City Council - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the Visayas City Council work session. We're going to go ahead and get started. We will start off with citizens' comments. So citizens are now invited to comment on issues within the jurisdiction of the Visayas City Council and items listed on the closed session agenda. The council asks that you keep your comments concise and positive. Creative criticism presented with appropriate courtesy is welcome. The city does not tolerate disruptive behavior in our meetings. This council meeting is considered a limited public forum, which means the council can regulate the time, place, manner of speech. Speaker comments during public comment must be limited to matters within the council's authority, generally referred to as within the council's subject matter jurisdiction. If a speaker's comments are not related to the council's subject matter jurisdiction, the presiding officer will rule the speaker out of order. The speaker will not be ruled out of order because of disagreement with the content of their speech. Please step up to the podium and or form a line. And for those calling, raise your digital hand now and dial star nine on the telephone to indicate you wish to speak. And when it's your turn, star six to unmute yourself. You may begin your comments by stating and spelling your name and providing your city of residence. Each speaker will be provided three minutes. I will now open the time up for anyone who is here in person who wishes to speak on an item that's not on the agenda. Okay, seeing no one going up there. City Clerk, do we have anyone online who wishes to speak? No one online. Fantastic. So we're going to go ahead and close public comment period for the work session. And we will go on to item number one, which is entertainment ordinance discussion. Staff report, please.

Yes. Good afternoon, Mayor Taylor, members of the council, Paul Burnell, your director of planning and community preservation. And with me this afternoon is Colleen Moreno, the planner that's been assigned to provide or has done the work with the zoning potential zoning ordinance update regarding live entertainment and Jim Coons, city attorney. Before we begin our presentation, I just want to note we appreciate the efforts that were provided in comment and review from both our Visalia Police Department and Code Enforcement Division that also reviewed this draft ordinance. And again, it's a draft based on a discussion we had with council back in December, and then in speaking with businesses that's identified in the staff report, just listening to comments and concerns they had with regards to the process the city currently has with live entertainment. We believe what's being presented this afternoon is the hybrid approach that provides some flexibility at the administrative level with the option to go the discretionary route. And with that, I'll turn it over to Colleen so she can walk the council through what's being contemplated in the draft ordinance.

All right, thank you, Paul. Colleen Moreno with the Planning Division. So to give you a bit of background, as Paul mentioned, in December of 2025, the Planning Division provided an overview of the current live entertainment process. Staff discussed a possible hybrid process that would allow both administrative and discretionary approval. Staff worked with direction from not only the council, but also with business owners to kind of framework or to create a framework for this new ordinance. So the department recommendation is to provide staff with comments and or direction on the proposed draft entertainment ordinance and the draft entertainment permit application. Both were included in the staff packet. The ordinance is listed as attachment, the ordinance is listed as attachment A and with the permit entertainment application is listed as attachment C, if you would like to review those as well. So as with any ordinance, staff conducted a public outreach. We hosted individual meetings with current conditional use permit business holders who have a conditional use permit for live entertainment. We also conducted a larger group meeting with business owners who may potentially want to add live entertainment to their current business activities. Some common concerns that we received with the current process was that more flexibility should be allowed to allow businesses to remain dynamic and relevant. From a lot of our conditional use permit holders, they mentioned that the current process or the conditions that are applied with those conditional use permits are rigid. They do not allow the flexibility to change their offerings, their entertainment that they're wanting to provide. and it doesn't allow them to be dynamic and to provide a more like vibrant entertainment or business atmosphere. They also expressed frustration with the current process regarding the information that is required. So with the current conditional use permit process, we require a site plan, operational statement, and a security plan. Currently, we do not have any type of templates. It's more so staff directing the business owners on what information we're looking for, what needs to be included. So business owners did express frustration on how they could better provide a more comprehensive plan to meet the city's requirements. So for the draft entertainment ordinance and entertainment permit application, based on all of this feedback, the staff is proposing the following update. First is definitions. We have updated and added definitions, one being for entertainment, acoustical music, ambient music, and security personnel. These updates allow flexibility. They allow the, create a broader entertainment definition essentially, and we are also defining consistently used terms. Additionally, these definitions create a pathway for administrative and discretionary approvals. Staff is also recommending an update to the zone use matrix. This is included in the staff report as well. In red, you will see what is the current line item in the use matrix, and in yellow is what staff is proposing. So it's a little bit hard to see, but line E3 currently for microbreweries and microwineries with or without restaurants, Those are conditionally permitted in the CN, the CS, CMU and the DMU, the BRP and the IL and the I. So the staff has broken down what all those zones are in the staff report. And so what staff is recommending that microbreweries slash micro wineries with or without restaurants be updated to also include with or without entertainment. Now the requirement for the entitlement or being permitted by right is not changing. It's basically adding the with or without entertainment. Staff is recommending this because during our analysis of the current ordinance, if a microbrewery existed in like the light industrial, they essentially wouldn't be able to have entertainment because entertainment isn't permitted in that zone. So it's creating a more, a broader level of OF A DEFINITION BUT ALSO ALLOWING THOSE MICROBREWERIES TO OFFER THOSE SAME ENTERTAINMENT AND AMENITIES THAT WOULD KEEP THEM IN BUSINESS, THAT WOULD KEEP THEM RELEVANT AND WOULD ATTRACT MORE CUSTOMERS TO THEIR SITE. SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY HELPING OUR BUSINESS OWNERS. ADDITIONALLY FOR LIVE ENTERTAINMENT, IT IS CURRENTLY CONDITIONALLY ALLOWED IN THE CR, THE CMU AND THE DMU ZONES. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THIS BE UPDATED for two items, so it would be entertainment till 10 p.m., which would be permitted by right in the CR, the CMU, and the DMU zone, and then entertainment past 10 p.m., which would be the conditionally allowed, in the CR, CMU, and the DMU zone. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE WILL BE NO TYPE OF STAND-ALONE ENTERTAINMENT WILL BE PERMITTED WITHIN THE FOLLOWING ZONES, WHICH IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, C.N., SERVICE COMMERCIAL, R.C.S., OUR PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, O.P.A., OFFICE CONVERSION, OUR BUSINESS RESEARCH PARK, OUR LIGHT, OR IN A REGULAR INDUSTRIAL. AND THIS IS REMAINING STATUS QUO. SO WE'RE NOT SEEKING TO INCREASE WHERE STAND-ALONE ENTERTAINMENT IS OFFERED. IT'S JUST adding the two types of entertainment in the two different manners of administrative and discretionary in the current zone. So working with what we currently have. So entertainment prior to 10 p.m., we are recommending an entertainment permit, which would be an administrative process. This would require a complete entertainment permit application, as well as a site plan, a floor plan, a description of the type of event of entertainment, and a security plan. The entertainment permit application is comprehensive and serves as a template for the applicant. With this entertainment permit, there will be baseline conditions requirements that are applied and adopted to help safeguard and protect patrons and land use compatibility. The process will be a 30-day review process and will be reviewed by planning, code enforcement, PD, fire, and building, and this will be approved and denied administratively. So the examples of entertainment that would be allowed with an entertainment permit, I wanted to provide some examples just to kind of create a picture of what this would look like. That would be karaoke and DJ hosts ending at 9 o'clock, a comedy night ending at 10 p.m., line dancing classes ending at 8 p.m. with music and dancing continuing till 9.30, open mic ending at 8.30, bands playing amplified music ending at 10 o'clock, bingo trivia with amplification playing music and a host starting at 10 a.m. So these are all entertainment. These are just random times that I picked. So it'd be any type of entertainment ending before 10 o'clock. But this is just kind of an example of what is currently being offered, what are some ideas that business owners had or were seeking to add, and that we've kind of compiled to create an example of how the entertainment permit would help that.

Colleen, so these are just examples, but for example, the karaoke and DJ hosting could end at 10 p.m. is what I'm hearing?

Correct, yes, yeah. These are just complete examples, random arbitrary numbers I pulled up, yes.

And just curious, how did we come up with 10 p.m.? I know we've discussed it in the past, but can we go over that again?

Yeah, so 10 o'clock was discussed with, when we met with business owners and even within our own divisions with PD, it was discussed at 10 p.m. because they felt that after 10 p.m., it was tend to get a different crowd was what you would see. There was more of a, like for calls for service is something that we looked at. And then from a lot of our feedback that we received from business owners that they are only seeking to operate till 10 o'clock because of those concerns as well. They were saying that, 10 o'clock is a good time. We're not really wanting to operate any later. We want to seek a family friendly environment is another common term that we received a lot, having things during the week. So that way they have more patrons coming in at 10 o'clock. And so when we discussed it amongst ourselves as well, we felt that 10 o'clock was an appropriate time. But again, this is a draft. So if council feels that maybe that's too early, then that's something that we can look at as well.

I think Barrel House right now on Fridays and Saturdays is open till 11, right? Or are they- open till 10, 11. So, I mean, and have we had any issues with Borough House? I mean, that's.

Well, currently Borough House has a conditional use permit. So places could operate with the conditional use permit past the 10 o'clock deadline. So if they wanted to go to 1.30 till 10 o'clock or 11 o'clock, they can.

Would it be crazy to not require this until 11 as opposed to 10? Or should we do this just for that one hour?

So Council Member Soto, I'll kind of interject, because I also want to add on to everything Colleen stated. Also looking at other cities that had a similar approach where there was an administrative approval before you moved into discretionary, 10 o'clock, 9 o'clock were kind of the times that seemed to vary amongst different jurisdictions in California. As Colleen emphasized, speaking to a lot of the business owners in general, 10 o'clock was kind of the predominant time where people saying, we're usually stopping by 10. However, this is a draft. If it is a decision of council to look at this differently, then we can do that as well. I think the difference here is, and I don't wanna take too much from Colleen's presentation, but that 10 o'clock, the 10 o'clock cutoff time Is the administrative approval anything beyond 10 o'clock? You can go through discretionary and cover it that way as well.

All right, thank you. Now for entertainment past 10 o'clock would be the current process, which is the submittal and approval of a conditional use permit or a CUP. The current conditional use permit process provides project-specific review tailored to each establishment, which provides staff with the ability to impose case-by-case operating conditions. DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL AND EACH REQUEST WILL BE REVIEWED ON A PROJECT BY PROJECT BASIS. SO THIS ENSURES THAT CONDITIONS REQUIREMENTS ARE APPLIED AND ADOPTED TO HELP SAFE GUIDE AND PROTECT PATRONS AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY. THE PROCESS IS DIFFERENT AS IT WILL INCLUDE SITE PLAN REVIEW WHICH IS OUR STAFF REVIEW. A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE SITE WILL BE MAILED OUT AND PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL WHICH IS OUR PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING. AND SO IT WOULD REQUIRE THE ITEM OR THE the request to go through to our planning commissioners. And examples and types of uses that would be applicable to the conditional use permit would be karaoke and DJ on Wednesdays and Fridays ending at 11 o'clock, comedy night with multiple performers ending at midnight, line dancing and salsa dancing classes ending at 8 o'clock with music and dancing continuing till 12.30 AM, DJ ending at 2 AM, and bands with amplification ending at 11.30 AM. And again, these are just examples, times that are just after 10 o'clock. that we have seen come through with the conditional use process.

A question real quick. When you say bans with amplification, Sometimes you have a guitar, like an acoustic guitar playing. Is that considered under bands with amplification?

So it wouldn't be considered as bands with amplification. With our definition, we created acoustical music, and so it would be allowed without even an entertainment permit. However, once it's after 10 o'clock p.m., so even if you're having an acoustical music performer after 10 o'clock p.m., we are recommending a conditional use permit.

Perfect. Thanks.

NOW WITH THE ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT, THERE ARE BASELINE CONDITIONS. THESE BASELINE CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AND WILL BE APPLIED TO ALL ENTERTAINMENT PERMITS. AGAIN, THOSE WOULD BE THE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED PERMITS. THE ONLY, THE EXCEPTION WOULD BE FOR TIME RESTRICTIONS FOR THAT BASELINE CONDITION BECAUSE THE ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT ALLOWS ENTERTAINMENT PRIOR TO 10 PM WHERE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WOULD ALLOW ENTERTAINMENT PAST 10 PM. SO THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ENTERTAINMENT BASED ON THE SPECIFIC LOCATION AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BUSINESS. AGAIN THAT IS WITH THE DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS WITH THAT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND THAT DOES ALLOW STAFF TO REVIEW THE SITE FOR PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE LAND USE ZONING WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THEN AGAIN THAT ALLOWS THAT PROJECT BY PROJECT REVIEW THAT COULD ALLOW THOSE specific conditions if we wanted to. And that would be just with the conditional use process. So that's kind of an example of how these baseline conditions that we've created that cover the type, manner, hours of operation, noise, occupancy, security plan, those will all be covered under the entertainment permit. They will also be rolled over into the conditional use permit. However, with that conditional use permit would go those tailored conditions if staff and the planning commission deem it appropriate.

And Colleen, if I can, Mayor, and also to clarify too, the baseline conditions are included as subsection K in the draft ordinance. Those are just conditions that everyone would apply, especially if you're doing the administrative process. Those will also get rolled into anything that may require discretionary in addition to any site-specific conditions that may be warranted, as Colleen mentioned.

