Read the March 5 meeting.

If you can all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Ready? Begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. If you can remain standing, we have Curtis Smith, our police chaplain, is going to give us our invocation today.

Honorable Mayor, members of the Council, honored guests, members of the citizens of Santa Ana, let us bow for prayer.

Eternal God, we enter your presence asking your blessing upon those participating in this Council meeting. Bless all who serve the city of Santa Ana, especially the first responders who bravely serve and sacrifice in the line of duty, guarding and protecting those whom they serve. bless the citizens who will share before this council assembly may they speak with respect as they share their concerns let their voices be heard and trigger credible action beneficial to all citizens of the city of Santa Ana

Lord we ask you to invoke a blessing upon those who will be honored in recognition tonight and to bless the upcoming activities and events set aside on the calendar. With providential direction and divine intervention, guide the thinking of the mayor and the council members into the decisions made regarding the items on the agenda. May this council meeting, which was called to order, be conducted expeditiously with dignity and honor and adjourned in harmony. And all of God's people said, Amen. You may be seated.

Debbie McEwen, where are you?

She's hiding in the back. She's got her fan club out here tonight.

Tonight, it's my privilege and my honor to recognize Debbie McEwen. And I'm going to read a few things about her, but then I'm going to tell you a story. And the story's a good one. She already knows what it's about. Debbie's been a longtime resident here in Santa Ana. She has a house over on, like around Bush and Washington. It's Victorian. She paints it and takes care of her flowers and everything else. She's been president of the association. She's been to probably hundreds of meetings, Debbie, hundreds of meetings over the years.

Some don't do anything. Others get things done, but they always have fun. She's hosted a lot of them at her house. She's been featured in many magazines and she's become a, her home and Debbie have become a treasure here in Santa Ana. Now she's decided to start a new chapter in her life and she likes horses a lot. She works with horses and apparently there's some horses out in Texas somewhere and she's going to go with her horse friends and put horseshoes on horses or something into the sunset. She's going to ride into the sunset.

And look, she's had tremendous energy. She's done a lot for neighborhood associations. Always when there's an issue, often I'm getting texts from Debbie. And, you know, she has opinions. She has strong opinions.

But let me just tell you a little story because it tells you a little bit like how much her heart is into Santa Ana. A few years ago, I was at the U.S. Open. and there's a tennis tournament and there's some French nuns at the tournament. And I speak French and anybody that speaks French, I'm a real sucker. So you got all these nuns. I start talking to them. I get to know them. After the tournament, they decide they're coming to Santa Ana because they want to build an eighth hospice here in Santa Ana. So I'm out there with these nuns. We're going door to door. We're looking for houses. We kind of find some houses in French

Park. They don't quite work, but we found another one by St. Joseph's Church where we had some land, and all of a sudden we decided we can build this Emanuel house, which, by the way, today exists. But in those early days, you know, these nuns say, you know, we want to come and meet with you. And I don't know if you've seen that movie, Sidney Poitier, you know, Lilies of the Field, the mother superior says, I want you to build me a chapel. She was German. Well, this is a young French nun telling me, I want you to build me an AIDS hospice. Anyways, I'm out there. They're coming. They show up here in Santa Ana. They

don't have money for a hotel. No nothing. I'm newly married. My poor wife, Laura, she puts up with so much nonsense. So Laura, I got these four nuns that don't have a place to stay. They flew out from New York from the U.S. Open. I met them, and now they want to stay here. So they move into one room in our home, and three-bedroom house, four nuns, a lot going on. So enter Debbie McEwen. She says, well, I've got this big house and more than three rooms, and they can stay with me. So all of a sudden, the nuns move in with Debbie. Now she's housing the nuns. I don't know if you ever saw the Flying Nun Sister Betrill.

They're riding their bikes down to the muffler shop because I'm down at the muffler shop, and the nuns are visiting on a regular basis, and we're trying to build this AIDS hospice. And meanwhile, Debbie's feeding them, doing everything, I guess, their laundry, everything. I know they went to a Halloween party, and people thought that they were the best costumes they'd ever seen. And no, they were real nuns. So these nuns, eventually, their order said, look, you've been here a couple years, and nothing's happening. and all of a sudden one day the nuns were gone.

All I got was a Bible, a rosary, and a note. And you probably got the same thing. But we did our good deed, and then Carl Karcher, his son Jerome, Father Jerome Karcher said, you lost your nuns, how about some Jesuits? And they came and they built Emanuel House. So today go to St. Joseph's Church sometime, and you see this Emanuel House, It's like 34 beds for the homeless and those inflicted by AIDS, because this was an AIDS project that they were working on. And because of those nuns and because of Debbie McEwen, the city is a better place today. It is a better place.

I'm going to let you say a few words, but do you still get Christmas cards from the nuns? She does, and so do I. So they're alive and well, but they're in Haiti now. And we're here in Santa Ana doing a good job. Please, Debbie.

Thank you. Well, it's been 30 years, and the neighborhood associations, they wax and wane.

In the good years, everybody's neighborhood association is strong and healthy, and then sometimes not so much. But like all things, it's nebulous, and it's ever-changing. I hope that that continues. Without the neighborhood associations and the whole neighborhood movement, I wouldn't have that diverse group of friends standing in the back corner. We come together, sometimes accidentally, via these neighborhood associations. We could be happy or we could be really mad. It's gone both ways. Right, Miguel?

Sometimes on the same day.

Yeah, that part's true. So I hope everyone here remembers about that whole neighborhood movement, keeping the city about those who actually live and breathe and do here in this city, because I think that's where the heart and soul truly is. And with that, I want to thank my friends who showed up and supported me. I appreciate that very much. Thank you.

Debbie, this is a certificate of recognition awarded to you on this fifth day of March 2019. And it's in recognition for your outstanding service and contributions to the community. Way beyond the call of duty, but it's from your heart. You're a giving person, and you've given a lot over the years, and the city will forever be better off for it. And I do hope that you enjoy Texas. If you ever change your mind, you're always welcome back. But I think you're going to do a lot of horseshoes in Texas.

Here, let's take a look.

Thank you.

Why don't we take a picture of Jeff? Come on.

David PenalozaItem —

And if you ever want to go to her house, just watch any horror movie. It looks exactly the same.

David PenalozaItem —

I love it though.

It's really nice.

Don't break my camera now, you guys.

Thank you.

Okay, Madam City Attorney, do we have anything to report out of closed session?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Mayor and Council members, we don't have reportable action, but I understand that you would like to make one statement coming from our closed session. You did?

Well, I just want to thank and acknowledge our acting City Manager. We're going through a process. We think we'll be done with it soon, but in the interim, you've stepped up to the occasion. I know you're signing a lot of important documents, making a lot of decisions, and you're doing so in the service of the city here. And just for the record, we all appreciate it very much, Stephen.

Go ahead. You can applaud.

I have quite a few speakers here on item 19C, so we'll be on that very shortly. And as we do that, I just want to go ahead and bring up the consent calendar and ask if there are any items that people wish to pull or have questions on.

Councilmember Iglesias, please.

20A.

Okay.

20B, 23A, 25B, and I think it's 19E.

All right, so those that she's polled, and also 19C because I have speakers for that.

And just for clarification, Council Member E. was that 25B as in boy?

Let me see, 20, no, yes, 25B.

All right, so I would entertain, unless there are more items, people wish for a balance, a motion on the balance.

Make a motion for the balance to approve.

