City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. So, it's 7:02 and I'm calling this meeting of the San Leandro City Council to order. Today is a work session. It is April 13, 2026. This point in time, Madame Clerk, would you please take RO? Council member James Aguular, present. Council member Victor Aguular, present. Council member Fred Simon is currently absent. Council member Bowen, present. Vice Mayor Viveros Walton, present. Present. Council member Bolt, present.

And Mayor Gonzalez,

present. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I will start with my announcement. The city of Sano conducts orderly meetings to fulfill its mandate. Discriminatory statements or conduct that would potentially violate the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and or the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, California Penal Code sections 43 or 415 are per se disruptive to a meeting and will not be tolerated. Please see the city council handbook and city council meeting rules of decorum for more information. Madam clerk,

if you would like to make a public comment during the meeting, you can do so in person or via Zoom. If you are present at the meeting, please complete a speaker card and submit it to the city clerk before the item is presented. If you wish to participate in public comment via Zoom, you can use the raise your hand tool when the item is called. During public comment session, speakers will be invited to speak and will have a set time to share their comments. A countdown timer will appear for their convenience, and when the time is up, the microphone will be muted. All raised hands outside of public comment will be lowered to avoid confusion. Once public comment is opened, hands may be raised to speak.

We'll proceed to item number three. Is there a report coming out of close session? Thank you, mayor. Uh on item 3A, a reportable action was taken, but because it's still in the legal process, uh no report is required at this time. No report was taken on item 3B, but direction was provided to staff on item 3A. More information may be forthcoming in the coming weeks related to the same and more generally direction provided to staff. Thank you.

All right, here we go. Thank you so much for that. We will move to item 4A. This is our item for today's agenda. Um I'll just very begin I'll begin briefly by just reminding council that uh we are in a difficult situation with our budget. Each of you has expressed concerns and I'm very grateful for all the work that you have done and recognizing the gravity of our situation and the work that has gone thus far into proposing some solutions to the challenges that we face. With that being said, I will introduce finance director Nicole Gonzalez to take us through what we need to achieve today.

Great. Thank you. Um, good evening, mayor, members of the city council. Nicole Gonzalez. I'm the city's finance director. Um, today is a work session which will review proposed changes for the fiscal year 27 midcycle update. So, a way of background, um, really wanting to focus on the bottom half of the, uh, slide here, which is why we're here this evening. So, in June of 2025, we adopted a budget that was balanced for fiscal year 26. Um, for 2027, the city uh, did not present a balanced budget. It did project a use of reserves to balance that budget. council granted staff more time to close that structural deficit in 27 and beyond um in a meaningful way that was much more um clearly understanding the impacts for both the organization and the community. And so the direction at that time was um our expenses uh should equal our revenues for fiscal year 26 and 27 not including transfers. And then in 28 and beyond all of our expenditures plus our transfers should equal revenue. Um, I will pause for a second here. This is just a road mapap of where we've been and and where we're headed. Um, a lot of the the slides that you will see tonight have been presented in a number of uh different council settings over the last several months. So, I will not be spending great detail on every slide. Um, but did want to provide a snapshot on where we're at. Again, high level, this is the city council's uh principles for balancing the budget that was agreed upon during the council retreat on May 6th. Um, so again, I won't spend a significant amount of time, but wanting to remind council of the principles that were adopted and agreed upon as we move through the continuation of this budget process. The next few slides um provide an overview of the city's um reserve and fund balance. We've talked about this a number of times, so I'm going to go ahead and skip through these slides. They are in your packet for further review if you'd like to to ask questions

at the end. and I'm going to move directly into the proposed general fund reductions which are being considered by this uh work session tonight. So this uh the departments are broken up into functional areas. Um first we'll look at the city manager's office, finance, human services, human resources, excuse me, and uh information technology. So the finance committee supported all of the uh recommendations. They were unanimously agreeing for total reductions for the city manager's office of $376,000. Finance uh department, the uh finance committee unanimously agreed to um the proposed reductions by the finance department totaling just under 440,000. Human resources. Again, the finance committee unanimously agreed to all of the proposed reductions which totaled um about 156 almost $157,000. Um information technology. All of the items were unanimously agreed upon by the finance uh committee with the exception of item 14, which is the proposed elimination of public Wi-Fi in department, excuse me, in downtown and parks. Um however there was a a majority agreement to support this reduction moving forward. So the total reduction um being considered for information technology is just under 740,000. Moving to culture and services libraries. Uh the finance committee recommended unanimously agreeing to all of the proposed reductions related to library services which totaled um about 863 just under $864,000. recreation um had a proposed uh net cumulative change of 1.2 million which was unanimously agreed upon by the finance committee.

Human services had a total change in uh in proposed changes of uh just over 150,000 and that was unanimously agreed upon by the finance committee as well. Moving to public works and community development. Um the finance committee unanimously agreed to items 43 through 45. Um and then a unanimously agreed to the reduction proposed on line 42 which is the third party encampment cleanup. So they agreed to the reduction for 2027 but directed staff uh not to make a reduction in 28 and 29. So those reductions were restored. Um the total reduction supported by the finance committee was 823,250. Moving to community development, uh there was a proposed net cumulative change of about uh 1.5 almost 1.6 million. Um on this slide here, uh the finance committee did uh unanimously agree to support all of the reductions shown on this slide. on this slide. Um they unanimously agreed to 52 which is a reduction in first-time home buyer program. However, for item 51, which is the reduction in housing consultants, there was a recommendation to retain funding of 10,000 for core third-party tenant and landlord services, which re included a reduction of 30,000, uh, which would ultimately discontinue the multifamily rental assistance program, needs assessment, and seminars and outreach. Um furthermore on line 53 uh this was proposed reductions for the downtown ambassador program funding. There was no recommendation by the finance committee um in either direction. So for or

against this reduction. Um on the third slide for community development um all of the uh items 54 through 57 were unanimously agreed to uh by the finance committee and item 58 was majority recommended that no reductions uh to this particular line item be included in the proposal. Um so bringing that overall cumulative reduction for community development to about 1.6 million. Moving to public safety and fire. um and police. Um 59 um is the reduction in the city's retirey medical contribution towards Alama County. Uh this uh amount is being continued discussed with Alama County Fire. Um we do not anticipate that this cost um will change significantly. However, we'll bring beforeward this committee, excuse me, this council um before adoption the actual reduction amount being proposed. Um overall Alama County Fires cost um has a proposed cumulative net change of 973,000 for police. Um the finance committee um supported unanimous agreement with all the proposed reductions totaling um just over $810,000. Uh now pausing for a second and shifting to mayor and the council compensation. Um, it is something that is revisited and reviewed, evaluated every even year in accordance with the handbook and government code uh to coincide with new council members being seated. And so um part of what was presented to the finance committee um were these slides. Um this was aformational slide which showed um the new adjusted um rate for council and mayor effective January 1st,

2025. you'll see that current monthly compensation um is the compensation that council and the mayor are currently receiving. Um possible compensation adjustments as we're reviewing um and evaluating and seeking input from council this evening is in accordance with government code 36516 which allows adjustments for each um calendar year. Um, and there are two options. One being a 5% each calendar year since the last adjustment. Um, or the equivalent of the California CPI, um, but not exceeding 10%. And so with that CPI right now is 3.1 uh% for each, uh, year since the last adjustment. And this adjustment would be effective January 1st, 2027. Um when presented to the finance committee, there was no formal recommendation um to move forward with any specific and so we are again seeking the full council's uh discussion and direction on how to move forward with council and mayor compensation. This is a highle summary of the proposed changes. We did talk a little bit about those in some of the slides previously presented. Um those changes for 2027 will uh result in a reduction in uh FTE or full-time equivalent employees of 9.1 um FTE. Now pausing for a second and transitioning away from um our operating expenses including staffing. Want to spend some time talking a little bit about transfers and inner inner fund transfers. So, the general fund does provide support uh financially and transfers money out of the general fund to other funds to support um infrastructure needs as well as funding future pension obligations are some of the things that the city of San Leandro um transfers funds out of the general fund to other funds. With that being said, uh this slide here

provides a summary of the general fund uh transfers that have occurred in fiscal year 25. What is budgeted for 26 and 27 and potentially planned for for 28 and 29. The slides um that will follow this summary slide will be recommendations from staff to the council seeking um uh recommendation and support for our recommendation which is to reduce transfers of a million dollars in 2027, another million in 2028 and another million in 2029. So a total of three million in reduced uh transfers from the general fund to other funds. Um this is a typical way in which when cities are um facing financial challenges that they are looking at ways to balance their budget. Uh transfers to other funds from the general fund should be considered once the general fund is in a financial position that it can sustain itself and support itself before it starts subsidizing or providing support to other funds. So for fiscal year 27, um there's a recommendation to reduce u by a million dollars. Um you'll see on lines four through six are the recommendations um being 300,000 uh reduction to facilities uh 200,000 for parks and 500,000 in street rehabilitation. And so moving from 4.8 million to 3.8 in fiscal year 27. In 28, we propose an additional reduction. Um, we are not proposing a reduction to the fleet fund on line six as you will see as that is planned for the purchase of needed fire vehicle so the city continue to provide core services to the community. Again, a further reduction to facilities, parks, and street rehabilitation for a total of a million dollars.