So one thing staff would like to bring to the council's attention is with those time restrictions. So per the ordinance currently, the baseline conditions apply to all businesses with a conditional use permit for entertainment with the exception again of the following, which is the time restriction. Per the draft ordinance, we have businesses shall not conduct entertainment regulated under this code section between the hours of 1.30 a.m. through 11 a.m. Staff wanted to bring this attention because we currently have conditional use permits that operate past 1.30 a.m. to 2 a.m. It's very few, but there are. And additionally, there are, or we've received information or we know that there are businesses that offer THINGS THAT WILL BE CLASSIFIED AS ENTERTAINMENT PRIOR TO 11 A.M. SO SOMETIMES THEY OFFER BINGO OR THEY HAVE A MUSIC SWAP OR THEY HAVE A DJ PLAYING MUSIC AND THAT'S USUALLY IN THE MORNING TIME LIKE ON SUNDAYS AT 10 O'CLOCK. SO STAFF WANTED TO RECOMMEND THAT POTENTIALLY THIS BE CHANGED OR WHAT COUNCIL'S THOUGHTS ARE ON RESTRICTING THE ENTERTAINMENT HOURS FROM 1 30 A.M. THROUGH 11 A.M. JUST BECAUSE THERE IS POTENTIALLY REGULATING A CERTAIN TIME FRAME THAT'S EARLIER WHERE BUSINESSES MAY WANT TO OPERATE. CURRENTLY ALSO ALL SITES WOULD HAVE TO OPERATE WITH THE NOISE ORDINANCE SO THAT WOULD PREVENT NOISE EXCEEDING DURING CERTAIN TIME LIMITS AS WELL. AND SO TIME RESTRICTIONS MAY FURTHER BE LIMITED BY AN APPLICAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR AN ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT. based if a conditional use permit was being submitted for entertainment, we can also regulate or restrict those hours as well through the discretionary process. Now, uses that would not require an entertainment permit or a conditional use permit for entertainment would be like a three-piece mariachi group walking around the inside of a restaurant prior to 10 o'clock, a solo singer with a guitar performing acoustically prior to 10 o'clock PM, an open stage event with multiple small music groups performing without amplification at a brewery prior to 10 o'clock PM, a violinist performing prior to 10 o'clock p.m. So these types of uses wouldn't require an entertainment permit nor a conditional use permit since they are all before 10 o'clock. Like the violinist would be considered ambient music. We also have acoustical music. So by redefining our definitions, we feel that we have created a better pathway and more of a broader way to allow just kind of those smaller, simple, acoustical musics to perform without having to go through the process.

Can we just change that to any... instrument? Because, I mean, you have mariachi, you have guitar, you have violinists. I mean, you have different instruments out there. Wouldn't it be more of a broad instrument?

Yes, under the definition of acoustical, it's very broad. It's acoustical in nature, so yes.

Now for our currently conditional use permits that have an existing conditional use permit for entertainment, those holders may apply for a entertainment permit to complement their existing conditional use permit for entertainment. It is an administrative level approval, so it is more restrictive in the hours of entertainment, but more flexible in the types of entertainment that is offered. If the business owner wants to increase the hours of entertainment till after 10 PM, an amendment to their existing conditional use permit would be required. So this would be just an example for our current business owners who have a conditional use permit for entertainment or for live entertainment. So an example of that would be like a business owner who currently has a CUP that allows amplified bands on Fridays and Saturdays till 1 o'clock a.m. can apply for an entertainment permit to include a DJ on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays only till 10 o'clock p.m. and karaoke and bingo on Sundays from 10 a.m. to 12 o'clock p.m. Acoustical guitarist to play during dinner service from five to nine can do so without an amendment to the CUP and without the need of an entertainment permit. So that's just kind of an example to paint of like what a business owner who has a conditional use permit for entertainment on what this entertainment permit can do for them. The entertainment permit will be non-transferable. Per the new draft ordinance, no entertainment permit may be sold, transferred, or assigned by a permittee to any other person or persons. The fees for the entertainment permit will be the same fee for a temporary conditional use permit to planning commission fee. And for the appeals with the administrative approval for the entertainment permit, the administrative decision may be appealed to the planning commission. So department's recommendation is that the council provide staff with any input or desired changes and provide direction on whether to proceed with the ordinance and related material for adoption at a future meeting. Alternative, the city council may, in lieu of the recommended motion, direct staff to not process any amendments to the Visalia Municipal Code, Chapter 17.32.155. This concludes staff's presentation. I am available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Council Member Nelson, we'll start off with you with any questions or comments. I'll wait for public comment. Okay. Council Member Poochigan? I'll wait. Everyone okay with just waiting? I'll wait, yeah. Okay, perfect. Let's do that. So let's go ahead and open this up to the public. Anybody who is present in this room who would like to speak on this item, please come forward and speak at this podium over here. I'm going to start with your name and city of residence.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council Members, and My name is Jenna Rodriguez, CEO of the Vice Elliott Chamber of Commerce. I'm here today on behalf of the Chamber to support our business community and our community as a whole. As you consider the updates to this entertainment ordinance, we appreciate the city's efforts to listen to the local businesses and create a process that provides greater flexibility while still addressing the needs of our community. Overall, we support the direction of creating a more efficient process for our businesses. As you consider the proposed entertainment permit, we encourage you to also look at the process through the eyes of a business completing the application. For example, if we can have some clarification, if a business already has a CUP and simply wants to add a new low-impact daytime activity, such as bingo on Sunday from 10 to noon, is the full entertainment permit application and review process necessary, or could there be a simpler process for these type of activities? We encourage the city to consider whether there are opportunities for a simplified or expedited process for existing CUP holders and a lower impact daytime activities. We also encourage staff to continue reviewing the application itself to ensure the administrative process is simple and accessible as the policy intends it to be. Reducing unnecessary barriers and providing businesses with clear expectations allows them to adapt, invest, and create experiences that contribute to a vibrant Visalia. Our goal is to see a process that is clear, efficient, and easy to navigate, one that allows our businesses to continue to prosper while ensuring our community continues to thrive. Thank you to city staff and for the council for your work and to continuing to include businesses in these important discussions. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to speak?

Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Mary Beattie. I am a resident of Visalia, and I am also a member on the City Planning Commission. My comment today is both as a private citizen and from the point of view of a commissioner who may be reviewing projects subject to this ordinance. So I'm just gonna focus on some of the ordinance language. Under definitions, throughout the staff report and the rest of the ordinance, there are terms like coffee shop slash cafe, and I'm not sure what the difference is. Some work on the definitions could help with that. Also there's a term private club. Not sure what that is. There's mention of both proceeds and admission to entertainment events or from entertainment events. So I'd like to know what the difference is between and if there is a difference, or maybe find consistent terminology. And then also, I said there's mention of coffee shop slash cafe, and then in the zoning matrix, I think there's a reference to restaurant slash cafe. So I'm not really sure what the differences are there. And I think it might help the business owners also to understand if they fall under this ordinance or not. Comments on solely on or at a location, maybe clarify whether that means inside or outside or both. Under section D of exemptions, I'm curious about, I'm not quite clear whether things like bingos, raffles, or auctions are exemptions or if they're part of the permitted application. And then just for clarity, the opening of the ordinance code says that it's regarding entertainment establishments, parentheses, administrative entertainment permit. Maybe that full proper term should be used throughout the ordinance instead of just entertainment permit. And then I'm also curious what staff might intend for the environmental documentation necessary for these permits. In reading some of the provisions in here, it looks like some judgment will be required to make some of the findings for the use permit, so I assume that would mean they're not ministerial and are subject to CEQA. Under Section K, the opening line says condition shall be applicable, and then under the next paragraph it says the Planning and Community Preservation Director may impose, but I think that should be shall. I think the intention is shall. That's maybe just a editorial change. And then I noticed the requirements for the content of the administrative entertainment permit and the conditional use permit.

Thank you, Mary, your time's up.

Okay, they're different. I just wondered if they could be the same. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, everybody. My name is Jeremy Schultz, I'm on the 1852 Visalia. One question I have, and we just amended our CUP recently, so I think we are where we want to be as a business, but with the entertainment permits, my question is, Is that for per event, or is that over an extended amount of time? Is that on an annual basis, a monthly basis? What's the time frame of that entertainment permit? And I guess the question I ask is, it said for a temporary conditional use permit, it's the same fee. I know we just went through the process of amending our CUP. It was a $1,800 CUP fee. We were required to do two different sound studies. So it was $2,800 for one, $3,800 for another. So we were about $9,000 in to amend our CUP. So I'm just curious in terms of the difference in the fee structure if I made the right move or if I should have waited for the entertainment package to allow myself to have a better financial situation. I think that's going to be a question of business owners based on cost. So I don't know if that's something we can answer now or it's something you can get back to me on.

Yeah, so all your questions, we'll go ahead and get those answered when everyone's done with public comments. But, Jeremy, real quick, so are you saying specifically, like, you know, you had the wrestling event last year that I attended. Are you saying, like, would you need a specific one for that, or would all of them fall under one?

All of my and I was I was fortunate enough to work with the city and I and I will say kudos to them they were very you know communication reaching out to us allowing us to be a part of the conversations and get giving feedback and then even through the CUP process it's someone daunting and so they were helpful in like making sure to navigate how we got through that so right now my cup covers everything that we do at 1852 so we're in a good position uh like they mentioned we were one of the business owners that don't really like to do things past 10 p.m it would be nice to have the flexibility we did adjust our hours to be able to open till 11 we currently still close at 10 but we do like to have that flexibility if we need to pending the crowd and the activities and things that are going as long as we're working within our CUP to have that flexibility. So right now, Mayor, I believe that we're covered on everything that we need because we tried to identify all the different elements that we do at our establishment.

I got you. Thank you.

So really my question is something you guys can get back to me, just on the entertainment permitting, the time frame of that entertainment permit, if you have to pay every time you do something or if it has a little more longevity, just so we can calculate as business owners if that would have been a better route for me to do a 12-month or if it's a lifetime entertainment permit or how that works. So thank you.

Anybody else from the public wishing to speak? Okay, seeing no one going up there. City Clerk, do we have anyone online who wishes to speak?

As a reminder to the callers online, please raise your virtual hand and we will add you to the meeting queue. Mayor, at this time I see no hands raised.

Okay, so we'll go ahead and close public comment then and we will turn it back over to council. Actually, before we start with our comments, there was a few questions. Would you guys mind answering those questions for us?

Yes, we can do that. Colleen, do you want to go first? Yes.

So for the comments for the people who have a current conditional use permit and what the entertainment permit would look like for them. So those people who have a conditional use permit for entertainment can apply for an entertainment permit to allow the types of entertainment under the definition be allowed at their site till 10 o'clock p.m. So there wouldn't be any change to their existing conditional use permit if they're wanting to exceed it or increase it at all. They would have to go through an amendment for that conditional use permit. but the entertainment permit could be used to complement their current offerings at their site if they choose to add that.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, so Mayor, if someone had a conditional use permit for live entertainment after 10 o'clock, if this ordinance was adopted, they could apply for an entertainment permit and do the things that were noted and discussed up until 10 o'clock. And that's how that works. So they can work in unison if the applicant or business owner wanted to apply it that way.

But their conditional use permit that they have now may be more restrictive, is that the idea?

Well, their condition use permit right now could have certain conditions on it when they operate within the time frames based on how they're currently operating. If they were to come in and say, well, I would like to, let's use the example of I want to have a DJ and I want to start at, I don't know, seven o'clock to 10 o'clock, then technically they can apply for an entertainment permit that could be reviewed administratively, but it would be subject to all the requirements that are still spelled out in here. Because what I hope is... What you glean from a lot of this, one of the biggest issues when you have live entertainment or entertainment is security and making sure your patrons are protected. So a lot of the conditions with regards to security, ensuring safety, are all codified in the proposed draft ordinance. That ensures that if you go the administrative route, we're still covering security and things that are done so that people are protected while they're there.

And would that be the same process for whether it's a high impact or low impact change? So like for example, you have a DJ which would probably be like a higher impact as opposed to maybe, I don't know, a violinist.

So yes, vinyl or ambient or something that would fall under acoustical or ambient. Yes, we're trying to identify that to make sure that it doesn't get wrapped up in a process that's not necessary. But when you have any use, whether it be the trivia, the bingo, the vinyl swap, there's so many uses out there that we're trying to capture everything in a process that just makes it a little bit more streamlined for businesses to run through. Like anything, I think when people... not knowing exactly how it works so that you're a little hesitant to understand really what's happening, but just looking at this, this is probably the quickest way we could do it under an administrative process with the cutoff time being 10 o'clock, but that is subject to discussion and change if need be. The other thing is just ensuring that the thing that Colleen had stated, most business owners kept going, well, staff, what is it the city wants? and having this draft application starts that framework for people to understand when you have a security plan, this is the information we need. Your operational stand, this is what we need. What is it you're doing? Try to give us just a comprehensive overview so that when we look at it and review it, we issue the approval, you're covered. That's really the emphasis here. I understand timing and cost, and we'll talk about that here in our response to those questions, but we're trying to figure out a way that gets you in a route that gives the administrative review process, but also recognizing there are some CEP holders out there that can still operate under those rules that they've been approved under, and could apply for this other route if they chose to.

And just to add that the noise issue is also part of the baseline conditions so that would, if someone were coming in for the entertainment administrative permit, they would also still have to deal with that, those kinds of noise studies at that point too.

Yes, and that's really to cover when you, if someone wanted to have entertainment outside in the open, especially when you're near sensitive land uses, we're definitely gonna require a noise study. That's just to make sure that they're not exceeding noise levels that results in an issue to the residents if that were to occur. And it is covered in the ordinance. It's very clear on that route.