Is there a second on the balance? Second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye, those opposed. Motion carries. So, Councilman Iglesias, let's go ahead and start. When we get to 19C, I'll go ahead and call on speakers.

what was your first item I think that would be the first one because I pulled

my all right so let's start with 19c if you're here to speak on that I'm just going to call your name come up and make your comments and now or by no me no followed by Karen Rodriguez if you're present come on down and then after that going to be Irma Rivera and then Udry Nicholson I believe it is.

Navor go ahead. Go first. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Karen Rodriguez. Tonight I am speaking on item 19C on behalf of Accord and as a resident of Santana. We just received a letter from the city attorney's office just five minutes ago. And the city still has not provided any evidence to show that these parcels, these 88 parcels, were being held for exchange. We are receiving a conclusion from the city and not documented evidence.

We ask that the city continue the item 19C until city staff can provide well-documented written proof that these lands are in fact exempt from the Surplus Land Act. Because we believe that the Surplus Land Act applies. The city has misled the community by having inconsistent staff reports claiming these lands as undevelopable and to be used for community benefit, and later claiming they are in fact exempt from the Surplus Land Act in attempt to circumvent the state law requirements to provide affordable housing and open space.

Santa Ana residents cannot rely on developers to address their most urgent needs. they expect and deserve their elected officials to do so. Please continue Item 19C until city staff addresses our demand letter with concrete documentation and with appropriate time. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

que respeten la ley estatal de terrenos excedentes

la cual en sus puntos indica de que debemos de conservar tener viviendas accesibles

espacios abiertos sí ya que para mí me presenta un problema el el tener una vivienda accesible

y todo mi salario se va en lo de la renta

Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr

to men in cuenta la comunidad seeing do it's telling you much of the access for this opportunity

good evening my name is the word palmino and I'm a resident of Santa Ana I've lived in Ward 3 for over 20 years and I'm here to ask you to please respect the surplus the state law of the surplus land act that which says the use of these lands are supposed to be used to preserve affordable housing and open spaces and this is a problem for me because I have the need for affordable housing and all my salary goes to pay for the rent and I need affordable housing because I do not have the opportunity to support my children well

so I ask you to please consider this and to support and to follow the law thanks

for the opportunity when you are when you clap just go like this please it'll be faster and we have a lot of speakers to get through so show your support by saying yay like this please this is a council meeting please let's go miss otherwise I'll call somebody else. We have a lot of speakers and I want to hear them all.

Please go ahead. Good evening. My name is Ugochi Annabara Nicholson and I'm here as an attorney who has represented tenants in need of safe and affordable housing in the city of Santa Ana. I come to speak about item 19C and echo the request of many of the speakers who will speak before you tonight to continue this item to ensure that adequate analysis and research is done into the applicability of whether the Surplus Lands Act applies to the disposition of these parcels. It is your duty under the law, and we ask that you follow it and honor that. And so I've handed around

two documents. I'm waiting to see if you got them.

Okay. Okay, you'll receive two documents, the first of which is an Excel spreadsheet that was produced by one of our community partners based on information received pursuant to a Public Records Act request related to the ownership and funding for the different parcels subject tonight under 19 . Many of those parcels are funded by Okta Gas Tax and Measure M funds. And the second document that you will receive is a letter specifically stating

that the city is not only obligated by statute, but by Okta, at least respect to funds that were used by Measure 2 funds to purchase these parcels to sell the land in accordance with the Surplus Lands Act, which is part of the government code section cited in that memo from OCTA dated May 18, 2018. And with regards to the cooperative agreement that relates to the OCTA gas tax funds, the city is obligated to return the proceeds to OCTA, but in no way does that agreement obviate the city's obligation to follow the Surplus Lands Act.

So because there are so many questions and because the City's analysis is premised on conclusory and faulty logic, we are asking that this Council continue the item and do the necessary analysis that is required under the law to determine if these parcels are subject to the Surplus Lands Act. And if they are not, then to at least follow the guidelines in the Surplus Lands Act to ensure that you're providing affordable housing opportunities and open space for your residents and constituencies that are in most of need. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Irma.

Rivera.

Thank you.

Ella es estudiante, está en el colegio en estos momentos. Mi esposo y yo trabajamos y mis hijos también. Hace siete meses fui desalojada de una casa que podía pagar. Hasta el día de hoy no he podido encontrar un lugar de vivienda. Esto me convierte en una familia más en consideración de calle. Soy mujer activa en mi comunidad. he sido voluntaria desde que mi hijo el mayor tenía cinco años fui parte de conseguir el

primer parque en el código postal 92 701 aquí en santana como familia tenemos que pagar mil dólares por cada semana por un cuarto de hotel y comida en la calle ya que no puedo cocinar en ese lugar this suma $4,000 a month. That way, we have the opportunity to reunir, we have the opportunity to reunir the deposit and rent that we have given in the different places that we have been able to apply.

Today, I ask you to support me to find a place accessible to find a place. accessible. I am a leader active who has always been looking for the best for my family and my community. No, no vendan los terrenos públicos a propiedades privadas. Construyan viviendas accesibles, please. Gracias. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Irma Rivera. I'm a resident of Santa Ana. I've lived here for 30 years. I am a mother of two children. One served the Marines and now he's considered a veteran. My daughter is 20 years old and she's a college student. My husband and I work and both my children and seven months ago we were evicted from a home that we could afford and to this day we have not been able to find a place to live and this makes me one more family that is in a homeless condition. I'm a very active woman in my community. I've been a volunteer since my

oldest child was five years old. I was part of making possible the first in and the zip code 902701, the first park in this zip code here in Santa Ana. My family and I, we have to pay $1,000 per week for a motel room and for food on the street because I cannot cook and we're in this place. This adds up to $4,000 a month. This way we do not have the opportunity to have money for deposits and the rents that the deposits and the rent that they have asked us

at the different places where we've applied. So today I'm here to ask you to support finding accessible housing. I'm a community and active leader, always looking for the best for my family and for the community. Do not sell the public lands to private construction. We need accessible housing.

Thank you and thank you for not clapping. I know some of you are not clapping. Silvia Aventaño and Isabel Lopez, followed by Paul Gonzalez, followed by William Nacimiento. Silvia? Esta Silvia?

Can somebody get Silvia, please, if she's outside? Isabel Lopez? May she's outside as well.

Paul Gonzalez?

William Nacimiento? Come on, come on down.

Good evening council members. I'm here this evening to talk about item 19C, and as others have asked, I am here to request that you hit the pause button on this one, and don't take any action at this time. The folks at Accord and other organizers have raised some pretty serious concerns with regard to the California Surplus Land Act, and I think those are, there's really is a strong need to get to the bottom of that before we proceed but even beyond that before passing or making the decision to sell land that you deem surplus I think it would be important for this council to define and

clearly communicate a vision for how that land should be used to the benefit of the community and so before you come back to make this decision I would encourage you to engage the community and find ways to priority the prioritize the community's concerns and find ways to ensure that this land can be used for things that improve the health of our community like affordable housing more open space or other community benefits thank you very

record your name again Paul Gonzales got it so do we have Isabel so okay go ahead

when a star this in his con se calis hoy estoy aquí para hablarles yo soy residente de santana desde hace 15 años y viví en una casa 17 años la vendieron y yo tuve un proceso de desalojo ok un proceso muy desgastante perdía mis mascotas, parte de mi familia, nos dividimos y fue un proceso demasiado largo para buscar una vivienda digna, una vivienda accesible. Y yo hoy les pido que tomen en cuenta, ¿verdad? Podemos culpar, ¿verdad? De tantas drogas que entran, pero también pongámonos a pensar

