two, or LLMD2. LLMD2 was formed for the purposes of maintaining streetlights, safety lighting, and roadway landscaping within the district. On May 12th, 2026, City Council adopted resolutions which approved the annual engineer's report and set a public hearing for this evening, June 9th, 2026. The proposed maximum assessment for the district for fiscal year 2026-27 is $2,906,200. Expenses are budgeted for $3,270,600. The budget shortfall of $364,000 will be covered by existing district reserves. The district is projected to begin the fiscal year with a reserve of approximately $900,000. Tonight, there are two resolutions before you. The first resolution orders the levy and collection of assessments. The second resolution requests Placer County to collect taxes on the city's behalf and also indemnifies the county. Staff recommends approval of both resolutions. At this time, I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

All right. With the public hearing being open, do we have any questions? All right. Now we'll open the public comment period. Do we have any comment cards?

No comment cards, Mayor.

Anybody in the public? Seeing none, close public comment. Final questions? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Seeing no desire for further discussion, I will ask for a motion and vote.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval of public hearing item 3A and B.

Second. All right. Having a first and a second, all in favor, aye.

Aye.

Aye. Noes? Abstentions? All right. Ayes have it. Item passes unanimously. Now moving on to PH4, inclusionary housing in Lufie, and now assistant to the city manager, Elizabeth Sorg.

Good evening, mayor, vice mayor, and city council. Elizabeth Sorg, assistant to the city manager, here to present the proposed inclusionary housing in Lufie. At the April 28th, 2026 city council meeting, staff presented an analysis of in lieu fees, including three potential fees scenarios. After reviewing the analysis, city council directed staff to return with a $2.75 per square foot fee. Consistent with the direction from city council, the resolution before you tonight proposes a $2.75 per square foot fee that is payable by right for any development that elects to pay the fee in lieu of constructing the affordable housing units required by the city's inclusionary housing ordinance. This fee would allow developers to have another option to meet their inclusionary housing obligations. This fee would be applied at the issuance of building permit and does not apply retroactively to developments that have already applied for building permits. Staff recommend that city council adopt the resolution that sets this in lieu fee. This completes my report and staff are available to answer any questions you may have.

All right. Thank you. So first I will open the public hearing and call for any questions by council members. All right. Opening public comment period. Any comment cards?

No comment cards received.

All right. But we may have somebody in the public that would like to comment.

Thank you, Mayor Bass and council members. Jeff Short, North State Building Industry Association. Thank you again for bringing this forward. We see the number that you landed on at $2.75 as a fair compromise. adjacent to what the affordable builders will often ask for for a public subsidy, and therefore showing our industry's willingness to do our part to solve the societal issue. I was a little disappointed to see a fee escalator be applied. I don't think that was what you had talked about at the last meeting. I'm not against escalation. I didn't get up for a comment on the previous item. And I certainly do not want, the last thing I would want to do is stop this. I appreciate that it is at council discretion every year, but because this is not an impact fee in the way that those other impact fees are impacts of development, I would prefer that that be taken out. Again, that said, the most important thing is that this passes tonight. We want to thank you and your staff for working with us on this, and again, think that this is a happy resolution, however it goes. So, thank you.

Do we have any other members of the public that would like to make a comment? All right. I'll now close the public hearing and see if there is any further discussion. Actually, I have to ask, is there anybody else that wants to ask questions of staff? No? Okay. Then I'll close the public hearing and ask for any further discussion on the item.

Just comments from a discussion perspective, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate Mr. Short's comments in relationship to that. I think there was compromise that was made relative to the amount that was landed on by council. Moving that to the $2.75, I think we've seen from the perspective of not having things indexed or some type of review and potential inflation impact to that increase of those over time that you become out of balance. So I think this is an appropriate time addition to that and enables us to have that flexibility as the need for adjustments is Recognized it can then take place and so I do Strongly encourage us to move this forward as recommended by staff and appreciate that inclusion in the recommendation That's those are my comments mr.. Mayor anybody else I Just want to thank staff For taking this on and I know it's been a it's been a ride so I appreciate all the work

that staff has done. And I do appreciate our stakeholders giving us additional information that has helped us make what I believe is the right decision at this point. So I will close that out and at this point look for a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval of public hearing item four for adoption of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Rockland establishing an inclusionary housing in Luffy.

All right. And do I have a second? I'll second. All right. Having a first and a second, all in favor, aye. Aye. Noes?

No. All right.

Any abstentions? All right. We have four ayes and a no from Council Member Genda. The item passes. Now, moving on to discussion items, which will include oral presentations and recommendations for receiving file. or any resolutions we need to adopt. First is D1, fiscal year 2025-26, third quarter reports, financial building capital improvement program and strategic plan update and position allocation change. Budget Officer Z. Lee.

THANKS FOR THAT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ZENUZIA, ALSO GO BY Z, BUDGET OFFICER. THE ITEM.

CAN YOU DOUBLE CHECK IF THE POWERPOINT IS FROZEN OR IF IT WERE JUST SLOW?

Just changed.