Additionally, for the entertainment permit application fee, staff recommended the temporary conditional use permit or TCUP to Planning Commission because that fee currently is at $588. The entertainment permit application fee would basically be with the business owner until the business owner chooses to leave since they're non-transferrable. So a business owner cannot assign it to someone else, cannot leave the business and leave the entertainment permit there. So it's different than a conditional use permit, which runs with the land. This is given to the business owners, but the fee will be there until the business owner chooses to leave or it is revoked because of, let's say, code enforcement violations and issues that we are receiving.

So that's a one-time one-in-one?

A one-time fee, correct, yes.

And the permit would be a one-time issuance, so it would run with them until they elected to sell it, close it.

So if I came in and did an entertainment fee for DJ, bingo, line dancing, whatever, one and done?

One and done, yes. Correct. Similar to the short-term rental application, you do one and then you're done. There's a business tax renewal fee, but that's not the application fee that's issued by planning. Okay.

How much work would it save you if we changed this to 11 p.m.? And I'm only saying this because I saw the breweries are open until 11 now, and I noticed those are a lot of good actors that we have in downtown, unless that's changed recently. But I noticed just from historically speaking and looking at the times of the shootings and where they were at, 11 seemed like a good cutoff time. Would that save you guys any work if we moved that?

So nothing has been adopted right now. This is all draft on paper. So it's, it's entirely up to council. If you directed us to do that, I think where I would caution is that, uh, one, you know, we kind of listened to what business owners were saying and you know, I know things can change, but we also had our police department code enforcement look at it as well. And I think everyone kind of thought the 10 o'clock was the appropriate time. But again, It's something that has not been adopted. So if we are looking at any changes in cleanup, which I would recognize what Mary Beatty stated, that's stuff we can clean up and I'll discuss one piece of the environmental review process. But again, it's really subject to what council directs us to do. This will have to go through a public hearing process through commission back to you. So there could be some things that pop up that may warrant us to look at things or change things if that's required as we go through that public hearing process.

I attended one of the outreach meetings, and there was five or six different businesses represented at this outreach meeting here, and the consensus was 10 o'clock, because nothing good happens after 10 o'clock. And I think what we could do is ask Visalia PD, if not at this meeting, at a future meeting, give us statistics showing what goes on before 10, what goes on after 10.

Can I ask for a point of clarification? Is it about what time the entertainment ends or about what time the business closes?

So in this case, the, the time is associated with the type of permit process you go through. So the 10 o'clock cutoff time is going the administrative route. So it's no public hearing unless you want to appeal it. Um, and it's, it's 30 day kind of a review for city staff to review the application, make sure everything is on point and then we issue it. Uh, And that's kind of what signifies, before 10 o'clock, you want to have an operation, you want to cease that entertainment by 10 o'clock. That was the kind of signifying time. If not, then you could find yourself in the CUP process if you want to go beyond 10.

So to be clear, they can shut the music off at 10 and then close at 11 o'clock, correct? Oh, yes. So let me clarify. Thank you.

Yeah, the entertainment ceases at 10. The business can stay open. So a brewery that wants to stay open until 11 but ceases their entertainment by 10, that's no problem. Yes, yes.

And you see that in most places now with the cooling off hour where they shut off the music, last call, and then clear everything out. It's kind of no one just shuts off the music at 11 o'clock and says get out, you know? So I'm told, I don't know, it's been a while.

So the, sorry Colleen, I'm just gonna, the comments that were raised by Mary Bae, we could address those, because those I think are some cleanup things we can do with better definition. Again, most of entertainment is done already in an established business, so we believe there's exemptions that cover us under CEQA for these types of uses. The ordinance is very clear, if you wanna do music or something that would cause noise outside, then you're gonna do some type of acoustical analysis that may now change the way we approach it from a CEQA perspective. That has been the case I guess with 1852 that has events outside that does use amplification. Noise study was done as required and it would have been done in requirement under the proposed draft ordinance as well.

I think we've covered everything, Colleen?

We'll turn it back over to council for further questions. Great, thank you so much. So we'll start off with Council Member Nelson.

Any comments or questions? Well, first of all, I want to thank Colleen. I actually listened to the outreach meeting because you covered everything. And I appreciate the outreach that the staff did at various businesses and get their input. And I think the thing that I heard when I sat at that outreach meeting was ease of application. There was a lot of confusion on do what I have to do and how I need to do it And I appreciate the fact you're making that's more simplistic Yeah, I think at some point I think it'd be good to have a report on statistics So the council's more knowledgeable what you know in PDS world Enforcement is the enforcement of an extended condition use permit going to be put on to code enforcement and PD or and How is that gonna work?

So as it currently stands, Council Member Nelson, code enforcement does bar details. Right now, about once a month, they're going out and observing businesses that have entertainment or the CUPs for entertainment and kind of reporting and identifying what they're seeing out there. So that does occur. I know our police department, we've been doing Regular, and I'm not gonna say they're monthly, but maybe quarterly updates of what's occurring downtown because of issues in the past that we had with some live entertainment venues. And we continually monitor where calls of service are starting to increase, we're trying to verify what are they allowed to do, what are their cutoff times, what are their security personnel requirements. All that information has been shared. So collectively, both police department and our code enforcement division are fully aware of what businesses are supposed to be doing when they're conducting live entertainment. So that does occur. And when issues start to arise, we convene quickly to figure out how to resolve that situation.

Okay. Again, a great report, very thorough, and I appreciate it. So thank you. Thank you. Council Member Pritchett again.

Colleen, great job on the report. I think it's great that the city is working with our business owners. I just have a couple quick questions here. The time restrictions, so we're not allowing anything before 11 a.m.? We have to come back and get a separate CEP, correct?

So currently as it reads, the ordinance is restricting entertainment prior to 11 a.m. And so that's what staff also was recommending, maybe council's direction on if that should be removed and just say anything prior to 10 p.m. would be allowed and anything past 10 p.m. would require a conditional use permit and not require a certain starting time frame. Because again, both of these, permits or the conditional use permit and the entertainment permit would fall under the noise ordinance. So those are one of those baseline conditions that we have. So wanting to seek your direction. So currently as it reads, yes, it would be restricted at a certain time.

So for me, I would get rid of the morning restriction. You know, I think about a lot of different places. I see Sam back over there, so I'll probably pick on like the Hyde. The Hyde's a breakfast place. If you want to do breakfast activities, you might have a DJ in there playing, nothing crazy. You know, some places might do events in the morning. I would say anything up to 10 p.m. and get rid of the early restrictions because I think you're putting the breakfast establishments Kind of behind a lot of times are gonna do bingo in the morning get people to come in or different events like that It's fun events on the weekend and get people in the doors. So I don't like the starting time personally Right now when someone buys a business the business license just transfers or that to reapply For business license You know, that's a great question when someone purchases a business yeah, they really transfer over or the company and fee and transfer everything that way and

Well, I think they do maybe a change of ownership under the business tax process. That would cover that process.

I see Renee nodding her head back there. Someone say yes.

But if the entertainment permit that was the administrative approval, that is non-transferable. That's the request. Yeah.

But the CUP is transferable. Yes.

Because if everything's transferable and nothing's changing, I don't know why we're making it more difficult. we can do a fee or something on that because it should be easy, like, hey, we're keeping everything the same, we're making no changes. I don't understand why we can't just transfer that over.

So, Council Member Cheeky, and I think that's where the issue tends to arise when these establishments that have entertainment permits where they take something over and then they morph it and change it and go beyond what they're allowed. This gives us the opportunity to reassess with them, hey, this is what you're allowed to do. If you wanna change it, modify it, then here's the process and application process you would go through to make sure you're checking all the boxes, especially with security if security is warranted. Some cases it may not be, but again, it gives us this ability to make sure they understand what they're getting themselves into.

All right, perfect. Yeah, great report. I'll be fully supportive, minus the change on the time restrictions.

Council Member Soto. Thank you. Question. Are we going to – so a business that wants to open or have entertainment until 11 p.m., are we going to treat them the same as a business that wants to do the same thing but until 1.30 a.m. as far as them having to go through the process?

Yeah.

So you're saying if the business wants to offer entertainment to 11 o'clock p.m. Are we going to treat them the same and make them pay the same fees as a business that would open to 1.30 in the morning?

That is correct, yes. Because per the draft ordinance, anything past 10 o'clock p.m. would require a conditional use permit. So neither of those would be applicable for an entertainment permit, and they would have to go through the discretionary approval. So, yes.

Okay. Yeah, I'm okay with the change for the morning, taking that restriction down. I'd be supportive of everything here. I guess the only change is I would probably want to see a change maybe in the fee structure for someone who's opening till 11 as opposed to someone that's trying to open till 1.30. Again, just looking at some of the major crime that we've had, it's been more after 12 a.m., and again, I've just noticed with the breweries, a lot of times, I know they stop playing music at around 10.30, but generally, I haven't heard of anything bad happening there, and I hope it stays that way.

That's one that's one other change I would suggest so just for clarification what yours what's the what is charged for? Conditioning you to permit for live entertainment is the minor CUP fee. So that's the that's the Least amount that we can charge for a discretionary item Where we were looking at because this still takes a lot of staff time coordination with other departments there still has to be a fee cost recovery there and we felt that given that we have a good starting template with the application process and everything that's included in that. There's an option where there's a temporary conditions for it that gets referred to Planning Commission for approval. That's a little over $500 and we thought that would be sufficient to cover the amount of time we're gonna go through to ensure Everything is up to date with the application, making sure both our police department, code enforcement division, fire and building are aware of what's going on, and any potential review that they may require as they look at some of the information that's provided.

Okay.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor Wynn?

A couple questions. If we drop the start time, Does it revert back to the noise ordinance start time? I mean, I don't want to see them starting at 4 a.m. in the morning. I mean, I know Sam's breakfasts are good, but come on.

Vice Mayor Nguyen, yes. I think what ends up happening is if you start to do, or if you start to conduct an activity that starts to create noise issues, and under the noise ordinance weekdays, it's,

I think it's 6 a.m. And then the weekends it's 9?

Yes. So there are some allowances there that we would look at in terms from a noise impact. I think based on what we've heard this afternoon, maybe we can look at kind of rephrasing that and maybe identify a start time that council may or commission. Something flexible. Yeah, that you may be comfortable with. So we put at least a time in there.

Yeah. I would ask that staff meet with our planning commissioner, Miss Beatty, there to clarify that. I want her to make sure she has full understanding. If it's not clear to her, it's certainly not gonna be clear to me. She's better at this than I am. And then on the security, because that seems to be probably the biggest issue of all, it says, it talks about them being licensed. But it can be owner, operator has licensed security. It doesn't have to be a privately licensed firm, correct?

It could be either or. So as long as security is licensed personnel, which has a security guard card through the BSIS, I'm sorry, I may be butchering that acronym. But it would have to be licensed through the state of California, so yes.

Okay, so then when code enforcement or PD does the check, they have to have their guard card on them, right? That is correct. And then it talks a little bit, did we talk about the queuing instances we've had in the past? Is that clearly stated? On the sidewalk, yeah. I saw a little bit, but I thought probably maybe clarify that as much as possible about what is and what is not allowed.

Yes, Vice Mayor Nguyen, we could definitely make sure that baseline conditions include the queuing requirement in them. I don't think it does, and I think we missed that.

Okay, yeah, I'd love to see that. And that's all. Thank you for your work, and thank you, I assume, since not too many people spoke out, I guess business owners feel like you've done a great job with them, and I appreciate that you listened to them, and we want to support our chamber and keep our businesses healthy and make it as easy on them as possible. Thank you. Thank you.

Yeah, I wanna thank the staff, our local businesses, Planning Commission, for all those who helped put this ordinance together. We appreciate it, because we've heard from our community that we wanna make sure we're protecting our downtown, that we're keeping it safe. And when we were first having these initial discussions, it was hard to create policies that were lumping nightclubs with someone who was just playing a violin. And so the way that you guys were able to put this policy together really shows you put a lot of effort into thinking about all the different possibilities. And I know that came from meeting with the public, meeting with the different business owners and understanding their needs what will help them to be successful. So I really appreciate you guys doing that. To me, it looks like a great policy. I think it's really going to help make it easier for those folks who just want to continue something that they're already doing, that they've never had any issues. And it's for the folks who are going to be doing DJing and the nightclub scene. It's going to require that they have some more skin in the game, that they're protecting our community. So I really appreciate that. And as far as the recommendations of the morning I mean, the ABC is already not serving alcohol at 4 o'clock in the morning. That's already a requirement, so I'm fine with removing that. I don't think there's any need to put that in there, because I don't see anyone getting wild with no alcohol at 5 in the morning. So I think that's fine. But other than that, I just want to say thank you. I think this is a great policy, and it shows a lot of the effort that you guys put into this. So I'll entertain a motion at this time. Are there any other questions or comments?

I move to direct staff to begin drafting revisions to chapter 17 zoning based on the information provided in the staff report and direction provided during the work session presentation.

I'll second. Thank you. I have first and second. All those in favor, please vote. And item passed is 5-0. Thank you very much. All right. Next, we're going to go on to our inclusive park project.

Good afternoon, Council. Jason Huckleberry, Director of Engineering and Building. I'm here with our City Engineer, Chris Crawford, and our Project Manager, Cody McLaughlin.