So bringing the baseline from 5.5 million to 4.5 million. In 29 again another million. So moving that uh from 4.6 to 3.6. Further reductions in building maintenance uh park maintenance and street hip rehabilitation. The ongoing uh support for those funds after 2029 will be 100,000 each for building um and parks and about 1.7 1.8 8 million for street rehabilitation. Um and uh as way of clarification, the finance committee made no recommendations on reductions to the general fund transfers during the finance committee. Um we talked a little bit high level about the need to provide um funding for our fleet specifically um as it relates to providing core services to the community. Um we have ongoing fleet replacement needs not only in the city's um non public safety fleet but police and fire. We are facing challenges with that specifically with procurement as it relates to our fire vehicles which um requires a four to five year date from uh delivery date from the date that it is ordered to the date that it is actually delivered. um but oftentimes we need to provide um payment upfront so that they can begin construction of those vehicles. So we've engaged with a consultant to help us prepare not only an an update to our uh policy but also uh development of a 10-year forecast to allow us to really understand how much money and how much funding we need to ensure that we have the vehicles to provide those core services to the community. And so that will be brought forward to the finance committee um in May or June, both the policy and the forecast and the recommended funding plan. So switching gears a little bit, we're going to talk a little bit about the American Reco uh Rescue Plan Act or

ARPA, which is uh commonly referred to. So what was ARPA? Again, high level. This was uh signed into law in uh March of 2021. It provided 1.9 trillion in economic stimulus package to address the impacts of CO 19. The city of San Leandro received um 18.6 million in local relief. I will say that all dollars were obligated by December 2024 and currently on target to be fully expended by 2026. So the city of San Le has been very diligent um in its responsibility, fiduciary responsibility in um uh receiving those ARPA dollars and using those to help support both the organization and the community. So here's a highle summary of ARPA appropriations um which totaled uh 18.6 million. Um while ARPA was a wonderful way stimulus uh to help uh cities and communities recover, it really was intended for one-time expenses, one-time ways in which we could support our organizations and our community. However, a number of projects not only here in the city but you know um other agencies did very similar things in which it created programs that were successful that really supported the community in ways that um was very beneficial and very impactful. As a result, some of those programs also will re require excuse me um ongoing support from the general fund to continue to operate as they are today. And so this here provides what the original appropriation was for each of those projects, but the ongoing cost uh to provide those programs to the to the community um which totals um between 3.3 and 3.9 million each year. The city um also has a number of

infrastructure needs uh that um will is required to avoid critical failure. And so what are some of those funding needs um uh that have been talked about? And so we discussed a little bit about this during the retreat, which is proactive investment to avoid critical failure. And so some of those projects include um significant painting projects at both city hall and the Marina Community Center totaling a million dollars, a roof uh replacement at fire station 10, and then the CAD RMS replacement which is $3 million um estimated um which is the city's 911 uh dispatch and records management system um and is a critical infrastructure need to avoid um failure um and the inability to provide core services to the community. Uh finance committee recommended uh that we fund these critical uh infrastructure needs um supporting unanimously all of the recommendations by staff. So what is the budget objective for 2027 and beyond? Why are we here this uh tonight and what have we been doing um over the last year? Ultimately the goal is long-term fiscal stability and to avoid reoccurring structural deficits which are not sustainable. So during the fiscal year 2627 bianual budget process there was a very clear budget objective and directive that we received from this council. The first again to uh remind you was that fiscal years 26 and 27 all expenses less transfers should equal projected revenue. And we met that goal for 2026. and we have met that goal for 27 by way of pres presentation for tonight. Um, beginning in 28, all expenses should equal um two projected revenue. So, both re expenses and transfers. And again, by way of the proposal this evening, staff has met that goal. With that being said, I wanted to

provide an update um on the city's general fund tenure forecast, really focusing on line 24. That's our uh policy, our 20% policy for economic uncertainties. The city is meeting that goal with a proposal this evening. And I want to commend council for the hard work that has happened over the last several months. Um we've had really hard conversations at both the retreat, the finance uh uh com committee as well. um and really allowed us to stay course to course correct that we are in a direction of um uh stability, financial stability. And so you'll see we're meeting that goal until about 2033 where we start to dip a little slow. A lot can change between uh 2027 and 2033. We also have built in here a recession which has slow growth recovery. Um it's something that we do is we model for long-term forecasts. I suspect that when we get to that point, we will be either at 20% um or exceeding that goal. Um and so um wanting to really highlight the great work that has been happening behind the scenes with staff and um the courageous conversations that council has had over the last several months. With that being said, should no um recommendations be made and we steer off course, this is what the financial picture looks like as it stands today with no course correction. Again, focusing on line 15, you will see that by 2027 and column D, we're at 19.5%, which is below the 20% um reserve policy and significantly drastically dropping from there. Um with a negative uh available for economic uncertainties by 2033 and then out of cash, you start to see that red box, that negative 9.4 million in 2032 where the city is out of cash sometime in that fiscal year. What I'll

say is this council has been very dedicated, staff has been very dedicated to ensuring that we course correct and that this is not the picture that we are working towards um in the in the future. And so again, really wanting to commend council for for the conversations that have been had over the last several months. With that, um it is an opportunity for us to have a discussion and feedback. We're asking council to provide feedback and input on the proposed reductions and then recommendation uh for adoption. And I would uh like to highlight this slide here which is uh what staff is seeking from council this evening. Uh the first is does council support the proposed uh expenditure reductions direction on council compensation? Does council support the proposed general fund transfer reductions? And does council support the funding plan to avoid critical failure which was recommended by the finance committee? And then last but not least, does the f does the uh council recommend moving forward with the 2027 midcycle update for adoption which was uh recommended by the finance committee?

Okay. Thank you for the presentation and all the work that's been done this far. What I'd like to do is take input from the public and then we will come to council members for robust discussion. So, madame clerk, do we have any cards or hands up online? Thank you, mayor. At this time, we have not received any comment cards from in the room and we currently have four hands raised online. Okay. So we have opened and we have closed public comment in person. Let us open up public comment online.

Our first online speaker is Douglas Spalding.

Thank you and good evening council members. Uh first and foremost uh citizens of San Leandro, we have to vote in a a city revenue measure this November. I I don't think that's accounted for in the budget yet, but that will that will uh help things. Uh second, um let let's not deduct money from the the uh alternative response unit. I I see that the numbers gone down, but but the the ARU is cost effective. It saves us money in the long run because we have uh trained professionals uh responding for less money than it takes to pay a a sworn officer to go out and maybe not know what they're doing. Um your cuts have to go deeper. So, I I I do have some uh some ideas. Uh first of all, um you talked about eliminating security. I remember the discussion about the the the dudes at the senior center. Absolutely. There are plenty of staff there and those security people do nothing but really uh hang out on their phone at the pools. Definitely. I volunteer my son and other people and there probably other places in the city where we have security. I I think we should take that money and train staff and deescalation procedures, not pe put people in the in a position where they're going to get hurt and and then sue the city, but but just, you know, be just being there. The presence, uh, I think will go a long way. Um, I think there are many many contracts to the sum of millions and millions of dollars that we need to more carefully evaluate as we go along because we just kind of put them on the consent calendar without questioning them. Um, I think it would be great if the city council would volunteer voluntarily freeze their pay, uh, as an example, but if not, the number that comes to mind in my mind is 65% of CPI, uh, or the lesser of 3%. If you're asking uh, rent uh, landlords to do that, why not do yourself? Freeze the

the police budget. Uh, defer whatever you can. Um, and, you know, let's hope the economy increases. Thank you. Your time has elapsed.