qué hacemos, ¿verdad? ¿Qué hacemos con esos espacios, con esas tierras que podemos ocuparlas para rehabilitación, ¿verdad? Rehabilitación de drogadictos. Hay cinco mil niños en la calle personas muriendo en los callejones porque porque no tienen vivienda viejos viviendo en lugares terribles en hoyos en en banquetas podemos nosotros verdad usted está en sus manos verdad tener esa visión de las tierras que están tratando de vender para para usarlas en algo mejor como parques como lugares de rehabilitación lugares de reunión de familias hacer algo verdad hacer

something to not blame other countries because they are drugs. What do we do for rehabilitating this people? What do we do for this change? And I ask you to take very much into account that the streets of Bristol could be used to other things. And you have to take into account that there is a law and that if we follow the law, we will live better. ser felices porque ver tanta infelicidad mirar gente en la calle muriéndose si por drogas o por alcohol o por cigarro porque tienen frío es terrible vivir así yo no sé si ustedes lo ven

pero yo vivo en santana abro mi ventana y yo veo un callejón lleno de gente que no tiene donde vivir veo gente drogándose y esto es muy muy muy triste yo les pido que ustedes tomen una reconcilió una consideración de esas tierras pueden servir para algo mejor muchas gracias

Thank you. Good evening. I'm here to speak about this issue. I've been a resident of Santa Ana for over 15 years. I lived in the same house for 17 years. It was sold under us and we were evicted from it. It was a tiresome and long process. It cost me my pets, divided our family, and it took us a long time to find accessible, dignified housing. and I'm here to ask you to not sell the lands, to use these lands for rehab houses, for drug addicts, to help people to find dignified housing. There's 5,000 children on the streets.

People are dying in the alleyways and holes because of the cold. It's in your hands to have this lands to use to serve the people. We can build parks, we can build rehab centers. We don't have to be blaming other people, blaming other countries for bringing drugs. Just build housing units to rehab people and we can make a change in this. Don't sell the parcels to others. The Bristol parcels can be used for these purposes. There's a law that allows for this. So let's do this. and I see people out of my window who are dying every day

because of the cold, because of drugs, and because of that. So let's use this land to help somebody.

Thank you, William Nacimiento. William.

Good evening. My name is William Nacimiento, 1521 McFadden. Mr. Mayor and Council, I'm here to speak in support of 19C, the funds that the city received for the widening of Bristol were earmarked specifically for the widening of Bristol any excess funds were to be used to reimburse back the agencies that granted this money. The city has a zoning code the city will be able to sell this to the highest bidder in order for the developers to be able to improve the city with whatever is in the general plan

and in the zoning code so I'm here to speak in favor of the city's action to

approve 19c thank you very much thank you now do we have Isabel Lopez Isabel Lopez or Maria Ramirez Leonel Velazquez might they be outside if they're outside let's let them come in. Leonel Hilda Ortiz. Perdón. Parece que es Díaz. Hilda Díaz. La O parece D. O la D parece O.

Isabel. Maria. Adelante Maria.

Buenas tardes. Mi nombre es Maria Ramirez. pertenezco al grupo de justicia social y mama de la parroquia inmaculado corazón de maría residente de santana con la organización con la organización poco estoy aquí por el problema de las tierras que quieren vender a desarrolladores ya que si ustedes venden no habría suficientes terrenos para beneficio de la comunidad tales como parques escuelas etcétera y el problema más grande sería que si ustedes venden estos terrenos no tendríamos estos espacios para tal

beneficio ya que teniendo estos lotes la comunidad tendría la oportunidad de vivir con mejor dignidad se puede construir viviendas de bajos recursos y por favor voten no a la 19 c gracias

My name is Maria Ramirez and I belong to the group of social justice for the Immaculate Heart of Mary. I'm a resident of Santa Ana and I belong to the OCO organization. I am here because of the issue of the land that you want to sell to developers because there is not enough land for the public benefit, the community benefit, for parks and schools, et cetera. And the biggest problem is that if you sell these lands, we would not have these spaces for this community benefit and having these and to have these these parcels the community would have a better opportunity to live with dignity

and to you can you can build affordable housing for low-income people so please

vote no on 19c gracias este Leonel

my name is Leonel Velasquez I'm a community organizer with OCO Orange County Congregational Community Organization what do you expect to feel when you get home after a long day of work I expect to feel relief that I have dignity home to rest and be with my family but the reality is different the community is bleeding heavily in just evictions rain increases operation discrimination

racism from apartment owners and managers you were elected by Santana voters and the voters trust you to support them I have heard many of them who have have lost confidence in some of you and they say that you are in the side of the richest people we need more affordable housing public parking lots schools, green spaces, lands to learn how to grow food, community theaters,

community centers, senior centers, recycling centers, emergency shelters, libraries, etc. I hope that today you will vote in favor of poorest people. Do Do not sell Santana, do not sell the ADA lots to developers to create a massive gentrification. Please vote no on C-19. Thank you, God bless you.

I believe our last speaker, thank you.

Hilda Diaz?

Good evening, my name is Hilda Ortiz. I'm here on behalf of Latino Health Access Community Organization here in Santana. I'm here because we ask you tonight to not approve the release of the RFP for the sale of the city-owned properties. We ask for a continuation of this item to assure that the city is complying with the California Surplus Land Act and to instruct staff to work with community groups to guarantee at a minimum the surplus land act benefits but include other public benefits on this public land. A coalition of residents have asked the city to prioritize public land for

the public good for over two years now. Additionally in 2017 Latino Health Access surveyed voters in wards 1, 2, and 5. Council members Sarmiento, Peñalosa, and Villegas, those are your constituents.

Out of the 1,444 voters that were surveyed, 87% said that their neighborhood is in need of affordable housing, of parks and community gardens.

91% said that they believe that the community should be the one to decide how the empty lots are used. We wonder why the staff is trying to move these parcels so quickly with some of the newer City Council members not being fully aware of the issue. The City should not pursue the sale of these public assets, which could be in violation of the Surplus Land Act. This item should be addressed when the City responds to the demand letter that was sent and allows the new members of Council time to consult and ensure that the City is not violating State law. Thank you.

I believe that is all the speakers that I have on this item let me now bring it to council for discussion and consideration councilor Sarmiento thank

you mr. mayor and I am I know that this was an item that was before us at the last council meeting and I asked for us to take some time to review what we were doing so I appreciate everybody who spoke and I appreciate staff that spent some time with me speaking about this and some of the members from the groups that were giving their perspective as well. I guess what I'm a little what I gathered from both you know the staff and those who were concerned about this was that I think the goals that we all have aren't mutually exclusive I think what staff wants to do and what I think is something that we're mandated to do

which is to market and sell these properties and generate revenue from the sale of those and use those proceeds that are restricted towards the improvements on Bristol so we all get that. I think where the analysis I think on my part got a little lost was when we were talking about compliance with the California Surplus Land Act. So I can see, you know, and lawyers always disagree and can see things differently, I can see where the city attorney staff sees that the SLA doesn't apply here, but that doesn't mean we can't adopt some of the

guidelines that the Surplus Land Act requests. So the goals there are to create more environments that are going to be, they're going to provide community So that's really the goal from the Surplus Land Act, and I can see us at least marketing these properties, making them available to bidders, putting them out, circulating them for procurement, but at least confining them to having some benefit to neighborhoods, some benefit to families, some benefit to our community. If we put them out to bid and without any sort of direction or any sort of guidelines,