Perfect. Good afternoon, City Council. Yeah, as Jason Huckleberry stated, we're here to present on the city's fully inclusive park project and the updated concept layout with this. This map shows the updated project site that was approved at council meeting on May 4th, 2026. As we can see, our project site is the undeveloped corner lot right there on the corner of Mill Creek Parkway and McAuliffe Street. The following slides will revisit some images we've kind of gone through, images and illustrations we've gone through before, just as a recap. That way we have some background when we get into the concept layouts. Show the types of amenities, play equipment, and uses that would be considered as part of this inclusive park project, starting with the playground equipment. Just show some other illustrations and renderings of playground equipment. Sequoia themed, as we've discussed previously, to associate with our location. These are examples of fully inclusive restrooms and shaded picnic areas that are a part of the project scope. Here we show the water play amenities and the music auditory amenities that are both through, operate through user interaction for sensory engagement. And then here we have the inclusive ball courts and inclusive fitness equipment that would allow interaction from users of all types of abilities. And then just to recap on an outlook of park operations. So there would be an onsite parking lot with accessible parking stalls for our ADA users and the park area would be fully fenced to ensure user safety and the park would be under the monitoring of city park rangers. Just some background on this. So an outreach meeting was held on April 15, 2026 at Valley Oak Middle School. Just notifying the nearby neighborhood and area regarding the updated project site location. We did send out 900 mailers to the nearby neighborhood. We had a total of 14 attendees at this meeting. We presented on the project site for consideration at the time and just the type of function and use of the future project. This opportunity did generate public opinions at that meeting with some expressing excitement while others expressing some concern of the impacts to their neighborhood in the nearby area. We have summarized the concerns and comments from that meeting, and I'll go through those and how city staff has believed we've addressed and mitigated those and heard those concerns and reflected that in our concept layout and design here. To begin, concerns with transients utilizing the park and restrooms in a non-appropriate fashion. This is going to be an enclosed park with an anticipated six foot tall fencing. It would be open only during specified park hours. City staff will be opening and closing gates in morning and evenings for those hours. There would be a regular city presence that can report any issues to the appropriate departments and personnel. In addition, city staff is exploring design options for these bathroom equipment that would prioritize heavy-duty commercial-grade equipment as an effort to prevent vandalization of that. Park operating hour concerns. There was some concerns that negative behavior in the area would be most likely to occur after dark and requested that the park only be open during daylight hours. Staff is continually investigating the appropriate park hours with the Parks Department, but that would likely coincide with standard operating hours. We see users and attendees want to attend this park. Concerns about the parking lot being utilized for non-park activities. Staff's response is that the parking lot is being made to place a... is being consideration given to place a vehicular gate across the drive approach entrance. So that way that parking lot could be closed and coincide with park hours. So in essence, those two would be open at the same time and operate simultaneously and close at the same time. Concerns of noise nuisance from park and park amenities. City staff believes there is a misunderstanding with some of the park equipment. There is some various park equipment that does have the ability to have noise function as learning type tools and sensory engagement tools. But we do not believe that this is going to significantly impact or be a noise nuisance to the area. In addition, we have strategically placed some of those amenities to, again, mitigate those concerns even further. And that will be reflected in the concept layout. increased traffic activity in the neighborhood. Staff has kept resident concerns in mind while placing the drive approach to this park as a means to manage traffic to the park. The drive approach has been located to turn vehicles into the park as soon as possible once turning onto Manzanita Street. In addition, the site entrance has an elongated drive aisle leading into the parking lot as a means to mitigate any potential vehicle queuing as also a way to streamline efficiency of getting attendees and users onto the site as efficiently as possible. a request that the parking lot not be placed on Manzanita and further away from the nearby neighborhood homes. This comment does seem to be geared towards residents not wanting a parking lot right adjacent to their homes and whatever is adjacent be aesthetically pleasing and kind of a beautifying effort being made towards that. Staff has kept this concern in mind and it is reflected in the concept layout. Safety concerns about the uncontrolled intersection at McAuliffe Street and Mill Creek Parkway. Staff has informed the residents that a design is currently underway for a traffic signalization at that intersection at this location. Following that, At the city council meeting on May 4th, city staff presented on the proposed site where there are additional public comments provided from attendees at the council meeting. A summary of those included a request to consider locating the restrooms further away from the Manzanita Street side of the site. That request has been given consideration as well and is reflected in the concept layout. a request to consider locating the parking lot entrance and park entrance in a method to minimize impacts to adjacent homes by pedestrians or vehicles. That also has been given consideration and we believe has been addressed and reflected in the concept layout. And then there was also just a reiteration of the previously stated comments from prior outreach meetings. City staff recently presented this updated concept layout to the Parks Commission. We did have an attendee from continual outreach meetings from the nearby area that did attend. We did invite all the attendees from the outreach meetings in the nearby area that provided contact info to the Parks Commission to see that presentation firsthand and an ability to provide comment at that time initially. We did get a comment from one of the attendees and from the nearby neighborhood that was very satisfied. They stated they were very grateful and felt we really heard those concerns and that we did address and mitigate all those concerns that were reflected in the concept layout. So from here, I'll go ahead and jump into the concept layout, explain how that functions, how that operation should flow. In addition, as we tackle that, how we believe we've mitigated that with those design components I stated. To start here, our entrance would be located off of Manzanita Street due to traffic safety requirements. That's the best entrance. As stated, we turn them into the site as quickly as we can based off of traffic design requirements. We show there that safety vehicular gates that would coincide with park hours. That is, again, the consideration we're considering to control vehicles attending the parking lot outside of those operating hours. This is that elongated drive aisle, as we stated, to kind of mitigate any potential vehicle queuing as well as a means to efficiently get vehicles into the site, into the ADA parking and the parking lots here. This also provided the opportunity for us to stretch that parking lot and locate it closer to Mill Creek Parkway and McCulloch Street, again, creating a little bit of a buffer, a distance buffer between the neighborhood that would be down here relative to where the parking lot and the park entrance. We do show our security perimeter fencing all throughout the border of that site that is denoted by number 11 there, and that would be our perimeter fencing anticipating six foot tall. Here we have our entrance to the park. Right off the bat is where our accessible restroom is. That's number seven right there. That coincided with two folds with again, consideration to the nearby neighborhood and the public comments we received as to being conscious as to how we and where we locate that restroom. In addition, that does seem to coincide very efficiently for our park staff and their maintenance of the restrooms being nearby their vehicles and nearby the parking lot. It's a more efficient means for them. As we enter, we do have this first circular ring here with a very wide walking path that would slightly elevate up as you progressionally get towards the play equipment. This area is centralized to our large playground amenities. Our custom slides, our inclusive swings, all of those play structures and playground equipment is located in this first circular ring right here with a walking path surrounding that. We do have picnic seating area on both ends located here. Number five, if families would like to sit and enjoy and watch other attendees use play equipment so that way they can enjoy sitting. We do have landscaping buffers between those and we do have shade sailing throughout this play area here. Again, this does ramp up slowly to allow our inclusive attendees to be able to access certain parts of the play structures and play amenities that they may not normally have on a prototypical play site. As we get to the back of this first circular ring, we do have down here towards the bottom, this is our water play amenities. Down here where you saw those interactive water play that provides a sensory engagement. Just above that, we do have a turf area where we have a slight slope transitioning back down to a zero grade. And this would function as attendees or users could just relaxation green space or run around, play with a slight slope there. Just above that would be our music amenities where you saw the sensory engagement for auditory. We, again, strategically located that closer to the McCulloch Street. Again, hearing those concerns of potential noise, even though we don't believe that those auditory would be significantly impacting, we did locate that closer to the McCulloch Street site to create a buffer between the neighborhood and those auditory interactions, including not only distance, but obviously landscaping would create a buffer with that as well. Going into the secondary circular ring here, we have number six, which would be our shaded picnic area, where we'd have our shade pavilion and our seating picnic area right there. Just behind that would be our play surfacing mounds. So these are colored, different play surfacing, different textures, different elevations that you'd have. Obviously, AD accessible with different colored striped games on those play surfacings. Centralize the center of that second ring is number 12, which would be our inclusive ball courts. So that's where we'd have those very unique style ball courts. You saw like the bank shot styles located the central of that second ring. So our secondary ring here, the concept that was worked through with our designer was kind of locating this more interactive play exercise area was the second ring. So we have 13s located throughout the backside of this secondary ring. And those are our fitness equipment, our inclusive fitness equipment. And uniquely enough, it worked out that this should measure, the secondary ring should measure, I believe it's about an eighth mile. So families could come, let other attendees play on different equipment. Maybe they'd like to get some steps in on that walking path and have a measurable there, maybe get some exercise. And that's where we located that distance in conjunction with the fitness equipment and the ball courts. Just inside of it, we do have another turf buffer area. Again, for those maybe using exercise and want to do some other running around inside that green turf area just between the fitness stations and the ball courts. And then following to the back of the site, we do have a bit of open turf area, green space for those attendees that may necessarily have had their fill of the different interactive equipment we have there, wanna run around, play catch, tag, anything of that sort where we do have a little bit of that green turf area just towards the back of that. And again, just to reiterate, we do have our perimeter site fencing all the way around this with our entrance located towards the front there. Thank you, Council. I'd like to open it this time for questions, discussion on the project and the concept layout.

Thank you very much. Council Member Soto, any questions or comments?

Thank you for the report. Exciting that this is coming along here. One question, the turf lawn on, I believe it's the north end, is that big enough for practice? I know you might have folks come in and do practice softball, soccer. Is that a big enough space for that?

Yeah, I don't have the exact dimension on that, and I could easily pull the dimension on that. The intent was, obviously, we do have an interesting shape, parceled site, so we did want some open turf space, not necessarily to orientate towards a riverway where it's predominant, but large enough where you could still see a small game, a small striping, a small practice, something of that sort. Obviously not a full-blown league level, but it does allow for that level of interaction, correct? Yeah, something of that sort. Awesome.

Council Member Soto, Jason Glick, Parks and Recreation Director. Yes, it's big enough for practices, youth practices for sure.

Thank you.

Thank you for your work.

Council Member Pachinko, any questions or comments?

Yeah, great presentation. I was talking to Council Member Nelson earlier. We talked about this six years ago. I'm glad to see it's coming to fruition. I'm really glad we listed the neighborhood's concerns and then worked with them and kind of, because obviously it's coming right next to their homes. They were concerns. I'm glad that we listened to them and addressed those. So great job. I'll be fully supportive of it tonight.

Council Member Nelson. You know, I appreciate the effort in putting this proposal together. I appreciate the amenities that you've decided to put into the park. I think it's an excellent location. I think it's a great amenity for the neighborhood. I think you've addressed every concern they have. I think some of the concerns were overinflated. But, I mean, that's fine. I'm not too concerned about having a play field for youth sports, because I think this park is designed for people that maybe aren't in youth sports, but they need the amenity. Maybe they want to do something. And I think if you open it up to that, you have more traffic. You know, the downside for me, and Council Member Pachigian brought it up, I'm very excited for this. I was excited in 2022 when the concept came up. And shame on us for what we've gone through and mistakes made. The only thing I would ask is if there's any way this can be expedited. Because in 2022, we put a notice out that we're going to put it next to the Imagine U. There's a lot of fanfare and a lot of excitement built. And then nothing happened. And now you're saying, yeah, we're going to build it. But hey, guess what? You've got to wait until 28 to get on it. I would like to see a way we can expedite it. I hate to use the word priority, but I think we stubbed our toe on this one, and I'd like to see us correct that. So thank you. Excellent job. Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Yeah, I just had a couple of questions. The number of handicapped stalls in the parking lot, is that just at the standard, or did you add more because of the inclusivity?

We have added more, and given budget, there is possibility if we could even add a few more here. Obviously, it's constantly spatial budget and traffic laws, so there's a possibility we could as well, but it is above the minimums. Yeah.

And then following up on Council Member Nelson's, has this been all approved and the change and everything's already at the state level for that grant we received?

We have submitted that. We submitted our full memo to them in their letter, the application. We've been checking regularly with our grant rep and that said everything looks fantastic. They thought our package looked complete and fantastic. It is moving through their departments. I've been informed it's with their competitive or their writing department or something like that. So I've been touching bases with them regularly to get that update and we're just ready for the formal written. It's done and we're steamrolling ahead giving approval by yourselves.

If you're working with the state, steamrolling is not a word to use.

We do the best we can, of course.

Okay. And then the hours of the park. I know that was a concern for all of us, I think, not just the residents. But, Jason, are you going to limit that? I would hate to see that open until 10 p.m.

I would think it would be somewhat like the skate park. The skate park operational hours are from dawn to dusk. Okay. So I would pretty close to something like that.

Okay. Perfect.

We're still researching. Yeah.

And then I like the elongated drive approach and stuff. And there's enough room, I assume, if the gates are closed, they can back out and turn around?

Yes. Yes, of course. Okay.

And thank you. This is a nice design, and I'm glad to see it coming and would agree with Council Member Nelson. Let's get this going. Thank you for your work.

Yeah, we really appreciate it. So I also had a few questions. So any anticipated date when we're expecting that the state would approve this? I mean, did they say, hey, by the end of the year, by 2027? I mean, what are they saying?

So in addition to being told by our state representative that it was a very thorough package, he saw zero reason why this would be denied. He gave Cody initially a timeframe of approval for last week. So when Cody called him last week and said, where are we at? How are we doing? He says, I think we're going to need another week or two. And he offered to actually give up some of the contacts for the decision makers, which we want to kind of press a little bit. So we feel like we're on the cusp. He said one to two weeks, and we feel like we're going to be close.

If you need some extra pressure, let me know. I'm happy to make some phone calls.