Our next online speaker is Melissa Wong. Melissa Melissa Wong, I can see you unmuted yourself. If you wish to speak, this is your opportunity. We cannot hear you. The next online speaker is San Leandro Chamber of Commerce. Hello everybody. Good evening. Emily Grego, CEO of the San Leandro Chamber of Commerce. Uh, thanks for the opportunity to comment tonight. So, in looking at all of this, it just is it's concerning that there are some cuts that are directly going to impact the business environment. It seems that funding should prioritize what directly supports a safe environment, business investment, and a strong local economy. They should not come at the expense of programs and investments that directly impact the business environment or the city's ability to attract and retain businesses, especially when the business community is a primary large contributor to the city's revenues. Programs like the ARU and the downtown ambassador program matter. They have contributed to a safer and more stable and welcoming environment. The third party encampment cleanup is essential. Maintaining conditions of a clean city impacts whether businesses choose to locate and stay here. Downtown

conditions have improved and those outcomes influence business decisions. San Leandro is competing with other cities for investment and other cities are actively marketing themselves. Reducing funding for branding and marketing does not save money in the long term. It weakens the city's ability to compete and delays economic growth. Some investments are essential. In this moment, the focus should remain on what drives a safe environment, supports businesses, and sustains a strong local economy. If San Leandro is a place where businesses can invest and succeed, the rest follows. Please consider any cuts to the items I've mentioned. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker will go back to Melissa Wong. Melissa, if you're there going to our next speaker, Alvo Ramos,

can you hear me? Yes.

Okay. The city is in the grasp of a failed economic model that stopped working a long time ago. Governments have forgotten the original purpose of law enforcement. Policing was a method to force people to play by the same rules. We do not have economic growth. We do not have rising productivity that we can reliably depend on. And that is why your revenues are down. Police are trying to enforce the rules when there's no game to play. That means police are obsolete and totally pointless. Police is nearly onethird of the general funds. People are not receiving any benefits from that in return. I find it extremely abbleist that all cities are focused on creating police jobs that not everyone can do and then the other city departments have greater demands that citizens actually need. Police cuts must be deeper, not just around the edges. Last year there were no cuts to police. Libraries should be open on all weekdays. I have been at the main library on a Monday. the kids, they get out of school on Mondays and then they go to the library because they need a place to study or maybe they need a place to stay for their parents to come and pick them up. We have a literacy gap as a consequence of the CO 19 pandemic because children received inadequate education. We have kids who are basically going through our education system. They cannot read. Don't be fooled. These cuts increase costs for the city by decreasing revenue by decreasing economic activity which delivers to us a larger budget deficit

in the future. The city is not preparing sufficient resilience for the crisis of this year. Thank you. Your time your time has elapsed. I'm our last speaker going back to Melissa Wong. Hi. Can you hear me now? Yes.

Oh, thank goodness. I have no idea. But anyway, I'm not that technically um great, but here I am. Um good evening. I want to comment on public engagement on the public on the budget process in the last four years and how we measure performance and results. To make it easy, let's just count only the uh budget forums. I simply call the meetings. Do we know the exact number in attendance each meeting who are not staff council or contractors of the residents? Which districts are represented? There these are not loaded questions. I've asked before, how do you measure success here? On the flip side, five years ago, we had six a six-month appointment, 28 people. They met um twice a month, six months. They were represented by each district. Four fold uh at least uh four folds. So, everybody showed up in those meetings. So, aside from attendance, we didn't have a structural deficit back then, but now we have one. Last June, I recall it was 7 million. Eight months later, 15 million. We have a lot of cuts in June. Now we have more cuts. I have no doubt staff have um worked a lot on it and so does council. But nobody talked about public input during the last presentation. Huh. As a result, as a resident, reducing any amount in any department doesn't mean anything because we don't really understand the um the uses of each department. So let's talk about budget to actual utilization. Let's talk about age of VA vacancies. Don't get me started with ARPA. I have lots of thoughts about that. So, I have no doubt about this, but please consider the creation of a task force and maybe one day we could actually remember to pilot the budget participatory program. Remember that. Then after all these efforts, I guarantee you, you guys will remember us. So, thank please include

us. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. There are no more speakers online. So, we are closing public comment online. Come back to the council members. Um, then we'll look for your input, your questions, and recognize that we can go around multiple times. So, who would like to go first? Council member Bowen, please.

Thank you, Mayor. Um, first, uh, I'm it's been said a number of times, but I don't think it's, um, can be said too often, but I really appreciate the work that all of the staff have done. Looking out there, I know like this is the real work that you have to do every single day. And I want to make sure that as a city organization, as a workplace, that it is one where we can still maintain high quality morale and and job security. So, I really appreciate the work that everybody is putting into that. Um, I also really appreciate the finance committee's um, efforts into looking at the full council's recommendations from our um, priority meeting. Um, and I just want to make a few comments about some of the the changes um, recommendations that came out of it. Um, I'll start with the number 53 for the the downtown ambassador program funding. Can we go to that? Um, let's see. Um, with no recommendation either way. Um, I do think that when we think about our city services, um, and what the critical needs are, public safety infrastructure, the public, the safety ambassador program is incredibly, I think, effective considering the cost of the program and the way that we are trying to proactively build out the downtown. Um, when we talk about economic development, we were talking about getting people to be here and having a a safe space and a perceived safe safe space is incredibly important. And so I would um I would like to advocate for having that ambassador program funding for the downtown. Um and then in terms of number 58 economic development funds um I have from the day one um and certainly when when I was on finance committee talked about the importance of economic

development you know we prioritized it um I think that the team has done a phenomenal job over the last few years really looking at economic development in San Leandro and trying to build up programming and for us to have the economic development studies right now I I feel like if we're going to be able to keep that $100,000. If we could actually um not eliminate the business incentive program and put some of the fund towards that, that makes much more sense to me because we actually have small businesses here that could use assistance, especially during these economic times. Um if we were to continue to do more economic development studies, which I already think we have a robust start to, we don't have the ability right now to do something with that information. we could absolutely do it later on, but I really think about the urgency of what we're trying to do right now. So, keeping that versus other um and then eliminating 57 doesn't make sense to me. Um trying to think about how do you actually encourage the businesses that are already here or trying to be um continue their um businesses here. That makes more sense to me. Um uh um I that's gonna be I think that's it right now for Oh, and just to clarify too for I know the compensation question because that's one of the questions you're going to have at the end for council direction at 5% that's $95 correct. That's the math on it. Okay. Um, and that would go so so it' be 1995 1,995 effective January 1 from the current 1,900 if the council directed 5%.

Okay. Thank you. We will cons we will continue with council member Aguular.

Thank you mayor. Thank you mayor and first of all thank you staff. I genuinely appreciate the time that you've put in to see giving us what we have here and I of a lot of people understand that it's hard. It this is hard work. Um and if anything that I want to elevate it's that this is not easy knowing that we are in a really really tight situation. And so I just hope that the public really understands that we have little wiggle room here. we are in a crisis scenario and we are trying to plan for that uh uh for and adjust for that and so I think that's really important to elevate here but with that being said um couple of things else to elevate the fact that staff put in so much work into these recommendations up here but also the work of the finance committee and so I genuinely appreciate that time and so when I see unanimous agreement on all of these items I see that that work has been done a and significant hours of thought have been put into that. And so the bulk of my comments and the bulk of my questions tonight go toward the items of which had no recommendation or um might have said majority lean either way. And so the first thing that I want to elevate is um something that council member Bowen brought up and that would be um item 53. I also want to advocate for the ambassador program. I had a downtown tour just last week and I was shown a boatload of data that shows that we are headed in the right direction with the ambassador program with downtown and all of the changes that we're looking to make downtown in addition to um I think what the ambassadors do that our police department does not have the capacity to fully follow through with. And so I also want to throw that out there that my

support goes toward uh um keeping the ambassador program funding because I see the importance physically. I see it in the data of keeping the ambassador program as it is now. And so that that's one thing that I'll kind of say around that. Um another thing that I would like to bring up would be item 21. Um, and initially, initially I was a little worried. Um, the arts are an extremely important thing in San Leandro. It it gives us the life and the vibrancy that I think that we have. Um, and I'm really grateful to have had a conversation with staff today. And so I just wanted to elevate um, a question for later uh, depending on how this is going to be facilitated. But um I was I I was taught that it's not a a complete elimination in the sense of there are other pots of money. There are other places to find uh money in the city of San Leandro for the arts in San Leandro. And so I felt a little bit more comfortable with this item and with the recommendation knowing that there are other places in which people can find dollars to support the arts. So that was a positive for me. Um, I would like um I'm trying to decide what I prioritize for right now. I would like to go to item one. Um, and item one was around the school crossing guard program. Um, which might to a lot of people seem very minute, but our schools are the foundation of a city. schools make a city what a city is. And so, um, I think that that requires us to engage in an authentic partnership with the school district and requires us to also put in. And with

that being said, I don't I I I don't necessarily agree with eliminating the crossing guard program. Um, but I would definitely love to hear the discussion from finance and hear a little bit of the rationale. Um, and so that's kind of just my thought around that is I would love to hear the rationale uh before going full throat advocacy. Um, but that's important to me especially as someone in schools. But I think for right now um just highlighting uh 21 53 and 1 and then going about the discussion however the rest of council would like um and hearing through is kind of where I'm at right now. Oh, and then um what I'll say about council compensation, I'm not in any way support of uh um increasing our compensation at this time, nor am I support of decreasing. I think that we need to maintain and and just move from that conversation. Um although I I would like to hear what council members have to say about that as well. Um those are my comments for now.