There we go. Sorry about that. The item before you is divided into two parts. I'll provide an update on the fiscal year 25-26 third quarter financial report. And Andrew Keyes, our assistant city manager, will provide an update on the city's two-year strategic plan. So to start, the quarterly financial report provides an overview of the city's current financial position. CITY STAFF FROM THE DEPARTMENTS AND FINANCE DIVISION EVALUATE BUDGET TO ACTUAL PERFORMANCE FOR FISCAL SOUNDNESS OR POTENTIAL ISSUES REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ACTIONS, RECOMMEND ANY NECESSARY MITIGATING PLAN AND MAKE OPERATIONAL CHANGES AS REQUIRED. HERE ARE A FEW KEY HIGHLIGHTS. PROPERTY TAX REVENUES ARE APPROXIMATELY 56% OF BUDGET CONSISTENT WITH THE PRIOR YEAR. THIS AMOUNT REFLECTS THE FIRST TAX DISTRIBUTION RECEIVED IN with the second distribution expected in the fourth quarter. Sales and use tax revenues are approximately 60% of budget compared to 64% in the prior year, and remain on track to meet our budgetary expectations. Building permit revenues remain in line with the prior year, approximately at 66% of budget compared to 67%. Overall, revenues are tracking similar to the prior year, HOWEVER, DEPARTMENT REVENUES ARE PROJECTED SLIGHTLY LOWER AT 47% COMPARED TO 54% IN PRIOR YEAR. POLICE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ARE TRENDING A LITTLE BIT LOWER DUE TO ADJUSTMENTS RELATED TO CONTRACT SERVICES AND TIMING OF SERVICE DELIVERY. A FOURTH QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON YEAR END FINANCIAL RESULTS. For expenditures, departments have expanded approximately 62% of budget compared to 60% from the prior year. Expenditures are expected to be within our budgetary expectations. And for additional information, the third quarter financial report is glued as attachment one. No budgetary adjustments are recommended as part of this report. There is one position allocation with a vacancy of a payroll administrator position. THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO REASSESS THE PAYROLL OPERATIONS. CONSULTANTS CONDUCTED AN ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT TO EVALUATE WORKLOAD EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE DELIVERY NEEDS. AND BASED ON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE RECOMMENDED POSITION CHANGES INCLUDED IN ATTACHMENT FIVE OF THE STAFF REPORT. DELETING 1.0 FULL TIME EQUIVALENT FTE PAYROLL ADMINISTRATOR AND ADDING 1.0 FTE PAYROLL TECHNICIAN. THIS CHANGE WILL ACTUALLY RESULT IN SALARY SAVINGS. And with that, this concludes my presentation, and I'll hand it over to Andrew.

Good evening, Mayor, members of the City Council, Andrew Keyes, Assistant City Manager, and I'm here to present on the strategic plan update for the period January to March 2026. It's important to note that these updates are for just that period, so there's some things you will see that the update looks a little bit out of date because something may have happened between that period of time, but this is just for that first quarter of the year. A reminder about the strategic plan. This was adopted in August of 2025. It's a two-year plan covering that period, 2025 through 2027. And it was adopted after a significant discussion at meetings during the spring of 2025. Five foundational pillars, resilient, vibrant, livable, sustainable, and safe. And then we develop a work plan based on those foundational pillars and those work plans. are categorized into three different types, foundational, strategic, and visionary. And there is a full report in the council item as one of the attachments, and I'll present some highlights of each of the pillars here for your review. So on the resilient pillar, we continue our work towards constructing and staffing a fourth Rockland fire station. This is to maintain our rapid 911 response and emergency medical response times within the city. New firefighter recruits were hired and trained during this period, allowing us to have that additional crew when that fire station is ultimately completed. And we continue work on design specifications and streamlining of our project planning and construction. We have drafts of those documents created during this period and also updating our customer service for our online permit guide to make it easier for developers and residents to submit permits. On the vibrant pillar, we have an objective to create and promote events and activities that attract outside visitors. This is one of those where the city actually held the red, white, and bluegrass civic celebration event. after the completion of this quarter, but we advanced our efforts to plan for that and linked it with the America 250 celebration. Turned out to be a very, I think, successful event, but the planning for that effort's undergone in the first quarter of this year. Also in the first quarter, for our business retention efforts, we launched this size-up business analytics tool, which really puts corporate-level data in the hands of individuals and allows Rockland businesses and Rockland residents to analyze uh their competitors and the market here at a very granular granular level that's uh would be very expensive for them to do otherwise and the city pays for the subscription so it's open to anybody if they'd like to take a look at that and it's specific to our geography of the city of rockland we also launched a an artist row that was at the may 2nd uh red, white, and bluegrass civic celebration, as well as an interactive public art map in support of the Arts Commission during this quarter. In the livable tier, we continue work on modernizing the city's zoning code. Staff completed a review of the draft zoning regulations, and those are being prepared and soon to be presented for decisions by the appropriate bodies. And then we also have city park facilities made more appealing and responsive. And there is a list of improvements at Quarry Park, Twin Oaks Park, the Whitney Park pump track, as well as the shade sales at the Clark Dominguez Park that were all completed during the first quarter of this year. And the project at Oak and Pine actually broke ground in the beginning part of this year. Hopefully that will be open in the fall of 2027. A big development to provide affordable housing units in the city. On the sustainable tier, the city worked towards an update to our request for, quote, an electronic content management system. This provides us the ability to more efficiently go out and bid and also analyze bids to be able to most effectively and efficiently use the dollars that the city does receive. We continue to evaluate opportunities to create new sources of revenue. You'll hear more about this in our next item on the elections and also approve the ordinance on the consent calendar tonight. As part of our outreach efforts, a lot of that occurred during March when we held four town halls. where we discussed possible long-term solutions to the city's known revenue imbalances. One of those solutions that was discussed at the time has since matured in the adoption of that ordinance that has been presented to council, where we discussed a potential ballot measure in November of this year. And then we continued to advocate for the city on a state and national level by submitting position letters as legislation and regulation move through the process. And on the safe tier, the city continues to nurture partnerships that aid in crime prevention. Most notably was the beginning of the education and enforcement of the Rockland Unified School District e-bike policy that was adopted in December. During January and February, it was education and enforcement, respectively, of that policy. And that was initiated, and that created a much... safer environment on our roads by removing that opportunity to take e-bikes to school because they were no longer allowed there. And really will help provide a safer environment for both the riders as well as vehicles in the city going forward. The police department continued significant engagement with the public during this period. both at local schools in continued partnership with our Granite Drive auto dealership group, as well as other local businesses and participating in community events. And then our firefighters, our fire department approved tablet command software that enables the firefighters to quickly target hazards at a touch of a button on a tablet, and they are going to a scene. WITH THAT, I'LL OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS OR EITHER THE FINANCIAL REPORT OR STRATEGIC PLAN REPORT.

THANK YOU. I WILL START BY JUST ASKING FOR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS. ANYONE WANT TO TAKE A STAB AT BEING THE FIRST? WELL, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. NO?

YES? JUST YOU HAD A PHOTO OF THE PUBLIC MARKET. WHAT IS THE TIMING ON THAT AT THIS POINT?