Mayor, I do have one like kind of serious question related to the speeding this up. Like we were as a staff level, we were, you know, concerned about getting the design completely started right after this because we don't have that state approval yet. Like, do we want to just take the risk and go ahead and start the design? The only issue is that, yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. We're just on board. Go ahead and just get it started, even though we don't have full approval yet.

You know, I think we can make that a, if we decide to move forward with this, we can make that as part of the approval process. So perfect. Whoever's going to make the motion, take note of that. So, um, so next, so if parking, so from my understanding, there's not going to be any parking allowed along McAuliffe. Is that correct? Like it just won't be physically possible to park along McAuliffe. I think that is correct. Yeah, that would be correct. Yeah. Okay. But there would be parking along Mill Creek and Manzanita.

I think right now we don't have room for parking on Mill Creek because I think we were trying to fit bike lanes in there too. Okay. So I think that's for McCullough, Fann, Mill Creek. I'm pretty confident from what I recall seeing the plans for that that I think we have bike lanes on both of those. So there won't be parking on either one of those.

Okay. So how confident are we that the parking that we have there would be sufficient for the folks who are going to be going there?

I feel pretty confident. For background on this, in the cycles of going through, we're massaging this concept light with them. Two times I've said, let's add more parking. So we went from maybe on the cusp of 20 to I think I'm knocking on almost 40 parking stalls. And again, given budget, that's where I'm always playing the game. I'd like to even potentially add just a few more in this little space right here nearest, which would probably give me another six to eight potentially. So if I can, I intend to even add that much more. So I do feel confident that we will have sufficient parking.

Perfect. That's what I was going to say. I mean, you know, Honestly, it's kind of weird just to have a little green space right there. I'd rather just have parking, you know, just more to mow and more just to – I mean, it will look really pretty, but I'd rather make sure that we're not having people parking out in the neighborhood because that was honestly the biggest concern from folks apart from just unwanted visitors and doing illegal activities, you know, so – The gate, the entrance gate, is that going to be an automatic gate or is that going to be like a chain? To the drive aisle? Yeah, the drive aisle, yeah.

So that would be Parkman. So that would be opened by a park ranger during staff hours.

A manual gate over there. Okay. So is it going to be like an actual gate or just a chain gate? Going up right there.

It'd be the style, kind of P-gate styles. I'm not sure if you've, that's how I've denoted them.

To match with the gating that's going to be up there?

Okay. Styling, yes.

Okay. And then the only entrance to the park is going to be .11, correct? Correct. Okay. I'm asking that because it helps to explain to people that most people aren't going to be parking way on the north side of Manzanita and then walking all the way over there if that's the only parking. So we're not inviting people to come in in different areas.

Correct. I might suggest, just so we're not surprised later on, as Cody gets into permits for this, there may be an evaluation of the amount of people in the park and a secondary exit may be required. An emergency exit?

Correct. Okay. OK, yeah, then my next question was going to be about when we're planning on starting construction. But I guess we need to find out when we're getting the money from the state. So yeah, wonderful. I really appreciate it. I was over in the neighborhood, and I was talking to some of the folks over there who live right there. And they said that at first they weren't really thrilled. But once they talked with staff, they were actually really excited about it. And I think as council, we were looking at this kind of odd pie-shaped lot. And I was kind of skeptical if that would even work. But once it's come together, I mean, it looks beautiful. And, you know, my big concern was the road and, you know, kids kicking balls and different things. But obviously the community has told us that with this clientele, they want gates so that the kids are safe and not running out in the road. So I think this is actually a perfect location. I think it'll be a good win-win. For the neighbors, they said they're tired of having the dust blowing around in the weeds. So I think with everything else that you guys have put into this, it's going to be a really, really nice amenity for the community. And even the walking path around, I think a lot of folks will enjoy that. So everyone I talked to over there, they were extremely excited. So I'll be fully supportive of this. All right, I will entertain a motion at this time. Oh, you're right. We didn't do public comment. Let's go ahead and open this up to the public. Anyone wishing to speak at this time, please come forward and state your name and city of residence. And seeing no one, Raina, anyone online wishing to speak?

As a reminder to the callers online, please raise your virtual hand and we will add you to the meeting queue. Mayor, at this time I see no hands raised.

Thank you so much. All right, let's go ahead and close public comment and turn it back over to council with a motion or any discussion.

Oh, wow. Okay, I move to receive a presentation on an authorized staff to move forward with the updated concept layout to prepare design and construction drawings prior to state approval.

I'll second it.

Fantastic, we have a first and a second. All those in favor, please vote. And the item passes five to zero. Thank you so much. Thank you, council. We're excited. All right, next we will go on to work session item number three, which is a stormwater master plan update.

Good afternoon once again. I'm here with Catherine, and Catherine's gonna lead us through this presentation, and we'll try to get you all the information you need, but not more than you need. That'll be the hard part.

As Jason mentioned, my name is Catherine. I'm an associate engineer with the City of Visalia, and I'll be presenting on the stormwater master plan update. The general overview of this presentation was starting with the purpose, going through a overview of the master plan, including a shift in approach, an evaluation of the existing system, and future conditions planning, and then briefly going over next steps. The purpose of this master plan update in bold would be to maintain the current level of protection offered for flood control purposes for the city. This includes and involved modeling growth for the 2030 general plan, land uses, assessing capacity of the existing storm system, IDENTIFYING NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS TO SUPPORT GROWTH PER THE GENERAL PLAN, PROVIDING DIRECTION FOR INCOMING DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN PROVIDING COSTS FOR THE STORM CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPER IMPACT FEE. THIS UPDATE WAS MORE OF A REDEVELOPMENT DUE TO A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT SHIFT IN APPROACH FROM THE PREVIOUS 1994 MASTER In essence, this shift in approach is from a discharge to a more recharge focus, where the adopted 1994 master plan relies heavily on discharging directly into the waterways that run through the city. So that would be that run through or border the city. So St. John's, Modoc Ditch, Mill Creek, Evans Ditch, Packard Creek, and Cameron Creek. This was acceptable at the time, but due to not only changes in regulatory requirements for water quality, more stringent water quality requirements for discharges, and then also limited capacity in the waterways, we don't own any of them outright, and we have shared use agreements to basically regulate our discharge to the waterways, so there's existing constraints and reasons not to keep discharging or not to add new discharges so the update and redevelopment focuses on regional retention basins and essentially collecting storm water in basins and using that to recharge groundwater when feasible just for a visual this is the a map from the 1994 master plan it divided things into general areas based on which waterway it was discharging it to. And so that's how it focused it versus the new approach which divides it into smaller areas based on basins that we're collecting the water in. So the first portion of the storm master plan is evaluating the existing system. So What you'll see in the master plan report, which was included as an attachment, is what I'm referring to as a contemporaneous approach. So by contemporaneous, I mean instead of evaluating the existing system based on the most current or modern standards, we instead evaluate the system based on the standards that applied at the time of installation. So instead of saying, oh, well, it should do the same thing as if we USED A NEW STANDARD, WE'RE INSTEAD SAYING, HOW IS THE SYSTEM FUNCTIONING AS DESIGNED? AND THIS AVOIDS MOVING THE GOAL POSTS. SO FOR COMPARISON, THE CONSULTANT ORIGINALLY EVALUATED THE SYSTEM USING A 10-YEAR, 10-DAY HIGHER LEVEL STORM, WHICH RESULTED IN $80 MILLION OF quote unquote deficiency projects, which increase discharges to waterways, which as I briefly touched on, we aren't allowed to increase our discharges to waterways, not only for regulatory reasons, but also because the downstream channels can't hold it. So if we increased our discharge to the waterway and it then meant that, well, we will no longer have flooding in our streets, but we may have, there may be flooding in the neighborhood one over. And due to these concerns and the high costs that we reevaluated how we look at the existing system and proposed this contemporaneous approach of the, hey, what have we actually been holding development to as a standard? And so the revised design storm that WAS DEVELOPED AND THEN DEVELOPED INTERNALLY AND THEN VERIFIED WITH THE CONSULTANT USED A TWO-YEAR DESIGN STORM REPRESENTATIVE OF THE HISTORICAL STANDARDS TO BASICALLY EVALUATE IS THE SYSTEM FUNCTIONING AS DESIGNED. AND USING THAT DESIGN STORM WE REDUCED IT DOWN TO THREE PROJECTS WITH A TOTAL OF 1.4 MILLION AND THOSE ARE DEFICIENCIES THAT WERE VERIFIED AND IDENTIFIED BY by field staff. And I can discuss those projects specifically if anyone has any questions, or I can move on to the next section. Okay. Going on to future development, the storm master plan development approach started with geospatial, meaning satellite imagery analysis of existing land cover in the city. correlating that with the general plan then forecasting what that looks like for undeveloped areas and then developing the master plan to put some visuals on it we essentially forecasted the land cover based on what those land uses look like in developed parts of the city modeled the storm drain system with a design storm and then developed projects to address that runoff There are three major elements that are changes from the previous master plan that I'll go through in more detail in the next couple slides. First is an increase in residential runoff. Next would be the detention versus retention, which I already mentioned briefly, and then also exclusion of the industrial park. For residential runoff, the estimated runoff for single family land use for a given rain event has increased compared to what was predicted in the 94 master plan. Based on that satellite imagery analysis of the city and correlating that with our general plan, low density residential zone lots are more impervious on average than assumed in the 94 master plan. On top of that, current development trends towards smaller lots and also with ADUs mean that we can anticipate that trend to continue and potentially worsen going forward. For comparison, in orange is the average percent impervious observed based on satellite imagery of the city for our existing land uses, whereas the blue is what was assumed in the 94. For the high and medium density, they're actually less impervious than was projected, likely due to our open space requirements for zoning. For multifamily, they're required to have a certain amount of open space, whereas we don't have that kind of requirement on single-family zoning. and they're welcome to do post-build add-ons of pools and patios and the like. That's likely where a lot of this discrepancy comes from. For context of why this matters, nearly 50% of, I have the actual statistic, to keep flipping pages. So residential low density makes up 48.24% or nearly 50% of all acreage in the urban growth development tiers of the city. It also makes up over 80% of residential land use. So while the imperviousness and imperviousness impervious cover of medium and high density is lower than was projected, they make up a much smaller portion of the city so it doesn't offset the higher imperviousness of low density. We also intend to, after adoption of the master plan, update our coefficients that we use for development to essentially have one coefficient for all residential land use, based on the fact that the imperviousness observed between them is nearly the same, and also to account for ADUs in post-development. The second major item was the shift from detention to retention. As I already mentioned, the detention discharged waterways, whereas we're now using a retention approach, which I equate to recharge. This new approach is not dependent on waterway capacity, but means our basins are designed and sized to hold stormwater until it infiltrates or evaporates, which means they're larger and single purpose. To that end, the master plan designs all future basins as standalone retention places. For planning purposes, we assumed a total depth of 23 feet, 18 feet of design water depth, perimeter landscaping, and fencing, and then we also included costs for frontage improvements on two sides. To take a step back on why standalone retention basins, I wanted to talk a bit about our existing park basins um the park basins in the city are typically designed as detention systems of the 38 parks identified by parks and recreation on this map 14 are detention basins and two well like three but one is kind of in between our retention basins There are two general types of detention park basins in Visalia. what I've been calling the overflow only design or the part basin design. The overflow only design, two examples would be Mill Creek Garden Park at McAuliffe, sorry, Lover's Lane and Mill Creek Parkway and Blaine Park off Court Street just south of Whitendale. The overflow only design has no separate basin section The storm drain pipes run under the depressed park and it only fills when the pump stations can't keep up with the flow. The park basin detention park basins include a deeper fenced basin portion and the pumps only kick on when water may encroach into the park portion. So examples of those include Seven Oaks, River Bend, Cherry Meadow, Kiwanis, and Ruiz Park. switching from detention to retention for new basins is why we're switching to standalone. We have two true retention park basins which function very differently. First being Burke Park Basin and second being Sunset. Burke Park is a retention park basin. The Basin design includes the park itself in the capacity, which means that it floods. This picture is from March 2023, and this park floods in major storm events because the capacity of the basin includes the park portion. On the other hand, Sunset Park is a park with a retention basin next to it. The basin area is sized to hold the entire required volume and the likelihood of the park flooding is very, very low. Pearl Woods would be like Sunset. So going back to our standalone retention basins, they're planned as standalone for sizing and impact fee purposes. The city can still plan on locating them adjacent to parks, essentially like the Sunset or Pearl Woods, but it would be not incorporated into either the storm impact fee or into the sizing of the basin. Any questions or comments on this so far?

So when you're looking at Burke Park, would that be one you would retrofit to become better recharge basin where you dig that part of it out deeper?

So the intent with Burke Park, it can't really be dug any deeper. The side slopes are already fighting against us. It's very deep for the width it is already. It's kind of nearly a V shape. There's not much space at the bottom to move around. What we are proposing is as a... there's a separate fenced basin non-park north of it up the street on Burke Street, I think in between K and Monta Vista. The intent is that we would deepen that basin and add a potential, it still would need to be designed essentially gate rear structure so that we can divert flows as needed for maintenance purposes to the other basins so that we can drain and better maintain the one at Burke Park. Thank you. The cost assumptions, I can go through in more detail if desired. For the master planning purposes, we took two potential scenarios of a local street, local street corner lot or a collector arterial corner lot and averaged them to come up with the frontage improvement costs. These costs are what's used in the master plan and will be the basis of the next study, which will start once this master plan is approved. Some items to note will be the land acquisition is based on the 2024 LAND VALUE STUDY THAT THE CITY DOES FOR ACQUISITION PURPOSES. IT MAY NEED TO BE UPDATED, SHOULD WE UPDATE OUR LAND VALUE STUDY. AND THE BASIN EXCAVATION OF $33 PER CUBIC YARD IS BASED ON ASSUMING THE CITY DOES IT AT PREVAILING WAGES WITH SOME EXPORT INVOLVED. THE ACTUAL EXCAVATION COSTS WOULD LIKELY VARY DEPENDING ON WHETHER OR NOT WE GET IT DONE BY DEVELOPMENT OR the precise scenario.