then we can come back with a lot of different sort of you know results that later on we may regret because what I haven't seen from this is sort of a vision of what is it that we want to see for Bristol or any of these other properties like what what is it that we're gonna you know have as an end result and so I think that's sort of the missing piece here and I know these sales if we do have people bid on them will come back to us but they're kind of you know there's a lot of parcels and I know that they're being assembled so they can be sold to bidders as a critical mass of land so you can do different things on them. So

you know not all the parcels are available for housing, not all the parcels are available for commercial development. Some of them are so small that they're only valuable to the adjacent property owner. So we have to see that in these 88 properties some of them are just not really marketable so I would like and what I was hoping is that staff would come back and say here's what these parcels can be assembled to be whether it's an acre whether it's half an acre whatever the size is and then realistically understand what we intend to do with them so I'm fine with with doing that and achieving

the goal that we have to do based upon the requirements of these of these lands and you know measure M2 money that was used to acquire them I just want us to have a plan to do something with them. I just want us to have some sort of idea and put a little bit more thought of what the final result is going to be. Because we have so many areas in the city where projects were built and adopted and they're eyesores and they don't fit and they're incompatible and they just don't make a whole lot of sense and don't provide much community benefit. And I think this is an opportunity where when we procure them, we

circulate them, we send them out to bid, we'll have those folks that bid on them understand, yeah, we want you to go ahead and develop them and invest and make a good return on them, but at the same time provide some community benefit from the city that's allowing you to do business here in the city. So that would be my goal, and if we can look at either taking some more time to see how we can redraft the RFP or if we decide to move it tonight, to move it with some language that would make it subject to some additional guidelines

and notice to bidders that will let them know that we want to see some proposals that make sense to neighborhoods and communities. And because from what we've heard, there's a need, obviously, for parks, affordable housing, but you can't put affordable housing or parks on every parcel that's available. So I think if they can be ancillary maybe to some proposals that are made, then I think it makes sense. And so folks, when they bid, when they work with our staff, they'll be able to submit something that we'll be receptive to. Because, again, just letting somebody build for the sake of building isn't always the right thing to do.

as we've seen with just a recent item that was with us at the council meeting last time around. So that's what I would request of staff just to consider. I'm open-minded about this. I just want to make sure that we also incorporate those that feel like these are community lands, even though those proceeds are restricted to go back into Bristol. I think our residents, again, have a role in defining what they want to see in these available parcels.

Mr. Mayor?

Yes. Go ahead. Go ahead, Council Member Salonio. Thank you. I shared some of the same views as Council Member Sarmiento. I'm open to considering it tonight with a few conditions and ideas that I have or postponing for two weeks so we can look to see how we can address some of these issues. I believe that staff's on the right side in terms of whether or not we have to apply under the surplus land act. But I do view that there's an opportunity to also extend the time that residents and businesses can do the research on these parcels and put a bid on it.

Right now the current estimate is five weeks, I would suggest seven or eight weeks because I want to make sure that residents, if they're there and they have an opportunity to expand their yard or to do an addition that residents can benefit. Similarly, if there's mom-and-pop shops in that area, I want them to have an opportunity to expand their business rather than a big international company just saying, I want to buy this lot and I don't care about anything else. And so with more time, we can do more of that outreach.

And then I think, too, that we can put them out to bid, get proposals for it, but at the end, maybe the city decides to not sell a few. Because maybe for some, there is a compelling reason to not do the highest bidder. Or maybe the city should consider buying some of these for open space, a pocket park, affordable housing. Also in this period of time with the delay or parallel to the RFP, I would like staff for the benefit of the council and the public to say these are like 10 parcels that may be good for a pocket park.

These might be 10 parcels that may be good for apartment housing. Because some of these remnants are small and we all drive up and down Bristol so you can't really build apartments in all of them or big parks in all of them. And so staff could do that research. research. And then I would ask, and I did meet with the advocates and community residents this morning, which is why I have some of these ideas so that they have time, the city has more time for us to consider housing and open space.

But I did also suggest that if they want to change the possible use of these lands that they can also talk to OCTA during this process and parallel to this. Because we're not going to sell any of these things overnight even if we put them out to bid. So those are my thoughts. And then the final thing in terms of the visioning thing, the Bristol Street Plan has been out there forever. People know about it, so that kind of is the vision and we have zoning for it.

So maybe in another documentation the city can share where that proposal is and prior outreach and stuff that we've done there and zoning because that is the city's vision for it. Thank you.

Any other comments by council members?

I have a question.

Yes, Councilman Iglesias.

So I agree with what Councilman Solorio is saying. Can you hear me?

Solorio, but you pointed Sarmiento.

Sarmiento.

Both. Okay, so regarding the RFP process, I know when it comes to an RFP, you have to put in there, I guess, what you're looking at, the scope of work and the things that you're looking for in order for us to comply with the Surplus Act. So I'm wondering if that's explained in the RFP. And also, I'm wondering when the RFP is set to go out and what's the timeline. And if we could, in the process, include some of the,

I would say some of the concerns and maybe some of the input that the community has shared. So it could be part of that RFP process, so then this way when the bidder comes up, they already know that's what the city's looking at.

Maybe because you listened to the, if you can address this. Yes, good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. William Galvez, city engineer one of the things that we can certainly do is we can revise the RFP to not only give the commercial properties that the Bristol specific plan clarifies as what the land use is we can give that one a little bit more time but we can also give substantially more time to the residential proposals we can take them in, review them and just because we have proposals due doesn't mean that we're going to make a deal

We're going to have to analyze what the proposed land use is, what the sale value might be, and then if it's something that we believe is doable, we're going to bring those proposals for the commercial businesses probably over to the council first, and we can sit down and actually go over what the proposal is, what the land use is, what type of office or what type of business is being proposed, and what the amount of the sale would be. So just because we released the RFP doesn't mean that it's going to be a done deal. So I would suggest because we do need to have the proceeds from the sales

so that we can continue with the Bristol projects, we can provide the commercial proposals a little bit more time, but significantly provide more time to the residential properties that are part of the RFP. And then we can also speak with some of these community groups to see if there's an arrangement that we can make to bring back to the council. Council.

So then I know you spoke in terms of the process, but what's the timeline? So for the commercial would be when would the RFP be released and also when are the bids due back?

Once this item is approved by the Council, we plan to release the RFP within the next few days. And in the RFP we stated about two months to receive proposals back. We can revise it to allow more time like what the city engineer stated, William.

So then you'll be giving us an update of when the RFP, the timeline is as council, or say we were to say move forward, then that said you pretty much are going to be, I guess, monitoring the timeline?

As William said, the action tonight is just to authorize us to release the RFP. We're not selling anything. We expect to receive hopefully more than one proposal for each parcel. There are 23 parcels. Twelve of those parcels are zoned as commercial, nine as, I'm sorry, 12 as residential, nine as commercial, and two as office. If we receive more than one proposal, we're going to evaluate each one and come back to council, present what are the proposals that we received, what's the benefit for each one, and then seek your approval for

whichever best fits the city needs. And if there is a public benefit component, maybe we can consider that too.

So there's no, do you guys have the RFP, was that part of our staff report, the RFP, the timeline and everything, was it included?

Maybe we can go from five weeks to eight weeks or ten weeks.

Because if it's not here, I'm not comfortable with moving with something, saying I'd like to know what it is that we're giving you direction.