We are in regular communication with the applicant. There is one item, and I don't know if David knows if it's been submitted, one small request we made of them just last week, and that's kind of the final piece of information we needed to be able to set the hearing, which would be at a planning director level to ultimately approve. I'd imagine in the next month or so that would be set. I think I'm seeing a head nod over from David. And then once that's approved, they anticipate they'd like to move quickly. They have up to six months to close their escrow with us on the property after that. They've indicated they'd like to move quickly to begin to do some flat work possibly this year and then start construction next year.

Do they have to go through the planning commission for this?

Community Development Director approval at this point, yes. It has to be a public hearing, but it's a Community Development Director hearing. Okay. All right. Thank you.

Anyone else? All right. We will now open public comment on this item. Do we have any comment cards?

No comment cards, Mayor Bass.

Anybody in the public that would like to make a comment on this item? All right. Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we have action on only one of these items. Is that correct? Just on C? Okay. So I'm looking for a motion on D1C.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval on D1C, the adoption of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Rockland approving the deletion of one payroll administrative position from the Administrative Services Department in the addition of one payroll technician 1-2 position to the Administrative Services Department.

Second. All right. Having a first and a second. All in favor, aye. Aye. Nose. Abstentions? The ayes have it. The item passes unanimously. Thank you. Moving on to D2. This is the November 3rd, 2026 general municipal election. We will have assistant city manager Andrew Keyes. And I believe on this one, we will be seeking approvals on four of these all individually. Is that correct? Okay. Without further ado.

All right. Mr. Keyes. All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So this item is really two items kind of combined into one. There is the city council candidate elections, and then there's the transaction and use tax election. And under each, there are two separate resolutions. Combined them because they're all related to the November election, and it made more sense to put them all as one item so you're considering them together or having the presentation together. Typically, the city council candidate items are Every two years. And the only difference each two years is whether there's two seats or three seats up, depending on the rotation. And those are typically done on consent. So they are fairly routine. So council has seen those items before, so I'll spend a little less time on those, and then we'll discuss the transaction and use tax measure items. So on the city council candidate elections, again, approved every two years, typically on consent. We consolidated them this year with the transaction and use tax, which is a little unique. The first resolution calls the election, sets the parameters around candidate statements, and all of this is consistent with rocking the municipal code and state law. And the second resolution then consolidates the election with the statewide general election and requests the county to administer that election on the city's behalf, and the city pays for those services. So there's a lot of verbiage that is required to make that happen, but that's essentially what those two resolutions do. So I'll pause quickly if there's any questions on the candidate resolutions themselves. This year, as you know, we have two seats up. It's the Vice Mayor Bill Holden and Councilmember Joe Guialdo's seat will be up in November. Any questions on those? Okay, so we'll move into the transaction and use tax. So on May 26th of this year, City Council introduced an ordinance to levy a half cent transaction use tax subject to voter approval. The staff presentation that night, we have available if there are questions or you'd like to see more information related to that. And that presentation discussed the significant outreach process that the city underwent that I briefly touched upon in the last item, including town hall meetings, as well as online advertisements, surveys, multiple mailers to get resident feedback. The ordinance was drafted consistent with that resident feedback, and the ballot language that you will see later is also consistent with that ordinance and that feedback. ON TONIGHT'S CONSENT CALENDAR, THE ORDINANCE WAS ACTUALLY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, SO NOW THE NEXT STEP IS TO PLACE THAT BEFORE THE VOTERS, AND THAT'S WHAT THESE ACTIONS WILL COLLECTIVELY DO TONIGHT. THE TWO RESOLUTIONS ARE NECESSARY, SIMILAR TO THE CANDIDATE MEASURES, TO ALLOW VOTERS TO CONSIDER THIS MEASURE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 3rd. THE FIRST OF THOSE RESOLUTIONS, JUST LIKE WITH THE CANDIDATE ELECTIONS, CALLS FOR THAT ELECTION. But what it does differently, it will approve the actual ballot language for the question that voters will see before them. And it provides guidance for who can file arguments for and against the measure consistent with the state law under the election code. The second resolution will consolidate the election with the statewide general election and request again the county to administer that on the city's behalf. So first, I'll go through the arguments provisions, and then we'll discuss the ballot language itself. So consistent with the election code, there's a priority that's given to the arguments, so the resolution, or who can file the arguments, so the resolution sets this out. Priority number one is given to the city council, or member any member of the City Council so that if an argument is filed from that group that argument will be the one that's placed in the voter guides then if an argument doesn't come from that group it goes down the waterfall so then any individual voter eligible to vote on the measure would be second a bona fide group of such citizens would be third and then a combination of voters citizens would be for all of that's preempted if if somebody from the council would be would file an argument Arguments for and against can be no more than 300 words. They're due by August 7th rebuttal arguments allow the same priority Order and are due by August 17th and not in the resolution but City Council can discuss whether City Council would like to designate a member or subcommittee of the council as TO DRAFT AN ARGUMENT AS AN INDIVIDUAL OR ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL. THAT WOULD REQUIRE SPECIFIC DIRECTION AND COUNCIL DISCUSSION TONIGHT IF YOU DESIRE TO GO THAT ROUTE. AND THEN THE OTHER ITEM THAT'S UNIQUE TO THE BALLOT QUESTION, ON THE CANDIDATE ELECTIONS, THERE'S THE NAMES OF THE CANDIDATES APPEAR. ON A BALLOT MEASURE QUESTION, IT'S JUST LIKE WHEN WE SEE STATEWIDE MEASURES OR COUNTYWIDE There's a specific question asked of the voters. And I'll read the question. There is a 75-word limit, so that's why it's crafted and you see slashes and things where you might normally see an and. It's to make sure that we meet the requirements and the word limits. To maintain Rockland's public safety, financial stability, and core public services, including rapid 911 emergency medical response, police fire protection, keeping public areas and parks healthy, safe, and clean, preserving open space, preventing wildfires, shall the City of Rockland's measure establishing a half-cent sales tax, providing approximately $8 million annually for general revenue purposes until ended by voters, keeping all funds local with annual audits, public spending disclosure be adopted. And so a yes vote would... be a vote to approve the tax and no vote would be a vote against the tax. And so there are certain provisions in here that are required to make it a general measure. So there are mentions of general as well as requirements to have the dollar amount stated, the duration stated. And so all of those things are included. So this is a compliant language that we could then present to the voters that would adopt the ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY ENACT THE ORDINANCE THAT COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED AT THIS POINT IN TIME. SO THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. AS NOTED THE RECOMMENDED ACTION IS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER EACH OF THESE RESOLUTIONS INDIVIDUALLY. SO WE WOULD ASK THAT COUNCIL ASK AND HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ANSWERED, OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, DELIBERATE ON THE ITEM, AND THEN WE HAVE A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE COUNCIL ELECTION, A RESOLUTION CONSOLIDATING THE COUNCIL ELECTION, AND THEN THE SAME CALLING AND CONSOLIDATING RESOLUTIONS FOR THE TRANSACTION AND USE TAX. AND THEN IF COUNCIL DESIRES, IF THE TRANSACTION AND USE TAX MEASURES ARE APPROVED, THEN THERE WOULD NEED TO BE OR IF COUNCIL DESIRES TO designate somebody on council to draft the arguments Would need to discuss and direct how that would would occur either by individual or committee at that point in time Thank you any questions, I mean All right.