Would developers have the option to dig that out themselves at a lower cost?

It's one of the things that we're going to look into more during the next study phase of what we can do to potentially mitigate some of the total costs of and assumptions that can be made in terms of whether we have some of them assumed to be done by development, whether we have a development do it and then give them credits. That'll all be part of the next study discussion.

Currently, Vice Mayor, the developers are anxious to get the dirt, so they dig it out in order to meet the floodplain requirements. But for now, it's probably pretty solid.

Do we know when the Nexus study will be done? Is it in the next six months, a year?

Within the next year, definitely. First, we have to get this adopted. And then the Nexus, so there's, I've been using them interchangeably, but there's the Nexus portion, which is specifically about the impact fees, the developer impact fees, and then there's also a rate study portion for the stormwater service charges. The stormwater service charges are a whole separate beast and may take longer because that has to go through a full Prop 218 process. They will also be building off this master plan, but it... is more involved. The impact fees for sewer are already underway and that's in progress. And sewer, I think, is more straightforward than the storm. Specifically with the earthwork item, that may be one that may drag on the next study a little longer depending on how our conversations with development go. But we're definitely intending to get done within the next year for sure.

Thank you.

The last item I had on those major changes was the exclusion of the industrial park. So the storm master plan does not address or have any projects specifically to for the industrial park. This is because industrial zone parcels are required by current city municipal code to retain their stormwater on site. And we've had the practice for the past longer than I've been here of having for the areas where development is proceeding faster than we are of having them retain the street frontage stormwater in their landscape setback. And that seems to be working. So we intend to keep going with that. Here is an exhibit with most, not all the CIPs. There's one that did not make it onto this map in the northeast corner, just north of the Eastside Regional Park. That would be in the master plan itself. The majority of the projects include both basin excavation and land acquisition and then also conveyance piping, so all the green ones. Some of them are specifically piping and then some of them are just the basin where there's either already conveyance in place and it's just further excavation or where there's either existing development or other reasons not to have convenience as part of it. After this.

What do you think? Is this master plan, what's it supposed to be good till? I mean, is this like a 10-year, 20-year, 30-year, or is it just based on growth?

So it's partly based on growth. The intent is that it will be good for... So the master plan itself will is intended to be good for 1020 years. Legislatively, though, I believe we're required to update the CIPS and our impact fees every eight to 10. So we'd likely be wanting to reevaluate that at that point anyway. There's also we're starting our general plan update process. So depending on whether there are any significant changes with that, that may have a domino effect. So unless council has any major concerns, our intent would be to get your approval to put this on the city website for public review. We then send out emails to our mailing list of people who were interested in our other documents, basically the same list as we sent the sewer master plan to. and let them know and ask if they have any comments. And then we did plan to return to council. We're aiming for the September 21 meeting, if you guys feel that we should give the public more time, let me know why can aim for a different meeting. And then once we for approval and adoption, and then we would kick off the storm nexus study and rate study.

So once NEXUS study is complete in about a year or so and Prop 218 goes smoothly, when would rate payers potentially see that increase? Is that like two years from now, maybe?

Ideally, it'll be sooner than that. Ideally, it'll be sooner than that. Okay.

A year and a half?

Between 18 months and 21 months. Got it. Perfect.

See, the thing is that I was here two years ago saying that we were going to have it done within the next six months, and I don't want to make the same mistake.

Okay, thank you.

So let me add that a little bit though. I mean, we feel like we've done a lot of looking into this, a lot of talking to consultants, stuff like that. We feel like we have this pretty dialed in. So we're not expecting what Katie just said to happen again, you know? So we feel like we're on a little bit more of a track to get this done for sure in the next 18 to 24 months, as far as the nexus fee study stuff. So, but there are like with the stormwater master plan, when Katie says that, you know, it's not as straightforward as the sewer master plan, The assumptions on who's gonna be excavating the basin on this are huge. As far as whether the city has to build them versus the excavator's gonna build them versus the city's gonna buy some of this land beforehand so the developers can go in there and dig the dirt out at a lot cheaper rate. Those assumptions have a huge impact on the dollar amount for this. So that's why Katie's a little bit hesitant to say for sure the timeline because there's probably gonna be a little bit of back and forth with council, the development community and what's really practical. Cause really to make this, you know, reasonably affordable, there's going to have to be a lot more of a teaming partnership there between developers and the city more so than you used to seeing like on the sewer stuff and everything.

Thank you very much. Council Member Soto, any comments or questions? No, thank you for the report.

I definitely learned something new, and I hope the rate increase is for, you can hold back as long as you can.

See, the thing is, the longer that we hold it back, the bigger it's going to be when it comes to it.

I know, I know.

The bigger the hole we have to dig out of.

It's the issue with the dam, and you're trying to hold the, it's, yeah.

Council Member Puchigin. Thank you.

I know. Good report. You know, I hate to see people pay more, but things need to be done. Things need to be fixed. I'm not a big fan of the basements. The more we could hide that so they're not in, people see them. I hate driving in the neighborhood and you see this big hole in there. So the more we can do to block that out for people, the better.

The problem with blocking it out, though, is then if people are living in them, we can't tell them. Police can't tell them. They can't get into it. It's all a give and take. We're we're gonna try and do our best. Also, each location, once they actually, when it comes time for them to be developed, it will always be a detailed design process at the site specific. So we'll still try and incorporate everything we can to make things as ecstatically pleasing as possible at a basin by basin level. But for planning level assumptions, we're going with a standalone three to one side slopes kind of design.

Council Member Nelson.

Yeah, very thorough report. Glad we got it early. A lot of reading, but very good. I think it comes down to a general plan, growth, because we have to be strategic in where we locate these ponding basins. I mean, just to put a ponding basin in to say you did it and it doesn't really serve a purpose is ridiculous. I appreciate your comments, Chris, that I think this should be a partnership. I think it should be a partnership with developers, letting them do most of the work, because it's going to be cheaper than if the city does it. But I think it's a two-way street. But excellent report. Again, this is going to be based on growth. It's not something that's going to happen immediately. It's based on how the city develops. But very thorough. Really appreciate it, so thank you. Vice Mayor Wynn?

Yeah, just a couple of clarifications maybe for the public and myself. The fees that the Nexus study will bring up, those are development fees, right? They're not monthly fees that are going into our city bill.

So that's where I was getting into the Nexus versus rate study. So the consultant will be looking both at the developer fees and at the monthly fees. The Nexus fees will likely be adopted first because they're in the simpler process. That's just like a public hearing AB 1600 process. And and that'll be just the developer fees the The monthly fees service charge will we're also planning to update the storm portion of that monthly utility bill That'll be a more involved process That'll include a lot more public outreach and due to prop 218 will also require property owner approval so property owners will receive, most likely, a mail ballot, possibly with their utility bill. The logistics will still need to be worked out with finance. Basically, getting their buy-off on increasing this fee. Because of the way Prop 218 is worded, for a storm service charge, we have to get majority approval. We can't just do majority protest. And so, it's going to be a lengthier process, but yes, we are going to be increasing, assuming majority approval, the service charge.

And then I just want to clarify, the last time the storm drain fees to development was updated, are they updated on a regular basis based on COLA? Or is it, right?

Yeah, so the fees, the developer fees are indexed annually, I think, based on the engineering fees. But they haven't been, the projects that they pay for haven't been re-evaluated in over 30 years.

It's my understanding that these basins are going to all have walking paths around them and landscaping, correct?

That is the plan, and that is what we're currently budgeting for. They're currently budgeting for walking paths and landscaping around all of them. And whether or not council takes a look at the total cost for that and says maybe we should lose some things, that will be part of the next study discussion. But, yes, we are currently budgeting for landscaping

landscaping and trails around every basin thank you yeah thank you very much for the report i mean this is the important infrastructure projects that we are working on that nobody knows nobody appreciates but it's what allows our city to be successful and so i appreciate you guys you know doing all this work i've always i remember when i was younger i would be driving around fresno and i would see their their ponds would have water in them year round and i thought man we're so much smarter we turn ours into parks And now as things have changed, we're now having to look like theirs. And I'm glad that we are going to be having walking paths around them so that they're a little more usable. Because at the end of the day, in the recent study, it looks like our folks wanted more places to be able to walk and enjoy the outside. And there was a pond at my old house. And we'd walk around it all the time. We loved it. We loved watching the birds and everything flying there. But I appreciate you doing this report and putting all your time and effort into this, because this is the stuff that really makes us successful, the stuff that people don't see. So thank you. Let's go ahead and open this up to the public. Anybody wishing to speak on this item, please come forward and state your name and city residence. Nobody want to talk about stormwater sewer, huh? All right, anyone online or on the phone who would like to speak at this time?

As a reminder to the colors online, please raise your hand, raise your virtual hand, and we will add you to the meeting queue. Mayor, at this time I see no hands raised.

Okay, let's close public comment and I'll entertain a motion or additional comments.

I move to receive the presentation update on stormwater master plan and authorize staff to circulate the proposed stormwater master plan update for public comments.

Second. Fantastic, first and second. All those in favor, please vote. And the item passes 5-0. Thank you very much. At this time, we're going to go ahead and adjourn into closed session, and we welcome everyone back at our regular scheduled meeting at 7 p.m. Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the Visalia City Council meeting. We're going to go ahead and call this meeting to order. We will start with the Pledge of Allegiance offered by Council Member Soto. And if you would remain standing for, we'll actually do a moment of silence, and after that we will have the invocation by Pastor Unrau from Parkside Chapel. Everybody please stand. So we'd like to go ahead and offer a moment of silence for the longest serving city council member and former mayor, Greg Collins, who just recently passed away this last week. I'd like to go ahead and read something that we prepared in kind of honoring our friend Greg. As we bowed our heads and honored Greg Collins, who served over 30 years as a member of the city council, including a term as mayor, he was first elected in 1975 when he was just 24 years old. Greg's first term of service continued until 1991, He served again from 2005 to 2009, and he served a third term from 2011 to 2022. Greg was known as a champion of the oak trees, parks and recreational opportunities, financial stability, and especially good planning throughout the community. He preached compact, continuous, complete developments from the beginning of his tenure on council, adding a central core, community, and capacity as areas of emphasis for a quality community. He shaped the community's physical characteristics that we have come to know and love. Greg has served his community in many ways, including as a coach, a counselor, benefactor, and more, earning the coveted Chamber Man of the Year Award. He was a religious man who loved his family, and more importantly, his wife. And he also loved the city of Visalia. He gave generously of his time and talents to the community he loved. He will be sorely missed, and his legacy will live on forever. Let's go ahead and turn our time over to Pastor Honoree.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Heavenly Father, your word reminds us that government is established by you and exists to uphold your virtues and your values. It also says that we as citizens are to be subject to and respectful to those who are an authority over us, and so tonight I pray that each of us would do our part. I pray that Council would seek to rule with justice and fairness, and that its citizens would advocate with love in their hearts for those around us. Council would have patience with its citizens, and that citizens would have a peaceable spirit. Heavenly Father, as we come out of the heat of this summer in the valley, I pray that in our retreat into the cooler air, Lord, that that cooler spirit would also come with us, and that we would be tempered in the way in which we treat each other and show kindness to one another, and that we would come together as one true city. We pray these things in the name of Jesus, our Lord. Amen.

Okay, so we don't have any special presentations tonight, so we will start with our public comments. Okay, citizens are now invited to comment on issues within the jurisdiction of the Visayas City Council and items listed on the closed session agenda. The council asks that you keep your comments concise and positive. Creative criticism presented with appropriate courtesy is welcome. The city does not tolerate disruptive behavior in our meetings. The council meetings are considered a limited public forum, which means the council can regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. Speaker comments during public comments must be limited to matters within the council's authority, generally referred to as within the council subject matter jurisdiction. If a speaker's comments are not related to the council subject matter jurisdiction, the presiding officer may rule the speaker out of order. A speaker will not be ruled out of order because of disagreement with the content of their speech. Anyone who is wishing to speak, please step up to the podium and form a line. For all those who are calling in, please raise your digital hand now and dial star nine on the telephone to indicate you wish to speak and when the time is ready, star six to unmute yourself. You may begin your comments by stating and spelling your name and providing your city of residence and each speaker will be allowed three minutes to speak. Anyone wishing to speak at this time who's here in the council chambers, please come forward. And feel free to speak.

Jim Reyes, Visalia. And in April, I filed a public records request with the city for information on the flock system, the license plate reader system used by the police department. And I got quite a bit of information back finally. And I wanted to share a little bit of it tonight. From May 1st through June 1st of this year, there were 507,696 queries of the Visalia database, Visalia section of the database at Flock. The highest user was the California Highway Patrol. They checked our records 46,693 times in that 30-day period. The nearest city where you would think somebody would want to check our cameras for a vehicle related to a crime or something in their city was Bakersfield. And they're number 30 on this list. But even at that, they had 3,500 requests or inquiries. Visalia itself is like at 60, come back here, these machines. Anyway, in the about 65 on the list, San Leandro and Fullerton had more queries than Visalia PD had. 309 agencies have access. to this data and a lot of them are clearly just selecting all on the list of agencies that they query for information. So the page shows about 330,000 unique license plates cataloged by the Visalia system every month. And in that one month we had half a million checks of that data. Clearly we're not utilizing it anywhere near that. Our information is being checked by agencies up and down the state whether or not there's any legitimate thought that the vehicle they're searching for might be in Visalia. They're just flooding the system checking data. Courts around the country are starting to rule on Fourth Amendment matters on these systems right now. It's mostly cell phone sweeps of data for cell phones, but it's the same logic is being used on these systems. systems here. So anyway, and the Vice City Police Department has closed off one information field in its transparency page, the reason for these looks, and I think that should come back.