The timeline's in there, it's just very general, but it says a five week deadline for submittals. That's why I'm encouraging eight weeks and you said that too much would be appropriate. Yes.

So then by May 2019 then, that's when you're releasing it? Or you're releasing it now?

We're releasing it immediately. But as far as the deadline to receive proposals, in the RFP, we're saying five weeks, we can increase it to eight weeks or longer, as the council wishes us to do.

All right, let's see if we can bring it back to council. Is there more thoughts or a motion?

Well, no, I think I agreed with some of the comments that were made by my colleagues. I think I guess what we'd like to see, and hopefully this works, and I'm really sensitive to staff because I know staff wants to clear their plate of this, and we do need to get some of those revenues that are generated back into the Bristol improvements. So I get it. I think this has been with us for years. But the struggle has always been, you know, we just don't have any idea what the RFP, how it defines, right, how it defines what we're going to eventually have as a final product.

Can we approve, Madam City Attorney, subject to including some express language in there? that the and what I'm worried about is giving notice to anybody who bids on this that we want to have some sort of community benefit or public benefit element to this in other words it's not just the highest bidder but we want something to have some responsible bid that's going to benefit the surrounding neighborhood is going to be compatible with that vision that you know we have for Bristol but something that I guess we can include as language in there so so our bidders know what we're expecting we're not just simply putting a parcel

out but we want to incorporate some of the some of the priorities I think that we've heard tonight and obviously the concerns that neighboring properties and neighborhoods are going to have yes is that something that we can yeah first of

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

all I just want to remind the City Council that if you accept the the advice that this is subject to the exemption is not subject to the surplus land act if you accept that and we've given you that legal opinion and we've shown you in the staff report why that is then the next step is you can add whatever procedures, exemptions, and processes you want to. If you'd like to suggest to staff that they add this to the RFP, then you're allowed to do that. If you wanted to go back and follow other processes, you're allowed to do that.

So last question, is your opinion clearly that this does not, is not subject to and is exempt from the California Surplus Land Act? I believe it is and I mean for

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

the Council's benefit if you really want a very brief explanation of that we are prepared to provide that to you. Mr. John Bunk is here today, he's worked very closely with staff. These are not conclusionary statements. We actually spent a very long time. We reviewed the letter from OCTA, and if you'd like to have that explained further, he's available

to do that. Well, I mean, I think we can, again, walk and chew gum. We can incorporate some of the principles of the Surplus Land Act and just say it may not be, these sales or these properties may not be subject to it, but we think it's a good idea that we also try to promote where we can these public benefit proposals and projects. So I don't think there's anything that prevents us from doing that. And that's, I guess, what I'd like to see as part of the RFP. So when we do get these bids, and I agree, I think we're going to receive a lot more than one,

but hopefully those bids that we receive, if they have a public benefit element to them, they might get additional points or they might be looked upon more favorably because they're going to be things that are going to complement what we want.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

And I just wanted to make sure the Council knew that in our response letter we said exactly that. So that wasn't explained to you this evening, but when our response letter said exactly what you just said, which is we believe these properties are exempt, however, it is up to the Council to use its policy discretion to incorporate back into this process things which they find are important. And I think you've just articulated how you might do that.

And that might even mitigate a challenge if something is ever filed against us and there's a contrary opinion on whether or not the SLA applies.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

And that's why we added it, because we understood that.

Consistent with what you've said, Council Member, I think there could be, as part of the background section in the RFP, that there's been a few hearings on this and that we've heard a lot of community support for housing, open space, and the other things, but that they also need to be mindful of current land use and general plan designations, but that the community would definitely be interested in public benefit options, irregardless of what the current stuff is, because we want to have them try to acknowledge the interests of the community.

Councilor Sarmiento, let me try to see if we can wrap up.

So, Mr. Mayor, just to wrap this up, I guess what I would say, I would go ahead and move the item subject to some of the comments that were made by the Council up here. Second. So they could be incorporated as part of the guidelines and some of the direction on the

Let me add a thought. Maybe this completely won't work, but maybe it will. I don't know if the community has any particular site. Maybe there's one lot They don't yet. That's a little bit more special for a park. Maybe we could buy a portion of something and turn it into a park.

Yeah, they don't have anything in mind because I have to ask that specifically, but I agree with you that during this process, Maybe they can think of something because maybe we could buy something. And we could buy it or they could buy it.

And turn it into a park. Correct. Well, maybe we can give direction to staff to work with those.

See if you can identify anything. Maybe you can't. Maybe it's too expensive. Maybe it doesn't work. But maybe we can do something. They can identify, yeah. Let's give it a go. All right.

May I suggest?

Yes, go ahead.

First of all, the RFP sets the criteria under which we have to evaluate the proposals. We can include, for example, ten points for any proposal that has a public benefit component. The second thing, we have a list of about 12 properties that are not subject to the conditions set here. Those also we can come back to council in the next maybe meeting or within a month and also make those available for anyone without these conditions that will follow exactly. That's not this list. That's a separate list. That's a totally separate list, exactly.

All right, go ahead. I like your recommendation about maybe.

Well, it's just a suggestion to the maker of the motion that we try to identify an opportunity. I don't know how big, how small, but it'd be nice. No, and I'll accept that friendly amendment to the motion. To the motion. All right, we have a motion and a second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Those opposed, no by Mayor Pro Tempe-Legas. I'm just kidding. I'm kidding. Can't take a joke. All right. All right. Next item, Madam Clerk, where are we now?

Would we like to go ahead and administer the oath of office?

Yes, let's go ahead and do that.

May I please have Felix Rivera come to the dais.

I, Felix Rivera, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or

purpose of evasion, that I will unfaithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.

Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.

Mr. Mr.

Okay, for a moment I want to call on Councilmember Solorio. He pointed out that apparently there's an item in here where we're setting aside money to hire a recruiter for a city manager.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I know that we have a council ad hoc on this and maybe we just table this for the future, but at this point in the process I'm not sure we need to.

It's $4,000, it's 25G. Why don't we just move that we table it?

Yeah, let's table it for a month.

Okay. Is there a second?

Second.

There's a second. 25G, it's $4,000 to hire a recruiter.

Yes, sir.

So we have a motion and a second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries. So now is a, pardon? Look, we've got a ton of speakers on 65A, like maybe an hour and a half.

Is Ruben Smith here? I think he's the attorney of record on behalf of the college What I'm trying to do and maybe I'm wrong But I think a lot of these are in support and if they are is there way we can just bring the item up right now We have discussion if It's favorable to your cause may we may we don't need to hear everybody or are these all against I would agree with you I think that that That would be a way to because you know most of these speakers or if not all of them, right?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

correct okay unless there's someone that you may want to ask someone really wants

to speak is there anybody in opposition to 65 a that wishes to speak I'd like to call upon you come on up anybody else in opposition to 65 a all right boy one look from Ruben and she changed her mind. It's pretty good Ruben, you got to teach

me that. So, so, alright go ahead. Good evening Mayor, City Council members, my name is Chris Schmidt. Real quick, this is not a comment about the continuing education center the staff or the students who go there this is about a decision that was made a few years ago there are three acres of empty land at Centennial Park that are under a deed restriction that say they're for

educational purposes only we offered that to Rancho and they say they didn't want it so there is park space in the back of Centennial Park that is for educational purposes that they could have used. This item wouldn't be before you tonight if they took us up on that offer. This is the same piece of empty land that three years ago I had to report a city employee had built a dirt track and was playing with a remote control car while he was standing next to a city truck on a Saturday. The reason I'm here today is because Centennial Park is no longer a park. It's a sports complex and an

We built Centennial in 1980. There was no Godinas High School. There was no Dan Young Soccer Complex. There is no place to park in Centennial Park anymore.