So I'm gonna start with questions by council members. Do I have anything anyone have the questions? No All right Yes Then I will move this for public comment. Is there any comment cards?

Mayor Bass, there were no comment cards received.

Anybody in the public?

Hello again. I understand that the... that the ballot measure in question meets the word limits. However, I would still advise that it's considerably wordy if the intention is just to do a half-cent sales tax. For the purpose of all these issues, having the including and enlisting the including parts to be larger than the actual meet of the ballot measure itself, that might be... Redundant or extraneous, I guess. I would advise cutting everything from including to the word should or to just before the word should. It will still get all the exact same point across, and it'll be a lot cleaner for voters to either approve or deny. There we are. Thank you.

Thank you. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE IT BACK TO ASK FOR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BY ANYONE HERE. YES. COUNCILMEMBER BROADWAY.

QUESTION OF CONFIRMATION, JUST THE CONSIDERATION OF A DESIGNATION OF AN AUTHOR THAT WILL OCCUR AFTER THE ACTION ON THE FOUR ITEMS?

Yeah, the items are separate. The items don't actually make that. And so that could be done just from a direction or discussion from staff or from council. So if you wanted to have a subcommittee, you would direct staff to hold a subcommittee or you would nominate one of your members to do that. And so that doesn't need a resolution. So that could happen afterwards.

Yeah, I was just curious because I thought maybe we would have to be attached to D. But we can just have direction on that part of it, right?

I'm going to defer to the city attorney on that, yeah.

I mean, there's more than one way to do it, but the way, as you noted, that it's set up currently, there's some broad parameters around how those arguments could be forwarded and who could do them. If the council's inclination were to make them more specific or delegate more specific authority to one or two members of the council, then this would be an opportunity to do that, and we'd want to make sure that there's a motion and vote that clearly lays out that. And those are items that are up to the city council's prerogative.

So we would go A, for procedural purposes, we'd go A through D, and then we would have a separate motion for who's going to make the arguments, whether it be one individual or the entire city council, and then also whether there will be a subcommittee and who would make up that subcommittee. That would be fine.

That would be one way. Okay. And so you'd have, in that case, you would have taken each of the separate action items to adopt the respective resolution separately. And then you could give direction, delegation authority, I should say, for purposes of the argument aspect. Just another option would be to direct that the resolution actually captures it expressly. That's up to the City Council if you want to do it that way.

Okay, then what I'll do is, what I think we should do is take A through C, and we'll have a discussion right now, and then once we get to D, perhaps we will include who will be making the arguments and who will be on the subcommittee to draft that argument.

Let's just double check and make sure I'm talking about the correct resolution of C or D. So I think, yeah, I think, I think,

I THINK WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING IS CORRECT, BUT THE ORDER THAT THEY ARE WRITTEN ON HERE IS NOT. THE ORDER THAT THEY'RE LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT HAS THE RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE TRANSACTION ON THE USE TAX ELECTION IMPROVING THE BALLOT QUESTION AND ARGUMENT PARAMETERS IS ACTUALLY ITEM D.

It's number three on the screen in front of you.

Number three on the screen in front of you. Yeah, I'm looking at it from when we're reading out the resolution.

A, B, C. Right.

Yeah, I'm not looking at the system. Excellent. Okay. So we'll just take that one slow and steady, and when we get to D, I'll make sure that we know exactly where we're going with it. So any further discussion or questions? I've got a couple, but I want to make sure everyone gets there. No? Okay. And I appreciate always the comments from Benjamin Borkman. I want to acknowledge that because he's here so often, which I love, he has – an acute understanding, I think, more so than the average voter. And I think the point's well taken on the wordiness, because I don't like a lot of words. But I think in this situation, because we're reaching out to many people that are going to be voting on this that don't have the knowledge, that's important. And I would also note, again, You know me noting for the record that last council, our discussion item was this. So we're making a decision based on a complete discussion that happened previously. So if anyone's watching this and saying we didn't talk about The impacts of all of this, I would ask them to revert back to our last council where we had a robust discussion about this so that if somebody's watching this, they're not thinking we're taking this lightly. We've actually gone over it quite a bit. And this is an important discussion, continued discussion in a sense. So moving to the ballot measure, because I would note, I believe it was unanimous that we wanted to be able to move forward with this when we discussed this last time, is who would My understanding, correct me now, this is a question, is that to write the arguments and have, it could be written by, for example, just the mayor. It could be written on behalf of the entire city council. So when we are maybe pushing forward who's going to be doing, whose name is going to be on the argument, the first, I guess, sub-motion within D would be Is it going to be the mayor? Is it going to be everyone? And does anybody want to have any insight or input on that?

So I'm thinking back to, I can't remember if it was two or four years ago when we did the tourism tax. I thought we just had community members writing that.