Thank you. At this point, we'll go to Council Member Aguilar. Uh thank you, Mayor Gonzalez, and thank you Nicole and staff um for listening to the finance committee and uh coming back to us, you know, we're not at an operating deficit. So, I think that you know, a lot of the hard work has been done um in finance and you know, hopefully we can move forward tonight um on city council with regards to this um this adoption. So, you know, the questions are, does council support the proposed expenditure reductions? I do. Um, with regards to the direction on council compensation, you know, for me, it's all or nothing. Either we support the current rate of what we what we get paid um with the 5% or we do this for free. Um, so that's that's my my concern. Um, with regards to supporting the proposed general fund transfer reductions, I I support that and I I also do support the funding plan to avoid the critical failure. We do need the city hall painted. We do need the Marina consent Marina community center painted. Um, we also need the fire station number 10 roof replacement and uh the CAD RMS replacement. And um I also do agree that um you know we we should move forward with uh fiscal year 27 midcycle update for adoption. Those are my concerns. Thank you.

Okay. I'm going to go online to Council Member Bolt. Thank you, Mayor. Can you hear me? Yes, we can.

Great. Um, this to me is a continuation of our retreat. Uh, thank you for bringing this back up uh for us to uh move forward with. Yes, there's a lot of things in here that we don't want to cut but have to cut. It's it's a tough situation. Um uh but but I do I am looking forward to to staff kind of explaining some of these things specifically one I heard from from council member Agular where was you know there's one way to say this uh we're cutting the crossing guard but that's not the case like this the the the school district is still going to have their process with the crossing guards. we just won't be participating at the level we were. So the and and that goes for quite a few of these um different line items that we have. We're not 100% getting rid of all of these things. We're just not participating at the level we were. So I wish I was in the room. I feel weird saying it from here and I don't want to be on very long because of it. Uh lastly, I do not support an increase. Uh I do support us giving back. Uh whether it's we do it for free as council member uh Victor Aguilar said. I I wish I could do the accent you do, mayor, but I'm not that good. So I'll just say council member Victor Aguilar does. Um his recommendation of doing it either for

free or or going with the 5%. I I would actually agree for a year that we don't take compensation if if all these positions are looking at getting uh what I like to call a haircut, then I have no problem taking one too. if libraries are going to be cut on hours, you know, every department is doing something and I don't have a problem with us doing something. So, um, just yeah, but I'm going to stop there because I it's got to be weird. I don't being on this side. I know it is. Thank you.

Thank you. I do want to clarify one thing just coming back to council member Aguilar. Victor Aguilar, were you suggesting zero for the compensation or zero increase? Zero. So that we don't get paid this year. Okay, perfect. Thank you. Coming back to uh vice mayor,

I can let I was actually um I was part of a really robust uh finance committee discussion. So I was actually putting myself at the end so that my colleagues that were not part of those discussions would be able to speak. We will come back to council member Bowen.

Thank you. Um, I I just wanted to add some context to um to council member James Aguilar's um concerns around the uh school crossing guard program. Um, that one was obviously is number one as well. I um have had numerous conversations with um San Leo Unified School District Superintendent as well as city um principles at both Benraftoft, Washington um many parent groups. And one of the things that I did learn was that um the district is very supportive of the um having crossing guards and has been open to um funding more crossing guards or funding the program. Um it has always been a very positive conversation and so um that obviously I'm not saying that they promised anything but certainly the conversations are there and the city does work actively with the school district to in partnership that goes beyond the $90,000 for the crossing guard. For example, both the mayor and I sit on Alama County Transportation Commission and I'm on um the policy committee that supports the safe routes to school program. And this is something that we talk about quite often. And one of the things that's really important is the actual safe route to school. And there is a proposed plan that the district has it, the city has it, and I know for a fact that the city public works has done significant progress to try to do um some of the items on that list. And so there's certainly a lot of robust conversation and action towards that. Um, and you know, Council Member Bolt said it where it's I mean, a lot of what we're talking about right now is trying to figure out ways to shave things so that we can maintain where we're at. And I think that that's really where we're at is like we want to maintain critical services. We want to maintain public safety. We want to maintain infrastructure so that the cuts

aren't deeper later on. Um, and so I could say that I'm uneasy about most of all of these cuts, right? If if I had a choice, I would give more money. I remember we had conversations at one point in the beginning about more positions. I was like, "Yes, let's do it." We're not there right now. And so, I am really proud of us for being in a place that we can at least maintain where we're at. And we're already a really lean organization. Um, in terms of uh council member compensation, I'm you know, it's I think to keep it as is considering where we're at is fine. I am not supportive of um cutting compensation for the year. The reality is the conversation is not reflective of the um work or the commitment the council members have in the role. That's it. you know, it's it's an it's it's an absolutely like um it's not equivalent to that. But at the same time, we do as um uh people living in this world, I would have a very difficult time being able to do the calculus of doing the work and putting the effort in um the way that I have chosen to um without um the compensation and also the sign uh the symbolism of that compensation that the work is valued and matters as well. Um and and also the opportunity for people to serve on the council because it does require you to commit in ways where if you took the time that you committed to this role, you could do other things for certainly significantly more than what we are making and certainly nobody's doing this for the money. It's mostly for the glamour I think. Vice Mayor, please.

Thank you. I appreciate the the work uh of the team of the city team um and the folks who joined um the budget forums um and to the folks that are listening to us tonight. Um I have two questions um and then I'll jump over to my comments. Um, so we have a five five-year runway on a $1.5 million asset, um, which is the firetruck. And I'm thinking about how are we able to protect ourselves should the truck not come through. Um, it's a significant investment. So, I'm thinking about what how are we protecting ourselves and that investment and that asset um that if it if there are issues with it or if we don't get it um it sounds like we have to pay upfront and then we get the vehicle five years down the road. I'm just trying to figure out how to how do we protect that investment?

Yeah, that's a that's a great question. Um and I know that our Alam County Fire Chief is here as well. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize it was too far away. Um and so um maybe he can speak a little bit to that but I will say that you are correct that in order to fulfill the order essentially we do have to pay upfront um and there is a long uh lag time in which it takes to actually manufacture and build the the fire vehicle. It's something that agencies across uh the region as well as California they're experiencing and so um I can uh defer to the fire chief to kind of talk a little bit more about securing that asset. Thank you, Mayor uh Gonzalez, members of the council. I'm Willie McDonald, the Alama County Fire Chief. Uh the requirement for us to pay for uh the apparatus in advance is really um to secure a position in line, if you will, to be able to um have the fire truck built. U there is a a bit of a discount that's provided if we pay upfront uh to actually secure the money, but I agree with you, it's a very long lead time. um longer than it's been uh or all the time that I've been a firefighter. Uh the protection I guess is uh the comm commitment that a truck will be built at some point um and that we won't lose uh the money that has been uh pledged uh to provide the vehicle. But um beyond that, I don't know that there's uh any protection that we would be able to identify um to not pay the funds uh in advance to get uh to be guaranteed to get the vehicle.

Okay. Sounds like I'm just thinking about any protection from our city attorney as we think about this asset. I'm thinking about the impact of 1.5 million in five years and what we can do this year and what avenues we have to secure our spot and make sure that we have the asset to maintain city services. Um, but we're looking at a 1.5 million zero interest money upfront which we don't do that. I mean, we don't I don't know of any other type of contract where that is the case. Right.

So, are there any is there any wiggle room here? I'm just concerned about the amount. I I I think that uh what an alternative could be to order the vehicle. I don't know that we have to pay upfront. Um I have to look at my budget manager. I think that we can order the vehicle and not pay up front uh to receive the discount, but I have to check on that to make sure. We have to you we have to come in. Um we could also just kind of uh Is this one of two hearings? I also don't want to use up all my time about this. City manager, please.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Um so tonight is is just the process of hearing your feedback and overall consensus direction. Um if we're able to then we would come back for adoption of this budget. Um but the council could direct us to do this again and then come back for adoption another meeting. It's really at council's direction. Okay.