We need that land back so that we can open the McFadden Branch Library that you guys closed down 10 years ago. We pay $31,000 a year to lease a retail space at Harbor and McFadden for the police substation. you could relocate that into Centennial Park

if Steve McGuigan our former council member Pat McGuigan was here tonight Mayor Polito they'd be telling you the same thing I'm telling you Centennial Park is no longer a park the Orange County Register Building has been sitting vacant for years now Rancho can lease that and move there they use part of Remington Elementary School for the Continuing Education Center I understand you're going to approve either a one or two year lease. I think that's great. But they've had nine years. They've known this was coming. We offered them three acres of land. They didn't take it.

Just take that in consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you. Now, I know everybody now wants to speak against you, but hold back, hold back, hold back. Let me bring it to council for consideration. This is a motion basically to extend the lease for Rensselantel Community College Centennial for a period of two years.

Ruben, do you just want to make a quick comment and then we'll vote? I would also note that we're in receipt of a letter from Congress Member Luke Orea, who is in strong support of this action tonight. And I think that's of particular importance because he represents this district. and he will work with us from the federal government, I'm sure, to get things done. Correct. And I note that letter.

I know everybody's familiar with the item, so I won't spend a lot of time, but just briefly, this is really a continuation of a 10-year extension to try to reach a longer-term plan, and right now we just want to get this done so we can continue the process, and that's why I think the National Park Service has approved a two-year extension so that we can continue the discussions in moving this forward. because the city as you know has looked for other park sites in order to lift the deed restriction and all of those things have already occurred and now we're just need a little time to finish the process okay thank you for that if

we have questions we'll rebank any any comments by council members councilman

regalas yes okay so can you hear me wait what the questions that I have is um is I know that Centennial Park and the continuing education with Rancho Santiago has been going on for almost, when was this land, or pretty much this MOU with Santa Ana College and the city, it was about 30 years ago? Correct. Over 30 years ago. Over 30 years ago, and then about nine years ago, they were given a notice saying that

based on I guess the National Park Service, that this land is for park use, not for educational use? Correct, recreational purposes. Okay, so then, so it's been like the gentleman said, like Chris just mentioned, it's been nine years that Santa Ana College has been notified that there may be a potential

the National Park Service giving it back and saying it's for recreational use. And so I know that the National Park Service has given us a letter of approval for another two year extension, but it's not saying that it's going to be

something that it's going to be permanent. Is that my understanding? is just for us to kind of see where we're going to be going with this. I mean what's the reason of the extension? I mean if you could just explain that to me.

Absolutely. The extension, Lisa Rudloff, Executive Director of Parks, Recreation, Community Services Agency. The two-year extension is for us to get through the process of the land conversion. We're going through the environmental review at this time and it was supposed to be completed in March. However, we're going going to need a little bit more time. This will give the College District an opportunity to start advertising, I think, for their fall classes and give us a little time to get through this process. Once the National Park Service makes a determination, we'll come back to the Council.

They're seeking a long-term lease agreement. So you all will have an opportunity to weigh in at that point. If the National Park Service does not accept

the conversion, then the school would need to vacate, and then we would need to come up with a plan of what we would do with that property.

So then going with a one-year plan, because I mean, if we extend it for another year until November of 2020, which is more than a year, actually the year and a half, if we'll do that, then they'll have an opportunity to be able to provide those classes there for this next, I guess, calendar school year,

right? So it'll be from fall to next spring or next summer?

Maybe somebody from Rancho can...

Hi, my name is Jim Kennedy. I'm Vice President for Adult Education for Santa Ana College. From our perspective, we strongly favor the two-year because this takes a lot of effort from our students, a lot of time away from studying and other things. They care deeply about Centennial Education Center. That's why you have so many comments on it, on this topic. We appreciate all the activism of our students, and this really has been led by our student government, but we also want our students focused on education. And we know that the National Park Service is going to come back with other document

requests, and the timeline has been extended as a result of these requests that we did not foresee. And the district has paid for all of the documentation, all of the reports, the environmental impact report, the parking studies, the various different requirements, but now we do believe there's going to be additional requests by the National Park Service that is going to come forward as part of this consideration. And so we don't want to be back here next year in this very same situation. We want to bring this to a conclusion which is based upon us submitting the full package and then having it reviewed

by the National Park Service and hopefully that can lead to a long-term lease.

So, okay, so thank you for that, sir. So Lisa, so what would be the process? I don't know if you've connected with the National Park Service of saying, you say they don't agree with the land conversion and they want us to keep it for recreational only. What would be the process for us to give notice to the college? How long would that take?

Well, if you extend the agreement tonight, they would have whatever term, the one year or the two year.

Other than that, I don't know if it would be immediately thereafter. after the license agreement expired. So if they came back in eight months from now and said, okay, here's our determination, they have to vacate, they would have whatever you approved this evening.

So that's why I would want to, if I may, I mean, it's just the November 2020, because I believe they're going to come back to us sooner rather than later, and then we can start talking again. I mean, there's no need to have all the students to come back. But I just feel it's something that, I remember last time we were talking about regional use of different, of our different resources, and Centennial Park, it's a regional park. It was something that was for use for the entire community. And I'm not saying that the continuing education doesn't serve our community,

But I don't think it serves all of our community, versus a park would serve all of our community. And I know that Centennial Education Center, I mean the Education Center with Santa Ana College or Rancho Santiago, they have other classes that are at the school sites. So it doesn't really specifically have to be right there at that center. They could, if they could, do a MOU with the school district at Godinas. And so there's opportunities. And I know a lot of the students that come from the different sides of the city.

I know that there's opportunities for Rancho Santiago Community College to do those type of, I would say, collaboration with the district. So for me, I would say it's a park and I know I've heard, I know we're hearing from them, but I know I hear it from a lot of our constituents that we want our park back. And this would be an opportunity for us to start saying, okay, maybe we can have collaboration with them.

Thank you. Councillor Salonio. Thank you Mr. Mayor. I'm very supportive of the extension for two years in part because what I've seen because I've been you know on the council off the council and I'm back again. Thank you.

Part of the reason why I want the two years is we've never really taken the time to consider all the community input council input to come up with a a permanent long-term solution. And so we need two years, but also, and it could be in this motion or not, maybe an ad hoc committee with a few of us, including Councilwoman Iglesias, and I'd volunteer myself to be on, and maybe another council member, to look at a longer-term solution that's parallel to it, whether it be moving this to another park or making permanent improvements to where it is. There's also other opportunities. You know, I was for a while also on the Rancho Board,

and Rancho Not Longo bought a beautiful piece of property on 17th and Bristol, the southeast corner. We're talking about public benefit. Right now the district just wants to do like an asphalt parking lot or something. That's not a good use. I'd like to see an educational use, a community facility, or maybe this facility being moved over there. I also know that last summer, even though there was an effort at some of the joint use issues with Godina's High School, A lot of commitments were made by the city, but there hasn't been resolution yet. So we need to really roll up our sleeves and do some good work there.