The City Council didn't designate any specific person, and so it fell on that order down to individuals. And yes, that's how it ended up being identified. In this case, we wanted to make sure if the City Council did want to take on that role that they had the opportunity through this process. Last time we didn't put that in, we didn't call it out in the resolution.

Does that mean that if we call it out in the resolution, the council has to do it, or it gets kind of the first chance that if it wants to defer to a citizens group, that's okay?

Go ahead. MY ANSWER IS IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO DECIDE ON THAT, IF I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION CORRECTLY.

I GUESS I'M SITTING HERE, I DON'T WANT TO LOCK IN THAT THE ARGUMENT IS GOING TO COME FROM THE MAYOR OR THE COUNCIL. IF WE WANT TO GIVE OURSELVES the option, but I've heard from a lot of people in the community, and I think those community voices would be good to make the argument, as opposed to just the council.

If you do nothing, and any combination of council members want to do something, they'd have first priority, right? And then if no one on the council does it, then it would revert to...

that's that's correct the council by the resolution has that first priority so if if you don't designate then we still have theoretically all you could write it and then that becomes that has to then be you know decided which one is selected by I believe the resolution calls the city clerk to but even if we don't designate anybody right now couldn't any combination of council members get together and put something together I

Any combination of two of you. Any combination of two, yes.

Any combination of two. Unless we come forward.

And only one argument makes it. So then in my example of potentially there's five arguments, then you place the clerk who's designated to be the final decider of which argument goes on there based on those four tiering priorities. If she has five arguments from the council members individually, then she's going to have to select which one goes.

Sorry.

Go ahead.

So part of your decision, I'm not saying do one or the other because I'm not trying to recommend a particular outcome just so that you're thinking about your options, is that if the council as a whole were inclined to want to designate one or two of you, and today you're wanting that, one or two operating group to be speaking on behalf of the entire council, then they would be given authority to go forward and do the argument and take care of it, and it would be on behalf of the council. That's one way to play that. The other option would be not to have that delegation, because you're not directing that it be on behalf of the entire council, and then individual members, as the resolution's framed now, would be able to choose or not to submit argument.

Or we could have, for example, two members then maybe find that coalition and write the argument with them.

If you authorize today that the two members are speaking on behalf of the council, yes. You would not have the two members later coordinate with a third or more members of the council.

Right, but other outside groups.

But with the community, yes. And so what that does, because you're aware, I believe, that there's a five signatory limit on the argument. And so some places, as I have tried to research this issue and understand the options in advance of the meeting, some places will have, say, a two-person ad hoc be authorized to be on behalf of the city council so it doesn't occupy, say, five signatures on the argument. But they're also given the authority to discuss at their discretion, determine what other signatories might join in on that argument with the understanding that that authority goes forward and it's not intended or planned to come back for specific reconfirmation of who's signing on.

So I think my big question, Mr. Mayor, is let's say we designated, oh, for example, the mayor and council member Broadway to manage this. Does that mean their names have to be on it or could they yield to other people?

Again, you could decide today how you want that to be framed as who's the signer. So you'd have some discretion, but if you want to go to that level of detail, my suggestion would be to make sure that you give that level of detail in your direction tonight.

Matt, we also have the ability to designate two members of the council. There would not be any engagement of other council members, but Two members to make that determination. To me, the most compelling approach is an approach that includes potentially a member of the council, a member, a leader in the community, someone from the business community, and an individual from public safety, specifically given the feedback we've had. So generally, and you see that often in these types of measures, and you have the ability for up to five, but my recommendation would be that we look at potentially Vice Mayor Halden, myself, serving if the council so felt to serve in the capacity of identifying a group like that to represent the ballot statement, the argument in favor and that those people could be selected and then work to have that argument developed.

So it would be more having an ad hoc committee as you mentioned and whatever two members of the council are on the committee don't necessarily aren't then obligated to be

Signatories they could still delegate that to other community members Not delegate, but have other community members or another council member sign if the Little sure yes if the so basically if the ad hoc is designated tonight That that means the City Council is trusting that ad hoc to go forward do the argument and enlist other signatories to it and they could also be

to one or two of the five signatories, if that's how you direct it.

Or none of them.

Correct.

Or the council can also designate that one of the signatures be the city council, which would encompass you all but wouldn't have an individual name, but it only takes up one spot. So you're playing with five signatures.

I don't think we want to box ourselves in. I think that's what we're trying to prevent.

Thank you. Just in listening, I think we all have the same thought that having representatives from our business community or public safety, I think that people have been engaged and I think it's really helpful. But I think as far as a signature, to me, it would make sense to have the mayor be our signature for that along with then whatever public service. Because I think it would look strange if just one

Councilmember did it that wasn't the mayor Yeah, I mean I and I don't have a problem with that I However, this all shakes out. But I think I would say that the first and foremost, the establishment of a subcommittee, two members, to see what the best makeup is. I mean, I will say right now, I have no problem being kind of the lone ranger on it if that's the way it comes down to, depending on how voters feel about me in five months or four months. The jury's out. But if that's the case, then we can do that. Otherwise, my thought is let's have the subcommittee seek out what's going to be the most powerful message that will be received the best by voters with an argument that is going to be truthful and transparent. for voters and so the subcommittee can kind of come to the give us suggestions I guess my question is let's just say we go that route and one of the signatories we say well someone like either it's going to be the mayor or everyone on city council they've got that one signatory thing locked up then the subcommittee can go out they can one find other signatories and two CAN WRITE THE ARGUMENT WITH THOSE OTHER SIGNATORIES. THAT COULD BE THE OPTION WE GO DOWN. IS THAT CORRECT?

NEW SPEAKER YES. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND I THINK THIS MAY TIE INTO COUNCILMEMBER GAYALDO'S COMMENT SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THAT UNDER THAT SCENARIO YOU WOULD AUTHORIZE THE AD HOC TO DO THE ARGUMENT AND IT WOULD APPEAR BASICALLY AS, YOU KNOW, the city council, and you could even have a space for by the person who's authorized to have submitted it for the city council. And then the remainder of the four spots would be non-city associations or groups that you would go forward and see if they want to join in on that argument. Am I answering your question? Right.