Good evening, City Council. My name is Esmeralda Addington. E-S-M-E-R-A-L-D-A-A-D-D-I-N-G-T-O-N. I live in Visalia. I have for 14 years. I wanted to address consent calendar item 16, the request by Council Member Poochigan.

You can go ahead and speak of that during consent calendar. This item is not on the consent calendar. Okay, great. I will do that.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and members of Visalia City Council. My name is Pastor Isabel Vela, and I come before you tonight because there is a point where silence stops being neutrality and begins to look like indifference. I am speaking about serious allegations and complaints involving Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreau. I understand that this council does not supervise the elective sheriff. I am not asking you to exercise authority you do not have. I am asking you to exercise the authority that you do have to protect the safety of people within the City of Visalia, to take reports of harassment seriously, and to ensure that no person's title, badge, political connections, or position places them beyond scrutiny. We have heard from women who describe unwanted communication, persistent contact, and conduct that they consider stalking or harassment. Women have had to warn each other about their experiences. These are not just allegations. We have copies of those messages here if you guys would like a copy. Those allegations deserve independent examination. When electronic communications cross the lines into threats, stalking, harassment, unlawful conduct, the fact that the person accused happens to be a county official does not make the conduct somebody else's problem. A phone has no jurisdictional boundary. Social media has no city limit time. And a woman should not lose the protection of the law because the person she fears carries a badge. This is bigger than politics. It is about whether a woman in Visalia can report troubling conduct involving a very powerful law enforcement official and have confidence that someone will actually listen. It is about whether women and young people should have to warn one another privately because they believe the institutions responsible for protecting them will not act publicly. And it is about accountability. I am asking this council to request that appropriate law enforcement authorities independently review any credible complaints or evidence concerning electronic harassment, stalking, threats, or other conduct occurring within Visalia City limits. I'm asking the city to make clear that anyone who believes they have been victimized can report that conduct without intimidation, retaliation, or political interference. And I am asking each of you a simple question. If multiple women are warning other women that they are afraid of the conduct of a powerful law enforcement official, how many warnings are enough before someone in government asks questions? You may not have the power to remove the sheriff, but you have a voice. You have a police department. You have a responsibility to the people who live within the city. Thank you.

Okay, anybody else wishing to speak?

Hi, I'm Jeff Poole, Visalia. Real short, y'all know what I'm doing. I've been out there with a stupid mask and a sign for a few months in Visalia, just trying to get people to talk, put down a message. And what is really sad is I have dozens of people coming up to me, kids, young adults, moms, sharing their story with me and their testimonies of what's happened to them. And it saddens me to think that they have to come up to a clown on a street corner with a sign to share their most secret, horrifying stories because there's no one to listen to them here. They're afraid of retaliation. Some of them have reported their incidents and it's gone on deaf ears. Nothing has happened. And enough is enough, guys. Come on, let's get something done. I mean, you guys are all in positions of power here. And the people coming forward are as yourselves. They're from all walks of society. One of the biggest groups we have is law enforcement. Prior, current, they're tired of it. Everybody is. And I mean, why is it that one reel of this type of thing goes on social media and it gets almost a million views across the United States and not one word out of any of you guys? Not one word. Not one word. There's no awareness programs of pedophilia and child endangerment, child trafficking, nothing around here. There's not a 1-800 hotline. There's nothing. Everybody's just quiet. Like, go away, clown. I'm not going away. I'm not going away. I grew up here. This is my home. Yeah, I'm wanted in lots of other places, but I am not leaving. There's a lot to do here. And there's a lot more than just the guy across town. We got a guy on deck. We got three on the bench. But we're going after the guy across town first. And as people talk, more people will be exposed. And I would just like to see some support from Visalia. People are watching. We're in a fishbowl.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak? OK, is there anybody online wishing to speak, city clerk?

We do have a caller. OK. Caller, ending in 0677, your line is open. You have three minutes.

Good evening. My name is Amanda Dunno. It's A-M-A-N-D-A. D E N N O. And I'm in Crayola, Alabama. I did grow up in the Visalia area and the hot springs in Tulare County. The reason I'm calling in tonight is because I have been drawn into a situation with accusations against the Tulare County sheriff. A friend of mine, a kid I grew up with from school reached out to me asking me if I'd be willing to testify against him with no other information. So we talked about it, and he told me what was going on. I started digging into it a little more and doing a little more research. There's a lot of information that can be found through FOIA requests, as you're well aware, public information. And I'm just coming in here tonight. I'm not here to start an argument. I have much respect for you all at the City Council, if I tell you that is my home area. But I do want to come with truth, and I speak truth. And these people are liars, these victims. supposed or alleged victims. They've done this before. I grew up in a community with them. And I just wanted you to know as the council to understand that there are those of out here who have truth, who know the truth, and who have grown up with these people. They've done this before. It's a pattern of behavior. And to create an environment of such hostility and slander and defamation against a human being like this to me has been called for. especially when it's lies and based off lies and based off patterns of behavior that I saw as a child growing up with them. They did this to another man in our community where they said the same exact thing. They drug me into it as a child, and I have truth. I will speak the truth, and I am not afraid. So if you need more information or want further information from me, I am happy to make a statement. I am happy to provide documentations. I have legal counsel. and I'm more than happy to put the truth out there. So if you want further information from me, please don't hesitate to reach out, but I'm willing to bring the truth forward because I feel it is time that somebody steps forward with the truth. Thank you. I don't need the three minutes.

City Clerk, is there anyone else wishing to speak at this time?

Mayor, at this time I see no further hands raised.

Okay, thank you. So we'll go ahead and close public comment period and we will go to items of interest. I'm sorry, we're gonna skip over items of interest and go straight into the consent calendar. Consent calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. This is a time for members of the public to provide public comments on an item that is on the consent calendar. Comments will not be taken individually by a public By the public, if an item is pulled by a council member, each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes, and a timer will notify you when your time has expired. Please begin your comments by stating and spelling your name and providing your city of residence. So ma'am, who wanted to speak about an item on there, this is your time. Thank you.

Good evening, my name is Esmeralda Addington. I wanted to address calendar item 16. I think a future discussion is important to have. Data centers are popping up Sorry. I think a future discussion on data centers are important to have. Data centers are popping up all over the country, and we have a threat of it being built in our neighboring city, Tulare, and the residents are actively fighting against it. Any little research shows how data centers negatively impact the residents, their environment, and animals. Studies show that data centers release micropollutants in the air, which worsen air quality, create an auditory hum that affect humans but animals more intensely due to it being low frequency. Alton Fowler from Fowler Farms in Texas lives 5.5 miles from a data center, and he reports that the auditory hum has caused animals to not want to breed, and if they were pregnant, they deliver stillborns. Quote, it causes grown cattle to lose 30% of their body weight. They're not able to conceive. It does the same thing in goats. The data center will also use way more water and electricity than it emitted initially, taking up a little water resources we have, pushing the bill on residents. Please protect the city and keep data centers out. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Natalie Ortiz, N-A-T-A-L-I-E-O-R-T-I-Z is my last name. So I'm here to also talk about the data centers, mainly global LLC stack. They want to tie Tulare and I'm assuming also Visalia into a 100 year contract. They are offering a helipad, a water splash area, some other things, but I mean, That all sounds nice but the main thing I'm gonna talk about is closed looped water systems. Science for Georgia explained how closed loops water systems work and they aren't as great as some people think it is. Loop systems still use water. Loop systems consist of two main loops. Loop one will pull the system over and over through a set of tubes and eventually that water needs to be flushed out, what some people may call blowout. or blow down, sorry. The reason it needs to be flushed out is because of the mass amounts of chemicals and other hazardous waste buildup that goes through those systems. Who ends up cleaning that water? Our water waste facilities. Um, is the city going to pay them for the added labor? Those closed looped water systems have to be fleshed out periodically in order for them to work right. That means they need clean water. Where will that water come from? Will they come from our rivers? Will they come from our underwater wells? Um, when And when water waste management can't filter out those water from those chemicals, because scientists have said that biocides and corrosion inhibitors can never be filtered out of water, even if it's clear they're still present in the water. Where are they going to put that water? They're going to go back into our rivers thinking that they're going to be filtered out by their minerals, but they never will. Those are rivers that our children play in, those are rivers that adults play in, and then on top of that, our drinking water. Our farmers need this water for cattle, for growing food. It is very important to us and I find it baffling. We are entertaining this idea when early Mart has gone weeks without running water and are washing children with water bottles. and the city has told them that they need to conserve water but are fondling this idea of a data center that is going to take up the majority of our water. What's gonna happen to our electricity bills, our water bills, is the city gonna take care of that? These are very concerning matters. Thank you, I yield my time.

Hello, my name is Mia Llerenas, M-I-A-L-L-E-R-E-N-A-S, and I live in Tulare County. I am here to speak on subject matter number 16 about the AI data centers, and I mostly want to just talk about energy and public health, because in 2016 alone, and this was before the increase in energy use in 2023, 200 trillion watts an hour. That was how much energy was being used. And there is a projected rise of 2,967 trillion watts by 2030. This would cause raises to energy bills because of a demand in energy. And for public health, a lot of these data centers use generators, backup generators for the power to go out. These generators actually emit a lot of nitrous oxides, which are very harmful to the surrounding environment and very harmful to the people who live or who would live near these data centers. The amount of nitrous oxide released can cause irritation of the eyes, throat, and nose. They can cause respiratory infections and reduce metabolisms. And in the cases of people who are closest to the data centers are causing death. And as people before me have mentioned, water is also a huge aspect that is like to be worried about because Oregon used 355 million gallons in one data center alone. And globally, Meta's data centers used 1.4 billion gallons of water. So then in turn, water bills go up and energy bills go up and health crises continue to run rampant that crises that we already worry about will only become higher. And I just think that we should very much think about it. Think about the effects of generations past us. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Riley Smyers, R-I-L-E-Y S-M-Y-R-E-S, and I live in Tulare County and I live in the city of Tulare. I sat through the entire meeting on the data center with the Tulare Fairgrounds and I noticed a lot of talking points being parroted among my peers and among family of jobs and public health not being as big of a concern as they should be. I heard a lot of people say that there would be more jobs if Tulare County especially built a data center. I know that while it could bring jobs in, it would also take away the jobs of farm workers and anyone who works in agriculture because it could take away plots of land because of the water usage and there would be less agriculture done in our area. I also heard a woman speak on the air pollution that comes from data centers. They emit so many different chemicals into the air because of the fact that they just run all the time. They do light pollution, and the effects can be insomnia, paranoia, things along the line. They can cause mental health issues, which is a very big issue among our community and many, many other communities. and they can also cause heat and breathing problems which according to a study done in Virginia caused 265 to 489 million dollars in health related debt and a projected 17 to 33 premature deaths among residents close to data centers and I'd like us just think on I'd like the council to think on what that could mean for Visalia if it is at all proposed that there be a data center built because it could potentially put the lives of residents at risk and including at risk, already medically at risk people, it could cause their lives to end prematurely. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Melissa Moore, M-E-L-I-S-S-A-M-O-O-R-E. I don't want to take up a bunch of your time. I know I could stand before you and share all the data that's out there that can easily be accessed online about the impact of proposed data centers on not just our water, but our air. Sound is, for me as a mom, I just moved here eight years ago. We bought last year, and we love this town. We love this area, and we came here to build our family here. I have two boys, nine and 11 years old, and I want them to be able to grow up in a town that makes choices for their future. My youngest is on the autism spectrum, does not sleep, And I can't even imagine what it would be like to live near a data center that even low decibel, below 50, which is a lot of data out there saying, oh, well, it won't be any louder than 50. Below that affects sleep. And I just, again, even just what's proposed in Tulare at the fairgrounds, near so many families that just want to be able to sleep at night, whether it's built there or here it's going to impact somebody and sorry i don't like to be emotional i again i could bring up the data but as a mom i want to know that i've chosen to invest my family's lives in this area and i i believe in what you guys do and i know that you guys can make the right decision for this city in this county and setting a precedent that we will not allow data centers into our area.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is DJ Kimble, that's D-J-K-I-M-B-E-L-L. I wish to speak about item 16, I believe, regarding the data center. I know a lot of others have spoken about it, so I'll be quick. I believe the data center is not something that people in this town are dying for. It's not something that a lot of people really want, myself included. I've spent a lot of my life as an artist building myself up. And my goal one day is to open, ideally, an animation studio out here. and to recruit people from the college. And I believe a data center, for one, would discourage a lot of people who are growing up out of the arts to more generative stuff. I believe it's very harmful for the environment, especially considering we are the Central Valley, a lot of farming. It comes from our town and goes into across the state and even the country. I believe it'll take a lot of jobs from people, especially artists like myself. And overall, I think there are just more harms to a data center than good. I really love this city, and I think it would be a huge disappointment to me and a lot of others if this ended up coming into fruition. And that's about all I have to say. Thank you.