I think many of you know I have two sons, one that's often in college now, but he went to Godinus, and I have a junior at Godinus. So I'm at Godinus 12 times a week at least. The park's still there. People use the park. Parking's there, whether you might need to drive a little bit more, go to the parking structure. That's one of the issues of how we use the parking structure. But that parking structure is empty most of the week. We need to figure out just how to maximize the use of that facility and the park overall because we're short on land and we're short on open space.

And so that's why we also need some kind of committee, formal and formal to come up with a long term solution. So I'm very supportive, especially since the federal government already says they'll give us the two years. So let's take advantage of that. Thank you.

David PenalozaItem —

Mr. Mayor, I have a question. Mr. Mayor, I have a comment. Yes. I just wanted to also voice my support for an extension, whether it's one year or two. I think it would be irresponsible on the city to pull the plug, you know, cold turkey from one day to the next. We should have an extension to have that conversation with the community, the people that use the center. You know, I was a child here in Santa Ana, and like most children in Santa Ana, we've been legal translators for our parents since we were five.

David PenalozaItem —

I was translating legal documents, medical records, and finally, around seven years old, I was like, you know what, Mom, you need to learn English. and you know signed her up I remember I went with her and I don't know forget the details but she ended up taking English classes there and she was there for about six years and learned a good amount of English it's not that great but she gets by and she could ask for we're all improving so

David PenalozaItem —

there's a

David PenalozaItem —

historical benefit to the center and I think that there should be an extension of again whether one or two years I'm not sure where my colleagues are on that but I just wanted to voice my support thank you

counselor ring Sarmiento thank you mr. Marin I I again want to say I know we've had this before us a couple times and I know that this may have been your predecessor that worked with us but and maybe Ron Oh knows in the house he's the I'm the only guy that remembers these things that go way back. But didn't we get some park space out of this deal as well from the national park lands or whatever? I know there was some sort of land swap at some time, so that was where we provided some land outside of Centennial Park. And I guess as they were bundled up,

we're the same size as the site that we're talking about. So the Pacific Electric Park right on McFadden and Orange is a result of that deal, right? Correct. And then we have some other small park space. I guess they're called parklets because they're not huge parks, but they're small spaces where people can gather. So there has been, I think, some reciprocity on this. So I'm supportive of it as well because I think what we don't want is to have school to start in the fall and then people not know where to go. And that's where I think that's my concern.

Thank you so much. So, you know, but I am sensitive to the fact that, you know, this is a park. It's a very unique park, right, because you have soccer fields on it. You have a high school on it. You have a lake. You have a learning center. So it's not your typical conventional classic park as it's defined. It's a very multipurpose site. And we even have mid-base injection wells, by the way, that are award-winning. So we got a lot of good stuff from that deal with the water district as well. We got new paving, we've got new bathrooms, new locker rooms, and those were all negotiated for the benefit of park users.

But I guess what I'm trying to say is that this isn't your typical park, right? It's a very, very probably interesting space, you know, because most parks are just open land. But one thing I would say is something that, and I saw Congressman Correa's assistant around here, and I don't see him. There he is. He was hiding behind you. But I know that when the congressman was a state senator, we talked about using that area by the river that is dedicated for public education or education purposes to maybe turn that into open space. Because I know there were some monies that were provided by the state.

I think there were Prop 1 monies to be used for open space. And maybe that's a way to, as we're using the space for educational purposes where the school site is, maybe that space that was intended for educational purposes can be swapped out. And that would take some advocacy on our part to maybe talk with the legislature and see how we can open that up. Because look, it's a great space and it's right along the river. So to the extent we can get something done. And we do have a parks and recs commission, so maybe our commissioners work with staff and others just to come up with some proposals that we can look at.

So I'm very supportive and thank you for your information tonight.

Councilor Iglesias.

I just have a clarifying question. When you said that we did the land swap with other parks, but it's my understanding that the land was purchased by the city, right?

That is correct.

So then it's really not a land swap with the college. It's more, what we're supposed to do as the city is get these different lots so we can provide park space for our students, I mean for our residents. So my thing is, where is the fairness when it comes to really having that open space for the entire community? So I agree with you with what you said with that lot in the back. I mean, that's something that I would be more than willing to be supportive of if that's something that we could do an ad hoc or we could do some type of committee for that.

But that space right there, I think it warrants that the entire community benefit from it. So I'm very appreciative that you brought that up so we can work on something like that. But I just don't want us to say that the land swap, it's all been city money. And then I know we have an item on the agenda this time that we're going to be talking about, one on Lacey and 6, which is for the same purpose, and it was also purchased with city money.

If I can just clarify a couple of things. One is that when Centennial Park was built, when the federal government gave it to the city, the master plan included the Centennial Education Center. It's not something that was added later. It was always part of the master plan. So from the very beginning, it was there. It's been there since the very beginning of the park. So that's an important fact to consider. The other part is that the city and the college 10 years ago agreed to go down this road to figure out how to figure it out. And what we came up with was a land swap. The city was going to acquire the parks,

and the district was going to pay for the cost of all the consultants to get there. And so that's where this 10-year plan has led us to where we are today, and we're really kind of at the end of that. And so I think just historically it's important to set that straight so that you know that this isn't something we're just coming up and saying, saying, oh no, it's going to run out. No, this is an ongoing thing for more than 10 years. We need the extension to finalize the process and then decide what happens after that.

Yeah, it wasn't a land swap in the technical sense where we're going to get proceeds from the district or from the college to go ahead and purchase this. But we felt like, well, if we're losing this land or if it's not being used for park purposes or for open space, let's try to find park space throughout the city that we can use and have the public benefit from those. So I think that's where the genesis of those parcels were.

What I'm going to do is I'm going to try to wrap this up because a bunch of people agreed not to speak to save time, and we're kind of making up for all the time we saved. But look, this is an important topic. It deserves a discussion we've had. If an ad hoc committee wants to form Councilor Iglesias, Councilor Lodio, I'd be happy to point you and anybody else that wants to serve I think this does deserve attention But I'll also tell you something else no matter what you call it a lot of folks benefit from the land out there at Centennial Park

And you know the Godina's high school Yeah, but if you look at the buildings of the high school they're on land that's owned by the school district. What we really did, which I think was a good move, was we opened up the park so we could develop it because it used to be dirt. For many, many, many, many years it was dirt. Now it's other amenities without fences so the community at large can go there on weekends, after school hours, and they use that land. They use the baseball diamonds, the basketball courts. We also have done some things that we need to do more in other parts of the city. Things like the skate park out there.

The Pat McGuagan skate park. We need more of those because it gets so much use. You go out there and the real miracle is how these kids don't get hurt because they're like going all over the place all the time. They'll say, oh my god, it's dangerous just to go in there because it has that much demand and that much use. So look, we all care about the city. 100% true. Let's have this committee let's work I favor the two years and I'll tell you why things sometimes take longer than you want them to and and and I hope we get done real quick but if we don't I'd rather see you all out there in the community or

somewhere else not negotiating whether you're gonna speak or not but but but thank you for being here tonight because I know you're here because you care and And I see a lot of red shirts out there. So with that, do we have a motion?

I'd entertain a motion. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion for option two. And I'll read the whole thing just so everybody knows. Authorize the city manager and clerk to execute a license agreement extension with Rancho Santiago Community College District to operate the education center at Centennial Park for two years to expire on November 5th, 2021, subject to not sensitive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.

Okay, with that do we have a second? Those in favor please say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries and I want to thank Councilman Regless in particular because I know you're struggling with us, but thank you for being on the ad hoc and let's go ahead and find a solution. So is the vote unanimous? It's unanimous in favor. Excellent. Thank you. Thank you.