And I guess my question then is how does, if we were to decide whether it's going to be just the mayor or if it's going to be The council when do we have to come back to make that decision or is that decision after you made tonight?

You do not need to come you can you make that decision now and you do not return you don't need to return to have if you you would be trusting that The mayor or the ad hoc is going to go forward and advocate with that part with with that argument And I I guess my question is but for them to let's just say I'm gonna say them as in councilmember Broadway and Halden

It formed a subcommittee, and it's decided that all five of us should be on it. But obviously, aside from right now, we would have to come back to be able to figure that part out.

So whatever decisions are made tonight, we will be submitting to the registrar voters tomorrow. So that determination with the resolutions, we take them down to the office tomorrow morning. So the determination of who is going to be a signatory, if you want to proactively do that, we should identify it tonight. You can also, again, defer that it could be the council. And if the council doesn't, then again, any member of the public could be added. My recommendation would be a subcommittee so you don't have to be concerned that all five members of the council are comfortable with the language because there, quite frankly, isn't another meeting to come back between now and when we need to submit. to review that language, which is due by August 7th. And so the determination of a subcommittee, either representing the city council or that if the mayor was to sit on it, could be drafted with the mayor, would be the most appropriate.

Or I could just roll the dice, say, yeah, put my name on it, and then let two other people come up with the arguments and find the signatories.

You could.

Yeah.

Mr. Mayor. Let's imagine that Council Member Broadway and I are a subcommittee. Could we just say the council gives direction to the subcommittee to develop the argument and choose the signatories?

Yes.

Okay. I think that's what I'd like to do. And it wouldn't preclude us, I hope, from deciding one of the signatories is going to be the mayor.

If the direction states that clearly, then that's possible. Wait a minute.

So I'm talking about the council giving direction to the subcommittee to decide, not telling us who we're going to be. But if the subcommittee decides we want the mayor, then that's OK. But are you saying we have to say the mayor if we want the mayor?

No, I'm just saying that you'd have to make sure that council's comfortable that you can put council's signature on there. any member's signature on there as part of your choice. That was the...

Okay. So we appoint a couple people as a subcommittee and that we're going to choose the signatories for this argument.

To draft the argument. So the subcommittee would likely be drafting the argument and identifying the signators.

Right. And I think the question because... We're not limited on who we could choose.

I don't believe you are. It depends on, again, how you frame the direction. The interesting part would be the mayor would have to agree to be comfortable with whatever you draft because it doesn't sound like he's on the subcommittee in this scenario.

Right, right. But I mean, so let's say... We come up with something and we decide the mayor is one of the people we want as a signatory. It's not like a Brown Act of violation or something for us to show the thing to the mayor.

Could we just then establish a subcommittee, whoever, I know we're just nominating without asking if anybody's interested, ask them to come up with the signatories but recommend that one of them be the mayor? Because I think the... All of us are agreeing to have somebody sign on our behalf.

I think that the cleanest way to achieve what I think you're trying to do would be to have the mayor as one of the subcommittee members.

Be one of the subcommittee members. Correct. Okay, but we're only two people.

Correct.

Okay.

That's the, yeah. It turns out he's an excellent writer, so I feel great.

I just want to make clear that the delegation of authority, if you go forward with this idea, You basically are you're saying you trust that they'll write what you're okay with and it's not it isn't Circulated to a third or fourth or fifth member of the council under that scenario for Brown Act purposes For these reasons sometimes some councils are good with that approach and other times They're not so yeah, I mean it's puzzling to me is this isn't city business.

This is a campaign but So you'd be saying then that the five of us can't see the draft of the argument unless we call a meeting? A special meeting.

That's correct basically so the ad hoc that we're talking about a two-person ad hoc is delegated with this Authority the council trust that they'll write it and sign off as directed tonight and There is no SEPARATE CIRCULATION OR DRAFTING AMONGST MORE THAN THE TWO.

DO WE HAVE A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING?

THAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY IF THAT WERE TO BE THE CASE WHERE THE PROPOSED DRAFT WOULD BE CONSIDERED IF NEEDED.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS HOW ABOUT THE REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT AGAINST THE THING? IS THE SUBCOMMITTEE ALSO IN CHARGE OF THAT?

The idea would be that if you were submitting or appointing a subcommittee, they'd be able to write both. And they follow the same parameters. So if you didn't appoint somebody, it would be that same list as previously shown. It would have priority.

Mr. Mayor, what are your thoughts?

I THINK YOU'RE ROLLING THE DICE PUTTING MY NAME ON IT THESE DAYS, BUT IF YOU WANT TO.

I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I DO FEEL THAT THE VICE MAYOR AND I, IF THE COUNCIL WERE COMFORTABLE WITH IT, COULD SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE WITH THE DIRECTION TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS OF WHOSE SIGNATURES WOULD BE ON THERE TO AN INCLUDING potentially the mayor. If it was deemed by the committee that there needed to be a full council review, we could ask for that to be placed as an item on a future agenda or a special meeting called because we do have a limit on the number of meetings that we will have prior to that time, but it does provide us with that ability.

And I have complete trust in both of you. So I would not have a problem with it. I do believe that when it comes to the overall reach in the community, all of us have our own abilities. But I do believe that both of you would have an impressive reach. And so I have... no reservations when it comes to my name being on something. And I do believe if you thought that there was a need to come back, then you would make that call.

So could we, let me just try this again. Could council member Broadway and I be a subcommittee and that the subcommittee could be directed to include the mayor as a signatory or as soon as we include him, we gotta all come back to a meeting?

I think he would just need to be, unless we scheduled another meeting, the mayor would have to be willing to sign whatever you put in front of him.

Okay. I don't want to put words in your mouth, Mr. Mayor, but you appear open.

Yes. No, I'm totally fine with that.

I have no doubt. I think if any of us are going to be on this, then I think the community would expect the mayor to be on this argument.