Good evening, my name is Maria Guillen, that's G-U-I-L-L-E-N, accent over the E. I too was present at the session in Tulare last month and I wanted to share some of the testimony that I was able to deliver. Granted, I had five minutes, not three, but I'll give you a little bit of this. My name is Maria Guillen and I'm proud to call Tulare County my home. A few years ago after retiring, I chose to make this community my home because I wanted to give back I have come to know the people of this valley, the farm workers, the teachers, the small business owners, the families who work hard every day to build a better future for their children. And now I want to add a group of fantastic young activists. These are the people whose voices should matter most in decisions like this. That night, I asked them to remember who we are. We are a community that feeds the United States. Our fields produce the food that reaches dinner tables across the nation. The hands that harvest those crops are the same hands that have built this valley through generations of sacrifice and hard work. Yet too often, those same families have carried burdens that others have not. They breathe unhealthy air. They worry about drought and shrinking groundwater. They live with the uncertainty that the resources they depend on may not be there tomorrow. Now we are being asked to accept another project that will place demands on the very resources that are already under tremendous stress. This is not a question of whether technology is good or bad. Technology should serve people. Economic development should strengthen communities. Progress should never require one community to sacrifice the health so that others can prosper. California has recognized that every community deserves clean air, safe water, and a healthy environment. Those principles are reflected in our environmental laws because they recognize something very simple. Every child deserves the same opportunity to grow up healthy regardless of their zip code. When a community already struggles with poor air quality and water shortages, we should not ask whether we can make room for another resource intensive project. We should ask whether this decision honors the people who already live here. We know water is not just another utility. In the Central Valley, water is life. It sustains our farms, our families, our workers, and our future. Once groundwater is depleted, once farmland is lost, once public health is compromised, no amount of community donations can restore what has been taken away. Our responsibility is not only to ourselves, it is to those who will come after us. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Faith Ortiz, F-A-I-T-H-O-R-T-I-Z, and I'm a resident of Porterville, California, and I'm in favor of prohibiting the development of data centers. I'm also, I'm a resident of California. I graduated from Porterville High School, and I'm currently a full-time college student in health careers at Porterville College. For data centers, they bring contaminated and limited water supplies, overuse of the power grid, rural families facing no reliable access to water, loss of farmland, worsening climate conditions, heat domes, air pollution, and more. The goal of data centers is to develop on cheap land in small rural areas with reliable access to water and a power grid, along with prioritizing tax breaks for big tech through loopholes rather than supporting the local community. Data centers are for profit, not for individuals, not for families, and not for farms. If data centers are permitted in Tulare County, there will be price hikes on utilities, poor water pressure, contaminated discolored water that will lead to no water, constant noise pollution radiating from data centers. This is not a small possibility. This is not a what if, it is what is happening in areas where data centers have been permitted despite public outcry and lawsuits. This is happening in Wisconsin, Texas, Ohio, and Arizona to name a few states. Data centers and the common practices of NDAs. Data centers begin projects without sharing all information with very little information due to non-disclosure agreements which is standard practice. We will not know how this affects our county unless the full environmental report and additional audits are demanded and carried out. In Oregon, it wasn't until a local newspaper led a lawsuit which forced Google and Amazon data centers to share they were using over a quarter of the city's water supply. Two-thirds of data centers are being built in regions with pre-existing water shortages. Large data centers can use up to five million gallons of water a day. Is it worth the risk of letting one or two major companies the right to Tulare County's water supply rather than supporting people, animals, families, and farmland in the highest yielding ag county within the country? In Wisconsin, the state that has the largest fresh water resource in the country, families are beginning to face problems with dry wells. The Colorado River, the Great Salt Lake River, and dozens if not hundreds of natural water resources are critically depleting. There's clear opposition. We're here, not to mention the families who face financial health and other barriers that limits them from being here. But there is public outcry and opposition. It's a matter of if the city council will stand up for the local communities they have a moral duty to respect. What good can data centers contribute to the community if technology steals and diminishes all the natural resources we have left that we need to live? I don't need five million gallons of water. I just want to

Thank you, ma'am.

Good evening. I'm going to read so that I can keep track of my time. My name is Erica Brooks, and I have been living in Visalia for the past 18 years and decided to raise my family here. I have two kids, two teenagers that just started high school. I ask you to support Councilmember Pushigan's request for the moratorium on data centers and other high-intensity uses in our community. This is not about opposing technology or economic development. It's about protecting our water, our electricity, the air quality, health, and the future of our community. Visalia already faces an enormous environmental and public health burden. According to the American Lung Association, which you all are probably aware, Visalia ranks among the five most polluted U.S. metropolitan areas in the country and ranks second at worst in the nation's forests on pollution. So why will we add another high intensity industrial use to a community that is already struggling with air pollution and respiratory health? So my concern are the water, which a lot of the people already mentioned. data center require a lot of water for cooling, or Central Valley is already facing drought and groundwater depletion. We shall not commit scarce water resources without knowing the long-term consequences for our children's and our grandchildren's. Electricity, large data center can require enormous amount of electricity and new infrastructure. We need to know who will pay for that infrastructure and whether the burden ultimately will fall on local residents and businesses. Air pollution and noise. I needed to check the air quality when I needed to take my babies out to the park when they were babies. So air pollution is a big concern for me. Again, we're talking about Visalia having one of the worst air qualities in the country. So data centers operate continuously with cooling equipment, fans, and backup generators, and other industrial systems producing noise and emissions in a community already facing unhealthy air, which will not add another potential source of pollution without fully understanding the health impact. So I support the moratorium. And before any project that comes to the city move forward, I urge you, city council members, to require full compliance of the California Environmental Quality Act and rigorous independent party evaluations that evaluates the impact of our water, electricity and air quality and public health. We have a responsibility and you have a responsibility to the people that live in Visalia, not just today, but to the future generations that love this community. So I support the moratorium and I urge you to support the moratorium.

Okay, seeing no one else. Is there anyone online who would like to speak?

Hi caller labeled Lou. Your line is open. You have three minutes. Hi caller. Your line is open.

Hello. Can you hear me?

Yes.

OK, I will name Lewis Carroll, LEWIS, CARROL, resident of Visalia. You know, I pretty much just want to echo the what everyone's been saying, right? I don't have a bunch of information on it, but the data is there, right? I do. I would like to see a moratorium on the data center. You know, it's all there, right? The water, right? You don't want to see, you know, like what's happening in Hanford. Once you have water contamination, that's it. You know, there is no going back on that, right? And we rely on at the Central Valley, the reason why these guys want to come over, tap into our resources, 100-year lease. You really have to think about that. Why do they want 100 years? Because they've already seen how much resources that we have and how long they're going to be able to utilize our resources before it's gone. uh no ties to the city you know 10 years 15 years 20 years you know you guys are all going to be out the residents are still going to live here so we would like to see the council support this moratorium uh to keep this data center away from our area uh you know i don't really need to take up the whole three minutes uh but it's all there the environment the air quality we're already on air quality index you know prior to this meeting right we're already seeing Reminders, hey, watch the water. Hey, pay attention to your water days when it comes to just energy, right? We're constantly getting alerts. Hey, possible blackout. You know, nobody's going to be – and it's not even about reimbursement, right? It's not about, oh, damage control. The lady just spoke on the nondisclosure agreements. Yeah, you know – The underlying red tape, can they be sued? Can the city sue them, right? What regulations do they have to adhere to? How long do they have to, quote, unquote, fix these problems? Who's going to be auditing their books, right, if they're keeping in line with, you know, their contracts, right? It's all hidden. And, yeah, you know, I want to see our area move forward, but this is not it. We don't have a budget problem. City does a good job. County does a good job of taking care of our budget. This is not needed, and I yield my time.

Anybody else online wishing to speak at this time?

Mayor, I see no other hands raised at this time.

Okay, then we're going to go ahead and close public comments, and we will turn the time over to Council Member Soto. Do you have any items you'd like to pull?

Yeah, number 16, please.

16. Council Member Puchigan, any items you'd like to pull? Yeah, item 16 and 17. 17. Council Member Nelson, any items you'd like to pull? No, I'm good. Okay, and Vice Mayor Nguyen, any items you'd like to pull?

No, they're already covered.

Okay, and I have no items I'd like to pull, so I'll entertain a motion for the remainder of the consent calendar.

I'll make a motion to accept the balance of the consent calendar as presented. I'll second.

The first and second. All those in favor, please vote. And the remainder of the consent calendar passed 5-0. Thank you very much. Let's go ahead and pull item number 16 first. And Council Member Soto and Council Member Pachinkin, did you guys want to report or?

I don't need a report. I asked to put this on the agenda. You know, water and electricity are things that we struggle with here in the city of Visalia. I heard a lot of people say Tulare County, we're in control of what we do with the city of Visalia. So we've got to focus what we do here. And groundwater and electricity are things that we struggle on a daily basis here. Projects come and we don't have the power to support high producing job creators. A data center is not a job creator and it's going to use so much groundwater and so much electricity. We always pride ourselves on very good Planning and city planning and city growth, you know, it's something that I know we talked about councilmember Collins before that He prided himself on and you know We really kind of think about what we're doing and a data center is not gonna fit in the city of Visalia It's not something in general planning that will ever work here So, you know, sometimes we've been reactive on stuff where things come and we said we why do we let this come here? I think we need to be proactive this time and just say, hey, data centers, you're not going to be here. So that's why I want to set up a moratorium on data centers here in the city of Visalia.

Thank you, Councilor Soto. Did you have any additional questions or comments?

Yeah, I don't need a report or anything, but first off, I wanted to thank Councilor Pachigian for putting this on the agenda. I agree with him. I would like to ask for one change in the wording, if we could put and or at the end, because of the closed loop system and how that's not a high water usage, but it's still very detrimental to the environment. So at the end where it says high intensity uses with significant water net loss and electrical demands, if we could put and or. That's okay. Yeah, but I'm not going to repeat what he said. I don't think it's good planning here in the city of Visalia, and I would support this. Very good.

All right. Council Member Nelson, did you have any questions or comments on item 16?

No, I think it's a good idea to bring this forward and have the discussion. I look at the City of Isaiah, I pride ourselves on the fact that we examine and study potential opportunities that can come to the City of Isaiah. We've looked at other high-end users of water, not a data center, but they're high-end user of water, and we've not allowed them to come to the City of Isaiah. I pride ourselves on listening to our constituents. Yeah, I don't think having a data center is a deal breaker one way or the other, but I think it is a breaker when it comes to usage of our water and our air quality, so I'm glad this is moving forward. Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Yeah, I agree with all the comments made to date, and... I think we're proactive, and I applaud those who came and spoke for us, and I hope you'll keep that up. We are in our little bubble in Visalia, but you have a voice that you can hear throughout Tulare County and the state, so keep up the good work.

Thank you. Yeah, I echo all my fellow council members' comments, so I'll be supportive of putting this on the future agenda. Can I say one more thing? Absolutely.

You know, City of Visalia is the seat of the county. We're the biggest city in the county, and I think we need to send a message saying that We're going to set the precedent here that we're not going to allow data centers here and be the first one in Tulare County to say no to data centers. So with that, I will move to approve the request by Council Member Brian Pachigan, which is myself, to place an item on future regular city council meeting agenda to discuss a moratorium that would prohibit the development and approval of data centers and similar high-intensity use with significant water and electrical and or electrical demands.

I'll second it. Thank you. Thank you. First and second. All those in favor, please vote. And the item passed was 5-0. Thank you very much. Next, we'll go on to item number 17, which is pulled by Council Member Luchigan. Is there a specific report you wanted or?

I don't need a report. So this is my third time up for a re-election. I didn't have an opponent this time. I do think it's good that people have the right to cross off their elected officials. That being said, it is a $20,000 expense. And that's why I want to say, you know, You can't even have a write-in campaign, from my understanding, correct? Because you have to be a qualified write-in.

Someone would have to go through that process and finish that within early September, I believe. Raina did some research on that.

So that would be October. But if the council approves this resolution, then that write-in process is not even an option.

But if they do do that, then someone still has a write-in option, right? If we don't approve this tonight, then they have a write-in option?

Correct. If they go through the process and become a certified write-in candidate, if you just choose to put on Mickey Mouse, it doesn't get...

I would really like to run against Mickey Mouse if possible, but that being said, I wouldn't want to take anyone's options if they want to become a write-in candidate at this point, so that's why I'm not going to be supportive of this tonight.

Can we bring it back at a later date, once that due date?

No, the timeline is very short and very tight. We would have to have a special council meeting within the week in order to have this brought back.

Any other questions or comments?

I like the $20,000 savings, Brian, sorry. No, I understand.

I completely understand that. I just don't want to say that we took anyone's option away for running for office. That's why I asked the question, because if someone does want to run a rioting campaign against me, they have the right to do that, and I don't want to take that away from anybody. That's why I'm not supporting this today.

Any other questions or comments?

No? No?

Oh, there we go. Try that one. I move to adopt resolution number 2026-61, providing for the appointment in lieu of election to the office of the city council member for District 3 pursuant to California Election Code Section 10229 and canceling the November 3rd, 2026 municipal election for that office.

I second that motion.

We have first and second. All those in favor, please vote. And the item passes three to two. Thank you very much. Okay, so that is all the items on our consent calendar. Do we have any closed session report?

Nothing to report this evening, Mayor.

All right, and that will be the end of our meeting today. We welcome everyone to come back at our next meeting, which will be Tuesday, September 8th, 2026.