I I'm thinking about so just to kind of uh I I want to secure the vehicle and the acquisition of the vehicle. want to be the be clear and thank you chief for uh the clarification. Um but I'm thinking about interest not made on 1.5 million. I'm thinking about protecting 1.5 million in terms of what if the company goes under? What if there are impacts to the price of steel? Um and all of a sudden we don't have a truck. Um there have been significant issues in logistics and manufacturing that just makes me very weary of um making this kind of investment without protecting the city in that investment and acquiring the asset.

What in the spirit of efficiency? Yeah, I'd appreciate if you would actually continue for an additional five minutes. Sir, I have one more question and then I can leave my comments and do another round. Um chief have anything? I'm informed that um we could h we could order the vehicle uh without paying upfront, but the city would have to encumber the funds, but you could I guess maintain it in an account with uh earning interest during that period of time. City manager, please.

I I think it'd be and thank you, Chief McDonald. I think it's something that we can come back with some more detail because what I also know about ordering fire trucks is that if you don't pay for it up front, you may have to pay more in the end. So the interest that we could earn could be eaten up in the the cost in the future. Also I think the really important part is and we can negotiate this whether it's 50% upfront. There will be an upfront cost. Sure.

Is that we have deferred um the ordering of trucks. We should have ordered three trucks years ago but because of our financial situation we've deferred it. So, we're kind of at that critical point where, for example, this current year, fiscal year 26 that we are in right now, the the the um Alama County Fire was kind enough to help us with getting that truck pre-ordered without the city paying for it. But as the truck was finished and completed on time, it was either you pay for it or you lose the truck, which then goes into fire service in our city. And so, we had to pay for that truck to get it delivered.

Okay. Thank you. Uh the other one is kind of a a question but also a comment kind of in both. And I'm thinking about evaluating and combing through our existing contracts and thinking through where some of those cost savings and the existing contracts um contracts that are coming up before us or before the city managers um that are within the city manager um authority. I would like to explore ways that we can evaluate them and uh protect the city from risk and or um whether there's some cost cost savings um in those contracts as they come up either they expire and they're up for a renewal but also looking at you know uh contracts that we have with and I I know that the team has already done this because there's several contracts here that y'all are proposing for elimination. Um, so appreciate that. But I'm um I I I there are some contracts that we can go back to the table once they are at the end of um of their lifetime. So that's just a comment and a a question about um that's that's more of a comment. I'll leave that there and I'll throw it back to my colleagues and I have some more comments specific to some of the issues that they brought up. So, if you don't mind, I would like to get your thoughts as I take notes for comp uh council compensation. Sure. Uh my proposal that um I uh discussed with finance committee was actually to revert our compensation to the previous uh amount. I believe it was third uh the old monthly

compensation if we're looking at slide 30 um where it wouldn't eliminate the council's um compensation but it would roll it back um to that there was no uh there was no um consensus um on that on um the finance committee. Um that would be my proposal to roll it back to the old compensation. Okay, perfect. And then the only other person I think council member James Aguilar on that piece in particular, I would welcome your thoughts.

Exactly. On compensation, correct?

Correct. Um, I'm inclined to I I'm inclined to support maintaining the compensation as it is. I I think Council Member Bowen really summed it up for me in that I I we on this council do a lot of work, but also recognizing that staff uh does a lot of work as well and and the image behind it matters, the symbolism of it matters. Um, but I I I would love to hear more from council about proposals about about what they suggest. Um because I appreciate Vice Mayor Vetto Walton's proposal as well. So I guess right now where I'm at is maintaining. I would like to hear more from council.

Okay. Thank you. Um my question I think focuses on the arts mini grants. I saw for art uh I saw a reference to the comedy festival. So whatever unfortunately I didn't have the number written down. So, eliminate the library public arts fund. And then over on the side, you mentioned something about the comedy festival. So, if you can remind me how that plays out.

Sure. Thank you for the question. Um, I will actually turn this over to director um Brian Simmons. Good evening, council. This is library director Brian Simons. Uh the way that would play out is of the 50,000 uh this last year, 20,000 was allocated out of that uh the the public arts fund for the the comedy event. So going forward um if the 50,000 were not there um without the city funding we would have to explore other funding in order to continue that program. So uh what our plan is to do is to try to do some fundraising within the community to do that. However, uh we wouldn't we would like to explore it sooner than later, but we do have it covered through um some uh funding that we received this past year that will carry forward into fiscal year 27. Uh some uh grant funding and some gift funding uh the Carnegie grant and a uh gift from uh Alta D. gave us uh that we'll be carrying forward and we already have earmarked that to uh use for the comedy event in fiscal year 27.

So we've earmarked it as such. But is it limited to that purpose for those grants? No, it is not. Okay. For the grant and the gift, it is not. So, part of the reason that I ask is it's obviously public information that that there's a Comedy in the Plaza event being run by Brian Copeland um in collaboration with the Davis Street. Um so, I'm wondering if we could reallocate money to the arts mini grants. It's an option if the city would not want to hold the art or the uh comedy event. Uh that is an option.

Okay. Um the other question that I I guess the comment that I would offer thank you very much for that. Uh the comment that I will offer with respect to the compensation is that we just went through a process of providing salary increases to staff and I'm not quite sure what the rationale would be for eliminating all council compensation. I mean, I get the publicity of publicity benefit of that, but I don't really see how it's logical when we're increasing compensation for staff and then saying, "Oh, by the way, we're going to cut our salaries to zero." So, I'm not supportive of that at all. I think that just staying the course with no CPI increase is an indicator. We're just going to keep it steady. Um the other thing to recognize is that the budget cuts that are being taken in the budget cuts no staff person is having their salary cut. We're eliminating empty positions. So I think that again it's very telling of the approach. If we were out there terminating uh employment and reducing staffing, right, actually having layoffs, I think I would feel a little bit different about that. Uh but that's not the situation that we're in. We may be there one day, but we're not there right now. So, let's uh I would not be supportive of cutting uh council compensation. Um at this point in time, uh I'll go through my thoughts on do I support the proposed expenditure reductions. The answer is yes. I do have a question around the mini grants in particular and I have a question about the um uh the ambassador program. Those are the two that really catch my attention. Many grants and ambassador.

Um because the ambassador impact does not occur until the next fiscal year if I remember correctly. Can you check me on that? I think that's one of the reasons that we're willing to to hesitate and to pause. Whoever controls that. Yeah. So it doesn't happen until next year. So we we bought ourselves some time. So I have no problem supporting just the overall reductions as is. Um uh so that's a kind of big picture a check. But just for the record, the ambassador program I think is highly effective. Uh and uh the mini grants I would propose that we reallocate the money from comedy in the plaza because someone else is doing comedy in the plaza. Um you've got my thoughts on compensation. uh the general fund reduct transfer reductions. The answer is I agree with uh council member Victor Aguilar just because we have to right now. This is not long-term sustainable. Period. Full stop. We cannot run our city this way. We have to invest in our infrastructure and in our roads. But for the purposes of where we are today for the next x number of months while we continue to figure out how we move forward, I have no problem uh with that. Um I also agree that we should be supporting uh the funding plan to avoid the critical failures and I would move forward with a midcycle adoption subject to the comments that I have made. I'm going to come back circle back around to council members as they continue to weigh in. Vice Mayor, please.