The benefit and the, you know, we all come from very different backgrounds and we have our own. We bring something a little bit different. But the beauty, quite honestly, of why I sit a little taller in the seat is, quite frankly, that we all work very well together. And I have absolute confidence and trust in a subcommittee if that's if you two are willing to do that. And whoever signature you put on there, including mine or the mayor, I'm speaking for the mayor, but I am comfortable to support that. I know you'll do a great job.

So am I correct that if we say, all right, so we're going to have a subcommittee to consider to basically run the process, including choosing the signatories. Do we say including possibly the mayor? Do we say including the mayor?

I think if you say it may include the mayor, it's fine, and then you can make that determination later. It sounds like that's what the direction is.

Yeah, I don't think it would even need to be that. I've just given my consent, so I'm not going to...

But did somebody say that he basically... will be shown the text and he won't have a chance to edit it. It'll either be yes or no. He'll sign it or...

Yes, because if you start having that

Conversation because two of you drafted it and one's now editing it that becomes the serial meeting or serial conversation Concept that comes out of the Brown Act and so you have a potential violation and so what we can do is identify timeframes and and deadlines to which We would like you would like to have the the draft finalized so that if the mayor didn't any concerns We would have time to agenda as a meeting or put it on a future agenda. We can do that

We have been just kind of leaning towards you to make sure I'm I'm good with that hopefully We didn't indentured servitude Volunteered the only thing that concerns me is like if we'd like the mayor to be a signatory and Councilman Broadway and I are the subcommittee that's like here take it or leave it You know kind of just seems

I've had a lot of that in the past couple months. While I understand that, I think that personally, if it were not me that we were discussing as part of this committee, if it was you, Vice Mayor, and another, I have the utmost confidence in this body being able to develop an argument in favor that I would support if you chose to put my name on there without me having a vote outside of this decision to put it on there. So I'm confident in that, and the mayor appears to have that level of confidence.

Yeah, I'm confident. I'm not worried about it. And like I said, really it's that both of you, if you felt that we absolutely positively needed to have a special meeting, which I don't ever foresee, then you would make that decision. So I'm not worried at all.

Okay, so. You want me to give this a shot for a motion?

Do we need to do the others first and then get to it?

We're going to do this direction and then do A, B, C, and then we'll do D. And within D, I will include what we just discussed, if that's what you're comfortable with.

All right. I think at this point we've already done, we've already opened public comment. So, yeah, we can move on to taking these resolutions separately.

Would it be a bad time to point out, I've got like four, five people in the audience. They may be on a signature here. We've taken volunteers as you walk out the door.

All right. So, Mr. Mayor, I will move approval of discussion item D to A. I'LL SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. AYE. NOSE. ABSTENTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

MR. MAYOR, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL OF DISCUSSION ITEM D2B. I'LL SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. AYE. NOSE. ABSTENTIONS. THE AYES HAVE IT. IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

MR. MAYOR, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL OF DISCUSSION ITEM D2C?

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AYE. DO WE GET A SECOND?

I'M JUST MOVING, MAN. MOVING AND SHAKING. A SECOND?

MAYBE WE DID. I'LL SECOND. OKAY. I DIDN'T KNOW IF SOMEBODY HAD ALREADY SAID IT.

GOT THE FIRST AND THE SECOND? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. AYE. NOES? ABSTENTIONS? AYES HAVE IT. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

All right. And I will move approval of discussion item D2D. I'm going to read this to approve the adoption of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Rockland requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Placer to consolidate a general municipal election. TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3RD, 2026 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THAT DATE PURSUANT TO 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE AND PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF DIRECT AND REBOTTLED ARGUMENTS AND SETTING RULES FOR THE FILING OF WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING A CITY MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION, INCLUDING AT COUNCIL'S DIRECTION THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AD HOC COMMITTEE consisting of Vice Mayor Bill Holden, Council Member Ken Broadway, who will determine the signatories that will be on the ballot in support of that argument. I have a second. Are you comfortable with that, Mr. Attorney?

I think you gave it too much specificity. You said you could only write the argument for.

ALONG WITH THE RESPONSE TO THE ARGUMENT AGAINST. AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED TO SPECIFY THAT IT WOULD BE INCLUSIVE OF THE MAYOR BECAUSE WE'RE STATING WE WILL DECIDE WHICH SIGNATORS WILL BE ON THERE. CORRECT, MATT?

DIDN'T YOU SAY WE NEED TO SAY IT MAY BE THE MAYOR?

I'M SORRY, I COULD NOT HEAR WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

I THOUGHT YOU SAID WE NEEDED TO SAY IT MAY INCLUDE THE MAYOR.

If you want to have that as optional so that the ad hoc two-person ad hoc designate Identifies a person ideally you would know that now to make it very clear But yes, you could also have them decide that Later and then that person would be basically would be presented with it and sign There wouldn't be alterations or anything or changes, but that's how that would work So I will modify my motion to state that we will consider signatories

in alignment with the direction provided tonight by council.

All right. Do I have a second?

Second. All right.

All in favor, aye. Aye. Nose? Abstentions? The ayes have it. It passes unanimously. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. We will now move on to discussion item three. City Council Meeting Technology Service Disruption Policy, and we will have our City Clerk, Aventa Singh.

Good evening, Honourable Mayor and City Council Members. I am Aventa Singh, City Clerk. Discussion item D3 before you on tonight's agenda is for Council consideration and adoption of the City Council Meeting Technology Service Disruption Policy. Senate Bill 707, effective January 1, 2026, amended several provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other requirements, it mandates that beginning July 1, 2026, eligible legislative meeting bodies, which applies to the City Council, must allow for members of the public to provide remote public comments during City Council meetings. In addition, the City is required to adopt a policy to address potential meeting disruptions to include any technology service disruptions. Commencing July 1st, all City Council meetings must include opportunities for the public to participate using a two-way telephonic service or a two-way audiovisual platform. To comply with this requirement, all future Rockland City Council meetings will be broadcast with a Zoom meeting link to allow the public to participate and provide public comments remotely. A live stream of the meeting will continue to be available on the City's website through the Granicus video link. Prior to July 1st, 2026, the City Council must adopt a technology service disruption policy, which is included as attachment two to the staff report. The proposed policy establishes procedures for responding to disruptions affecting remote public access. If a disruption were to occur, the Council would recess the meeting while staff would make good faith efforts to restore the service. According to the new law, the open session meeting could not reconvene for at least one hour unless the service is restored sooner. If service cannot be restored, the City Council may reconvene after one hour if it makes findings by roll call vote that good faith efforts were made to restore the service and that the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the public interest in maintaining public remote public access staff recommends approval of the resolution and the adoption of the technology service disruption resolution policy before you that concludes my reports and staff is available for questions thank you thank you

All right. First questions, council members?