Thank you. Um, so just to kind of frame my approach as I I went straight into questions. Uh, but I did want to share about my approach to how I'm viewing this budget and the kind of screens and filters and lens that I'm using to evaluate my decision-m and at this point um prioritizing core services and specifically focusing on those services that allow people to work, people to be able to ensure that their children are safe in public facilities programming. Um and so um and also really proud that at this particular point we're having to make really hard decisions on programming and um some um diverting the current cost to future years to ensure that we're protecting the jobs of the people who actually perform these services. Um, I'm I'm I'm proud that we're able to be having these hard conversations and having um really combing through this budget to ensure that we're protecting and continuing core services, but also protecting the jobs of the people who um work on behalf of the residents and businesses and community members of San Leandro. I do want to highlight a couple of bright spots in this budget. Um, I want to give hats off to our recreation and park department who is looking at revenue generation and looking at those contracts and and I know that a lot of the other departments are also looking at that. And maybe, you know, as a cost center, you can't necessarily generate income, but as a service provider, I just want to appreciate the work of the

parks and recreation department. It's um it's in um it's in the budget as uh revenue generation. Um I also wanted um to highlight the ARU um that has had positive significant tangible positive results in the community uh but particularly with um not just the the business um and the kind of perception of folks around that but really engaging thoughtfully and deeply with the folks who are in need of those services. I think that's what I'm proud of. Um that is what uh for me that's what makes this program successful just recently. Um and um I'll just leave that there in terms of the um ARU um in terms of some of the um things that were brought up um regarding some of the discussion items um the encampment um which I am blanking on the number. I did not write it down. Can someone does anyone know the number of the line item? 42. Thank you. Um, we dug deeply into this. Um, I think finance committee or I I'll speak for myself. Um, the reduction in 2027 reflects the amount that was actually spent on cleanup encampments by third party. So that particular number doesn't mean that there will be a reduction in service. that number is reflective of the current use of the program. So, we didn't we didn't use all of the funding that was originally allocated um to that

fund. So, that cut would essentially maintain the service as it is. So, I just want to there's folks listening and to the business community and also to residents who go around the city and call us and email us about the encampments. What this means is that it would maintain it where it is for um third party um encampments. Um we talked about the crossing guard, so I'll cross that off. Well, that's redundant. Cross it off my list. Encampment. Um so I will leave my comments at that for now. Um I am overall supportive of um of this as it stands. Um I I was the person out of finance committee that um wanted to ensure that the housing advising um now I'm blanking on the number uh community development. Um the reduce housing is item 51. Um I wanted to uh retain the funding for core thirdparty tenant and land landlord services particularly around onboarding and ramping and the implementation of rent stabilization. Um so just wanted to make that uh kind of bring it out into the this discussion. Those are all my comments for now and then um I don't have any time to seed. So thank you.

At this point in time we will go to council member James Aguular.

Thank you. Um and just appreciation for those who are providing me context and background because I'm the newbie on the council who's joining the conversation this late. Um, and so I appreciate um the context around the crossing guards. I appreciate uh Mayor Gonzalez a little bit of background into the conversation around the ambassador program. Um, and specifically director Simons for touching up a little bit about the arts grant. Um, so I think with all of that packaged together, going backward up, um, I support moving the midcycle update for adoption. um support the funding plan to avoid critical failure. Um support the general fund transfer reductions. Um and then of course we can go with the flow on the conversation on c counc council compensation. Um still like to hear a little bit more about the ambassador program but generally speaking the whole package the whole thing I I I am supportive of.

Okay. I'll come to council member Bowen next. Thank you, mayor. Um, I I did want to um ask my colleagues if they had thoughts about academic development studies. We haven't talked about that, but that's a significant amount that we're keeping in at $100,000. Um, I mean, if we're talk, you know, the debate that we're having on council compensation, I think it's a total of $3,000 between the six of us. And, um, and and I'd like for us to talk about this. I I would like to understand the the thoughts that the finance committee had on this particular item. I don't remember anybody talking about it at our um uh retreat and trying to understand how um if the priority is to generate revenue to maintain a balanced budget to increase economic um uh activity in the city. There are other items that I think would have a higher rate of return in the short term than eliminating econom or than keeping the economic development studies. And again, I love economic development. I'm I'm not knocking that. I I think we should do I think we have a really strong start now. Um and so I don't I don't understand um why this this one to me is is one I'm having a hard time with.

Um

may I just clarify your question or comment? So would are you saying that instead of in 2027 cutting the 50k on or I guess you would propose potentially cutting the 50k and moving that over into business incentive programs or just fully funding the business incentive programs or how are you thinking about that? um if no I don't ideally fully funded but I understand where we're at and so I would say I would rather have at least that 50,000 towards a business incentive program um than economic development study if I thought that we could do something with econom development study um in like if we had a great idea and we still can't do anything with it that it would just sit there for now and the reality is the landscape changes all of the time um so it doesn't make sense to me to put that money right there right now.

It would probably be useful, city manager, to have someone from the economic development team come and discuss a little bit about the decision of um why this versus not that. Thank you, mayor. I see economic development manager Katie Bowman on her way to the mic now. Thank you, Katie. And if we could clarify which one we want me to start with.

So at the very bottom we had talked we had some discussions in finance about should we have the studies should we not have the studies and I think you know we were we had mixed perspective on that. Council member Bowen is asking about the line immediately above that. So why are we eliminating these incentive programs and potentially could we maybe cut the economic development studies and move that money up or maybe from some other source to keep that? So that's just kind of framing and you can run with it however you will.

Okay. Um so for the business incentive program I will just start by saying the funding is flexible. So it's not an all or nothing. So certainly we have developed a new business boost grant that's $5,000 grants, a smaller method. Um so with smaller amounts we would likely do more of those. The larger grants are typically 45,000. So but uh we've been getting positive response on that. So I think we'll we'll take we're we're happy to work with what what we are able to. It um it's a it's strictly speaking a discretionary program, but it's you know and we just had tough choices to make. So it's not um you know in the perfect world none of these would be cut. So um and then um on the studies side yes. So if you know for instance if um typically in years about 25 a baseline of about 25,000 for studies is helpful so that we may respond as opportunities come up as potential uh developments come up that the city needs to upfront fund before we get reimbursed. Um so that that might be an option. and then um remaining funds going towards incentives um might be an option to consider for that.

Back to you, council member.

Uh I appreciate the adapting with that new information. I think that that would be a great idea. I I it's really important especially when we're thinking about governance and what our role is up here and thinking like long term, right? Like there's a reason why we do the studies and the surveys and create these plans. So that information is really important. I also think we have to be realistic about where we're at right now. And we often talk about inflation, but we are in times that are abnormal with I mean I just think about the fact that if gas is 20% more like expensive across the board and you're having to travel for work and you're having to do all these things like we're not making the same decisions we would in normal times. And so I want us to just be trying to be creative about how where we cut, but also where we can sort of um subsidize and promote and fill in gaps in terms of what the community needs. And the reality is again in terms of economic development, you know, the one of the reasons why I had really pushed for it as a priority was that it really does impact how we can run as a city. at the same time the priorities of public safety infrastructure and critical services like that is the the pri that is first right like what we're mandated to do as a city um but uh if we can if the council would be um willing I I would love to be able to um adjust um 57 and 58 so that we continue to um fund the business incentive program in some capacity as you suggested.

Okay. So, that is duly noted as a suggestion. Coming next to Council Member Bolt online.

Great. Thank you, Mayor and uh Council Member Bowen. I I have no no problem with that. What I would suggest is maybe uh I agree we should not be doing a study right now like that seems like we can use that money in in in a better way and if it is in a pot to grant to small businesses. I like that. I liked uh the 5,000 type grants compared to 145,000 but I would be willing to switch it but then cut that in half. So, so now we even got $50,000 more off of of the budget. But what what I know about this is if we don't cut heavy and hard right now, in a year from now, the the cuts may be doubled or tripled. So if if we look at these this scenario and we we stick to what um we have you know been cordially agreeing on going down this path. Um I think it's better I think it's better that we cut what we can now. Um yes it's tough. We want the community to have the the comedy shows and the arts and everything. I believe me, I love it. But right now, I would love to just cut a so much more that the budget is easy to swallow because next year, if things don't change, um, and right now in the geopolitical world, it doesn't look like it is, we may be sitting here going, you know, with a much heavier knife, cutting deeper. So, I'd rather us just dive in, stick with with what we're going towards and and I would support you, Council Member Bowen, in this

because I do believe that the small business is the backbone. And so, if we can keep those grants alive, let's not do the study right now. But, but I would wonder if you're amendable to just $50,000 and not a hundred. And so, we lose half of that. uh which is is hey it's better for us putting it back in the pocket and yes additionally no compensation for the but but I would go as far as saying and I said this before no travel no training and it's just one year I'm not saying the rest of our political careers or you know the rest of the city's uh leadership career I'm not talking about just council when I talk about transfer uh uh training training and and travel. I'm saying for one year, no travel for anybody. No training for anybody. Let's stay home. Let's do the work we got to do and let's let's do do this in a way that that is productive because you're right, it is only 3,000. We talk about compensation increase. But if we look at this thing as a whole and we take everything out, I think we're looking at something much bigger. And so I'd rather see us just gut it all just for one year. U I'll stop there.

So Council Member Bolt, just to dig in a little bit to make sure that my notes are correct. So currently the business incentive program is completely eliminated and currently we have $100,000 of economic development studies. You spoke about $50,000. So, are you saying let's expand the cuts or are you fine with just transferring the economic development study money to the business incentive program?

I got a big machete. Let's expand it. Let's let's transfer that 100,000 over, but cut 50,000 of it off. So, transfer 50. So on net, we're going to increase our cuts by 50k, correct? Yes, that's okay. Thank you. I'm going to ask you a couple.

Okay. So let's No worries. That's why. So right now originally there was a proposal to cut $100,000 from the economic development studies. finance committee did not push that through. So that was reversed. It was a reversal. So now we're back to spending that $100,000 on economic development studies. Currently in the budget that's up there, 157,000 has been cut from the business incentive programs. So, as I as I understand council member Bolt's description is that instead of moving the hundred that got restored for the economic studies, you know, I had asked, would you be fine if that hundred moved up to the incentives? And he said, no, let's only move up 50, which means that on net, we're cutting an extra 50 from this budget. Okay. Um, Council Member Bolt, just coming back to you. Um, and I know that there's a just some very slight nuance in some of these questions, but I just want to kind of get your your your your feel on this. So, one of the questions that we've been asked is whether the council supports the general fund transfer reductions that are listed. Are you a yes or a no on that or subject to change?

I'm a yes. Yes. Perfect. And then does council support funding plan to avoid the critical failures? There was a list of the CAD RMS and I think the fire truck and uh addressing Marina and uh city hall painting the fire station, not the fire truck. Thank you. The fire station roof. So is is that are you a yes on that or you a no on that?

That's where we were keeping we were going to redo the roof. And we and we were possibly going to take money from the emergency fund to do the painting. Is that correct? And we were going to separate it by two years. We were going to do we had two buildings to be painted and we were going to paint one one year and one the following year. So it wasn't such a big hit at one time. So I know that we did speak about that at the council retreat. So, what I'm going to do is clarify with finance director Gonzalez with respect to um I I I understand this to be happening all in one year, but can you just confirm that?

Yes, thank you. Um yes, it was a recommendation and what was proposed to the finance committee last month. Um and what was proposed was to fund the 4.6 6 million which would be the painting at the city hall uh facility and marine community center as well as a roof replacement and CAT RMS replacement would occur all in um one fiscal year and so that was what was recommended by the uh finance committee.

So coming back to you council member Bolt do you support the finance committee's recommendation? Oh, dang it. I wanted to split it in half and put put it in two years, but if this is where we're at, this is where we're at. I'm not going to hold it up on this. If if finance committee says it and staff is recommending it, I'm not going to just throw a complete wrench in the system. But gosh dang it, if we could split it out, that pain will last one more year. I guarantee it.

Okay. Thank you. We do have, you know, and again, I know there's been some some nibbling around the edges. Um, and we're going to get to a formal motion, but I'm just trying to do temperature checks here. In the grand scheme of things, do you support um these recommended updates? Uh, just the overall there's a number of reductions that have been put in place. Do you ex do you accept those recommendations subject to that adjustment that you were recommend requesting on the 50k? I do support the reductions.

Okay. Thank you. At this point in time, I'm going to come back to vice mayor.

Thank you. And just a a a point of um more of clarity for the folks who are tuning in and might listen to this later. So, we are doing a mid-year review of a two-year budget, which is why we have to do things specifically in this fisc in the upcoming fiscal year. And we're forecasting some cuts to avoid getting to the um to not fall below the threshold of what we need to have in our general fund to maintain our credit rating and our good standing in order that we're able to borrow. And also um it just it's a good fiscal management practice. And so what what we're looking at just to kind of you know in my effort my New Year's resolution that I uh shared with all of you in in January was to make the implicit explicit. So this is why we're we're looking at a one-year runway for uh these critical failure costs. Uh but we're doing we're projecting costs into the future to ensure that we do not fall below that threshold. Um I am supportive of um the of funding the critical failures for this fiscal year as as as long as they're appropriated. If something happens and they need to get pushed to the next fiscal year because of capacity, we can always do that. But I what keeps me up at night is that conversation that we had with the chief at our retreat regarding the cat RMS replacement. It is a significant investment that we need to do. It is imperative and it it

it if we do not do this, we will have an emergency on our hands and we will not be able to respond in a timely way for folks who are um in need of support from the police. So, I think if we were I I I know that we're um appropriating the funds and we're going to use this. I would like to prioritize a CAT RMS replacement. Um, in terms of the order of operations, it's a complex project. It needs a lot of coordination within the departments. Um, but that keeps me up. It has kept me up every time I think about the budget and I think of chief talking to us about what's happening um to our CAT RMS. Um, is there any other point of clarification, mayor, that you need from me in terms of getting some temperature takes

general fund transfers, please? I'm supportive of it. I would with the caveat that I would like to keep the money for streets, but it's just not where we are right now, but I am supportive begrudgingly of it. Okay. Just I'm going to go quickly to um Council Member Bowen, general fund transfer reductions. Thank you.

Yeah. Um I think vice mayor said it well when she was begrudgingly going to accept that because again I think I've mentioned infrastructure every time I've talked about priorities and it doesn't make sense for us to not spend money on the roads when we're trying to focus on infrastructure and that means roads but okay. Um and um the other thing that I want to share since I have the mic on is and I appreciate vice mayor's um uh continued effort to uh share context around what and why we're doing because we're constantly talking to each other staff and then the general public which are different layers of information that we have to share out. So what I would like to say about that is that nobody psychologically is happy losing something. And so much of that is how we frame what is happening right now. To me, I don't think that we are losing things. We are I mean and it it makes me sound like a politician, but it um I think it's really important that we're actually like maintaining services and we're doing really fantastic things for the city. And I when I walk around the city and I talk to people, people are really excited about San Leandro and people are happy and they want more things. Um but that means that we have to have really honest conversations about what and why we're doing these things. And so, um, I've spoken at length with city manager about the importance of, um, public engagement and outreach and education around what we're doing and why we're doing it, that we aren't cutting programs, but rather we're just having to maybe, you know, um, uh, uh, shift things around so that we can maintain them. And I really appreciate the this report and this presentation because I think it it really does do a good job of explaining where we're at. Um, I mean, the reality is we're spending onetime funds and on big projects and then we want to keep them going, but how are we going to do that? And those are just hard conversations to be had. Um, I I think I answered all the

other questions. Mayor, critical funding failures. So, CAT RMS, was that a yes? I think I that's okay. Thank you. Yes. And then um I'm fine with um the um uh $50,000 towards um the small business incentive program that council member Bolt had proposed as a compromise if you were wondering.

Okay. Just trying to track all the notes and all the different items. Uh Council Member Aguilad, Victor Aguilad, is there anything that you'd like to add to this discussion at this point? Okay. Thank you. So, let me tell you where I think we stand and then I'll turn to city manager to see if that's what where you're reading everything that has been said thus far because we might be there or we're pretty close. Council compensation. Um uh it is my perspective that if we get a motion to change the council compensation, it will not get enough votes to pass. So I am assuming and I'm looking down council ro to see ready to jump in and make a a motion uh that council compensation will remain unchanged. Yes, council member Bolt, please. Yes. Though though I think I'm jumping in at the wrong time, but I will say it since I got the mic on. We uh we talked about that CAT RMS reboot that vice mayor was just talking about and we thought that we would possibly be able to take that from our emergency funds which wouldn't affect the budget. Is that still the path we're going down? I know some things have changed.

I missed the very first part of your sentence. Okad RMS. So I'm going to come to finance director on this.

Thank you. Yes, to clarify um I did bring up the slide on what the recommendation from the finance committee was and you are correct that the CAT RMS replacement um was a directive to use the major emergency reserve fund. Um so we will be utilizing that for fiscal year 27. However, as part of the policy is that um the five million um is to be retained and restored and so that five million does is restored beginning in 2028 so that we retain the 5 million each year for major emergencies and the 20% for economic development. So or excuse me economic uncertainties. Um and so you are correct that that was the directive. Um the other three items, the two painting um uh improvements as well as the roof replacement will be uh uh drawn down on the fund balance.

Does that answer your question, Council Member Bolt? It does. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay. So, city manager, are we set on council compensation?