I do have a question. Just seeing other bodies that have that opportunity for Zoom, for public comment, they have limited. So, for instance, if you are county supervisors, they have public comment. I think it's like 20 minutes to start with. in the space where it is in the agenda, and then they come back to it after the other assigned things. Is that, you know, just in case you had, people just kept calling in, and so you never, the people that are here for things on the agenda just don't get to them. Is that something that we would consider? I don't expect it to be a problem, and obviously we want public comment, but I also want to make sure that the people that are here for agendized items get their opportunity.

That isn't a part of this item, but if it's the council's desire, we can bring back recommended changes to the procedure handbook where we identify the order of our agendas to accommodate a similar, same similar to what you're talking about, if that's something the council would like us to consider.

It's just the non-agenda items that I'm referring to. Obviously, if agenda items are

Correct. But by resolution, you adopt the guide and it mandates the order. So we would want to add in a second section for public and identify that the first section was time certain if that's something that you want to pursue. And we could do that. We could bring that back for your consideration if it's something you want.

So it would be something like best practices on, and we'd be asking to explore what would be the best path forward, including maybe allowing people who are in person to be able to present. But if we hit a certain time period, we could then have people, and then people online could come back later.

At the back end of the agenda so that, yeah.

And we do have the ability just on any given meeting, if we had a large group, to adjust. the order and the time and all that.

You do. Under agenda review, you can move things around and then obviously you have the discretion with the mayor's recommendation, the council's concurrence to reduce or increase the amount of time for public comment. But that has to happen, I believe, right at the beginning because the first person who's afforded the full three minutes, that then indicates that for the rest of the meeting, three minutes is the time.

And I think that's the challenge because with phone calls you don't know how many you're going to get.

Maybe establishing a policy that says whatever it's going to say ahead of time until we know. If we're faced with that situation, this is how we deal with it.

Yeah. If I may? Please. I don't want to get ahead of ourselves on the agenda. potentially this is a future agenda item to have staff look at best practices and come back to us as opposed to a recommendation. Let's have a discussion about what we're seeing. This is fairly new and I think it would be helpful for us to be educated on things that others are doing that have been found to be more effective.

I definitely know if you've ever sat through especially the county supervisors there can be continual call-ins and so I think Of course you want all that, but you also want the agenda folks to be able to have their time for public comment as well.

All right. Any other questions? All right. At this point I'll open public comment. Do we have any comment cards?

No comment cards received.

All right. Anybody in the public?

Hello again. I noticed there was a lot of reference to Zoom in this conversation, and I didn't see any in the resolution or in the exhibit. So I'm glad for that. I just wanted to make sure that personally, I don't prefer Zoom. It melts my phone. In the instance that years from now we switch to another technology or another streaming service that is more amenable or has a faster speed rate or is made in America, I'd prefer that we can account to switch to that platform within our internet and telephone services. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Any further comments? All right, seeing none, I will close it out and bring it back for further discussion. Is there anyone that has any further discussion?

No?

Okay. I would just say that... The one comment I do have is I think we need to be hypervigilant when it comes to the costs of this. I know that the staff has stated that it doesn't cost anything. Kind of actually, to Benjamin's point, changing providers or if providers increase their any fees because now they know we're a captive audience in terms of we now have to adopt services. a technology and we have to be able to use it. If we have to take on additional costs because we do have an abundance of callers and whatever version we're using has to change, I think that we should be paying attention to that because this is mandate is a state mandate that could cost us money and then we would have to seek reimbursement from the state for that and I just want us to make sure that we're paying attention to that as well as in the event that there are other jurisdictions that have identified a cost that we are joining our voice to the chorus of that and making sure that when that period opens up for asking for reimbursement, we're doing it. Obviously, there's precedent. There's a number of reimbursements we have not received from the state because of changes to the Brown Act, as well as various changes that have happened for public comment or for public meetings. And I just think it's important for us to get in front of that and be aware of it. I am almost certain that there will be a couple of jurisdictions that put in for the commission on state mandates for this. And in that event, we should probably reevaluate and see where they have identified costs. Not saying we're going to be reimbursed. We all know that the state already owes us a million dollars, but this is just another one. I'd like to make sure we're keeping receipts. Anything else? All right. Then I will be seeking for a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I'll move approval of discussion item D3.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. HAVING A FIRST AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. AYE. NOES? ABSTENTIONS? THE AYES HAVE IT. IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE ARE GOING TO ASK FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND THEN WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO BACK INTO CLOSED SESSION BEFORE WE ADJOURN. SO DO WE HAVE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THAT WE'D LIKE TO BRING UP NOW?

MR. MAYOR, JUST TO RESTATE, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO ADDRESS COUNCILMEMBER GAYELDO'S REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION. of potential review of how we manage this state requirement and having staff bring back some best practices that have been found and alternatives that are available.

Yeah, and I would just add to that, any disruptive behavior that comes from this, I do know that some city councils have had issues with that and how we deal with it. I understand that we already have a way to deal with disruptions in person. I just want to make sure that if we have a disruption online, that we're not taken off, you know, offline too long to have to then come back on. So thank you. Okay. With that, we will now reenter into closed session. Do we want to take a break before we do that? Everyone's good? Okay. We will reenter closed session. back from closed session. We do not have anything at this point to report out. And before adjournment, I would like to have a moment of silence and adjourn in honor of Sharon Rhoda, who is one of the owners of Pottery World and a phenomenal member of Rockland. And so at this moment, if everyone could just give a moment of silence. Thank you. And we are adjourned.

Recording.