Okay, then we'll move to the next item. It is my read that you have unanimous agreement that the council supports the proposed general fund transfers. Um you heard a number of comments that is kind of like begrudging support because there is significant need for infrastructure but for the time being it's the reality that we face and we will work to address that through time. Um on the item number four on the list, does council support funding plan to avoid the critical failures? The answer is yes. And I think that is by unanimity also. And so now I'm gonna ask I'm going to go to finance director because in the end I'm looking for the distinction between number one and number five. If I answer number five, am I deacto answering number one

on this slide here? Just to clarify. I just want to make sure that we're that I'm getting the team what they need in terms of the council direction. I think to clarify for item one, I think we would need to have um at least four council members that would support any of the recommended um uh changes that were brought forth. Um, for example, the one about uh the $50,000 um being reallocated, we would need some consensus from the council um as a as a body um of at least four that would support that um uh in order to uh address number five. And so if uh it supports number five um which is to move it before the council but my point is if we answer number five

correct will we have answered number one? Correct. So what is being proposed today? Yes. So I'll just focus on number five. Try to build that that consensus.

Okay. So on on my notes, um I've heard significant questions, challenges uh about the downtown ambassador program. So I want to put that here. I've heard the desire to move economic development studies money to many grants. One I think you might have actually agreed in your proposal that it would be 50k instead of the 100k. So I'm going to just assume that that that will come in the form of a proposal around which we try to build consensus. Um, I had some discussion about the arts mini grants um, and in particular given the uh, comedy in the plaza event that's scheduled for July, whether money could be reallocated. So, I'm not quite sure exactly how that fits into this, but I heard that. Um, what else? So, I did hear something about the uh crossing guards, but I was unclear if it was expression of a frustration or request to reverse the recommendation.

Yes, please. More so context building. So, I feel comfortable moving forward with that one. Thank you. Um, are there and everyone's probably had a lot of context. Are there other items? Please share them now.

Vice Mayor, please. Um, there was I brought up the ARU. Um, but I did want to um Can someone What is the item number for ARU? Hold on. See if I have it on my if I 60

slide 27. Oh, I got it. Okay. Um, so just to um clarify regarding the ARU is that this is funded through 2028. So we the team put together a plan where we would be able to um have a bit of a runway to plan for that. Um, so that was uh brought up in one of the public commenters. I also brought it up uh during finance discussion and tonight. But I I just wanted to clarify that that is a cut that is forecasted for FY29, not for uh the upcoming fiscal years. And and to ride along with that, my recollection is that the ambassador cut is also in the future, which was one of the reasons that finance said, "Well, let's just we're willing to put that on pause in terms of saying, uh, no, no, no." Um, do you remember where that is that? I think that's next year. The ambassadors,

correct? It begins in 2028.

Thank you. Um, so I guess I'm going to lump the two, the ambassadors and the ARU. That is the rationale that finance came up with for allowing it to continue with the recognition that they are high priority programs that we don't have to make the decision for 2027 that we should continue to look for funding that it is a priority of this council. So with that in mind, when we say we're approving the 2027 midyear adjustment, are we literally moving 2027 or are we moving the full plan? City manager. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the council would be once we get to the meeting for adoption, you would be adopting the budget for fiscal year 27. So that's June, it's July 1, 2026 through June 30th, 2027. What the outear? So I'll just take the ambassador program. Why that is important today? If you want to delete it as um our finance team continues to refine the budget, look at the forecast. They want to know where are we going so they can bring it back to you. And as uh the vice mayor eloquently put it, we're working on one year because normally we do a bienial budget and so we needed to work on it. But we will be back here in this room doing this again in a year because next year is when we set the bienial budget for fiscal year 28 and 29. Um maybe we will be in an excellent financial position. Things will turn around. There will be lots of revenue and the numbers will be better than we see it today. And then the council in a year could say you know what we're in a much better position. We can then fund these outyear items um or look at them some other way. And so the mayor's correct it the decision is about fiscal year 27 but you're informing us to have

to put together the forecast for the future.

So with that in mind I think that you have uh if not unanimity the majority of the council providing direction that the ARU and the downtown ambassadors are very high priorities for this council. Okay. There seems to be agreement on that. um but that we would be willing to for this point in time let the the the 27 adoption continue because those items are not impacted continuing to get a majority of headshakes on that. So then that just leaves us with kind of two items. Um there has been a proposal with respect to the economic development studies to move $50,000 up into the um up into the economic and small business economic incentive grant program. uh we have at least two council members that are open to that approach where the net effect of all this would be a further reduction of 50k. So I'm going to look for consensus. I see vice mayor I see okay I've got James Agular I support that. So you've got a majority of support on that. And so then the last piece that remains unanswered is I'd express some interest on the mini grants of trying to support the mini grants through reallocation of monies that could be freed up uh by not having the um comedy in the plaza because there we are getting a comedian plaza that's privately funded right now um that Brian Copelan is putting on. So, I'll have it looks like I've got library director coming back up with any uh concerns. Now is the time to speak your piece.

No, no, this is great. This is really good and I'm glad we're thinking outside of the box. Um, if the direction from council is that we no longer would like uh the city to fund uh a comedy event like comedy in the plaza or a comedy festival or what have you, um then that is something that we could uh couple things. So, uh, let me backtrack a smidge. So, you had mentioned, uh, the Copeland event is in July. Um, the city's event is planned for June 27th, so it's in this fiscal year yet. However, if we're already looking down that road and saying, "Well, we're no longer going to do this." We don't have Well, we have emails going back and forth with um the Ball Theater uh in agreement that that's where we would we would hold it. and we have emails uh saying that we would uh like to pursue a agreement, but we don't have anything signed by either party, an agreement with a producer. We don't have anything signed by anyone. I'd have to defer to our city attorney whether we're in uh already in a legal position to honor that or not. But if we if we are not, one of the things we may want to consider is not doing it this fiscal year and carrying that funding over to fiscal year 27. uh as well as as you recommended, mayor, um looking at those other two gift and grant funds that I mentioned earlier, um which would then be it's about 22,000 from this fiscal year and then those gift and grant funds add up to about 23,000 total.

So this is for fiscal year 27, correct? Um, so for the gift funds, do we need to spend those funds this year? Is there any sort of We do not. We can carry those forward for as long as we need. Okay. And there it sounds like there are two separate pots of money. The money that's already been um at least planned for correct comedy in the Plaza event at the Ball Theater. Correct. Okay. And then in the future, so in 2027, you were saying there would not be that event, correct?

Okay, let me just ask a quick question. Legal counsel. So just I I want to understand like if this lays the foundation for being in contract and if not and like kind of where we stand. City attorney, please. So, we do we my understanding from library directors, we don't have we do not have any signed contracts. That is correct.

And that of course all contracts are subject to appropriations from the council. So, we are not in legal risk, if you will, if we do not execute and we notify the parties based on direction. How much did we give in arts many grants for things like the downtown planter and some of the other things that we did? Uh the uh the this current year uh which is the active cycle uh the many grants are 5,000 uh per applicant. The year prior they were 10,000 per applicant. And I'm looking back to my uh my assistant director because he's the one that chairs the or uh secretaries the commission.

So the grant amounts for the cycle that we just ended were 10,000 for 10,000 for nonprofit organizations, 5,000 per individual. So for the current cycle which are under consideration actively consideration by the commission it's 5,000 for either nonprofit organization or individuals. So the same amount. What is the total amount of funding? So for this year the ones that we are considering currently it's $27,500 available for grants in fiscal year 26.

Okay. Thank you so much. Um, and you were talking about 22,000 from the other sources that would Yeah, 22,500 uh would from this year's uh what we have allocated for this year's comedy event um could be carried forward.

Yeah. Okay. So, it sounds like we've got some flexibility uh in what we would do. So it is my proposal that through whatever method your creativity comes up with that we maintain the arts mini grants um at the current level which is already a decrease. I think we've cut it twice over the last two years, but there's a certain amount of momentum that goes with having the program and being able to put small pieces of art in different places in this city and it's it's so nominal, but it's such a feelgood thing and the PR that we get from it uh is very positive and in the end we can get matching money um from from donors or NEH etc. Um, NEA, not NEH, sorry. So, that that would be my recommendation that so I've got at least but I need one more. Okay, I've got four. Okay, so with that, yes, please, city manager.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just for clarity, um, and director Simons, thank you. Please correct me if I get this wrong. So what the what the mayor and thus the council is proposing is that this cut to 50,000 wouldstand but what it is currently what the but the funding um for the grant program would come from a different source but that's one time dollars and so there what's not proposed is future general fund dollars for that purpose. I just want to make sure that that's clear for the record.

As of this time, we're dealing with 2027. So that 2027 will have whatever 20,500 or whatever the number happens to be. Okay. One challenge at a time. One challenge at a time. And it's such a small amount of money uh for for the feel-good effect. Um, okay. I think we have managed to do all of this before 9:00. So, okay. So, with that being said, it's 8:58 and we are returned.