Now all my hands became applause because you're leaving, but thanks for coming down and have a good evening. We got you out of here about an hour and a half early. About an hour and a half early. Remember that.

Thank you. Thank you.

You can go have dinner now.

Mayor and council.

All right. Let's go on to the next item.

Mayor and council. Mr. Mayor? Mayor and council, we would like to go back to the consent. I am.

Councilmember Iglesias, you had some items that you had pulled.

19D.

19 Diaz and David.

Go ahead, Councilman Iglesias, go ahead.

Okay, so my question for you, okay, can you hear me? Okay, Catherine? Yes, thank you. My question for you is going to be, if you could explain to us what, I know it's just a receive-in file, but what does this mean? It's the CalPERS projection?

Yes. This is an annual report. This information is based on an annual report that we received from CalPERS giving us the status and assumptions of our employee pension plan. Okay, I can't hear you. Do you want?

If we could have some quiet time in here, it would be great. Thank you so much. We can shut the doors.

Thank you, sir.

Go ahead, speak up.

Thank you. Each year the city receives a report from CalPERS on its employee pension plans. The information in 19D is just a public, to make it user friendly for the public, the information, because it's fairly complex. What it means is they tell us what our funded status is. The plans are 68.5% funded for safety employees and 68.7% funded for miscellaneous employees. The ideal goal is to be 100% funded.

They also tell us that as of June 30, 2017, we have a $614 million unfunded liability. That means that we have accrued benefits more than we have assets in the bank to pay those benefits.

What ratio is that for the unfunded liability? It's the 68.5% and 68.7%. Yes.

So for this one, you said that, let me see, so this one it was reported June 30th, 2017, but is it like a year behind? So this is not really telling of what's happened in the last year. That's correct.

We received this information in July of 2018, approximately 13 months after that fiscal year end date. For items that occur during the current fiscal year, we can expect to see that in a report end of summer, July or August of 2020.

2020, okay, so then you were mentioning that there's a 614 million shortfall on the pensions. That's correct. Okay, and then that's not including right now what our, I guess, our responsibility is. I guess moving forward, what's our responsibility as a city for the pension liability?

Each year we make contributions to the plan for both the current accrual of benefit and also to pay down the unfunded liability. In the current fiscal year, our total payments to CalPERS that are funded by the city are approximately 52 million. CalPERS expects that that will increase by $33 million over the next six years to a total of $85 million six years from now.

So we're going to be paying $85 million to the pension? Yes. Okay. And then how is that affecting our, I guess, our budget?

Well, again, this is using data through June 30, 2017. So any recent occurrences that might impact that data will be reflected in the report that we will likely receive at the end of summer 2020, so approximately 18 months from now. So things like the CalPERS investment portfolio for calendar year 2018 lost another 3.5%. And then also, any employee increases that are approved after June 30th, 2017 are not reflected in this data as well.

So then, for me, that's a concern. Okay, so then let me see.

I think that that's pretty much my questions that I had. I just wanted you to explain to us because I know that we had this information saying that as a city, we were liable to a lot of, I mean, that we were in a deficit spending mode. And then the pension liability is something that we should be looking at. And this is something that's really going to affect us moving forward with our budget. And I know that when I spoke to you, you explained it more that with what's going on right now,

that especially with the action that we just took to approve the police officers contract, contract that it's putting us in a place that right now we're faced with a huge liability with the pensions. Now moving forward it's just going to escalate to, you said, 85 million. So I believe as good stewards of public money, we should be looking at that.

During the budget process I'd like to have a more in depth discussion about our pension contributions and pension liability.

So I'm hoping that if this is something that we could do, have you in the past done like a budget, like a study session? Yes. Is that something that we could, I mean that's something you could bring forward to us? I don't know if this is a time you're going to have to see if I'm doing it right, but is that something that we could ask for, like a special budget study session so we can know moving forward where we're at?

I would suggest that assuming we have a new city manager soon under that situation. So it'll be soon hopefully. Okay, good.

So- Councilor Salario please. Yes, just two things. On that note, last year I did ask, and Mr. Schultz will support, we did have a study session on it. But we have new council members, I think it would be good to bring it back. But I think it's also important to say, this isn't something that's only happening here in Santa Ana. That's correct. Yes, all cities, all government agencies, including school districts, because they're in CalSTRS. But it's the same dynamic. There was an article that I think came out this morning that I saw. So as an example, Santa Ana Unified, the pension cost they paid in 2011-2012 was $26 million.

17-18, which was last year, it escalated to $74 million. So that quadrupled on. So it's unfortunately a pressure we're all feeling. Luckily here in Santa Ana, we are abiding by PEPRA. So for new employees, the pension costs are lower because of the new formulas. But we do need to keep looking at it. And so I am supportive of another study session as well.

And you're absolutely correct. On page 19 of your agenda item, we have some benchmarking information there that shows the other cities that are also in the same problem.

Thank you. Other questions? Other thoughts?

It's just a receiving file, right? Yeah. So, yeah, I'm moving.

She'll move a receiving file. Is there a second? Second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries. Council Member Iglesias.

Item 20A.

Is this for the pool?

Correct. Oh, okay. So my question for this, I know that we have three pools that we're looking at to resurface and I guess renovate. Yes. My question to you would be, what other pools are we looking at for future? I mean, how was the criteria for this, the pools that were selected?

We had staff do an evaluation of all five pools, and so this year there's a need to replaster these three pools, and then next year we will do Jerome and El Salvador.

I'm just wondering how fast we can do all of the pools. Because you know my commitment is to ensure that all the pools are going to be active by the summer too. Is that something that's possible or?

Yes, yes, the replastering of these three pools and the other ancillary items will be done by Memorial Day when we open. and then also we're going to really spruce the pools up do some painting and get some shade structures in there and really make it inviting for the for the

public and safe for the community I want to thank you for for your commitment to ensuring that we have these done and truly appreciate your staff's work and

also I want to tell you that we are going to open the pool six days a week

as opposed to two days a week. Thank you. That's really good.

Thank you. So I guess I'll move the motion.

I don't know if you guys have any questions. Is this going to take five votes?

David PenalozaItem —

Can I make a comment really quick? This isn't specific to this item. It pertains to this item and a couple other items on the consent calendar that we already approved. But it's a question about the bidding process? Would that wait until the end or is it just, should I just say now?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

It's more of a question. If it's a question, we can answer it.

David PenalozaItem —

Okay. I just, I had a question with the way that, you know, I see the different items on the consent calendar, how we reach out to Santa Ana contractors. They're always notified, you know, everywhere from 25 to 20 to 10. but we always have zero bids from Santa Ana contractors and Santa Ana businesses it is and I see it every time and I was just wondering what we're doing as a city to try to reach out multiple times to those different contractors I don't know if it's maybe a lack of resources on their part where they don't know how to how to bid or I mean I'm just I was just thinking it was

David PenalozaItem —

just a thought that popped in my head when I was going over these agenda items Can you answer that? Certainly.

I'll have William. Where's William? Here he comes. William's going to address this. Thank you. It's been a challenge. It's a local challenge to find qualified, eligible bidders. Contractors are not hungry in 2019 as they once were in a recessionary time, so that's part of it as well. 2010, 2011, there was no shortage of contractors willing to bid. But I'll let William expand. So thank you for the question. We use something called planet bids, and so recently that may be a little bit of a challenge for some of our local contractors to ensure that they're on the system. So the system ensures that we take the lowest bid.

However, with a policy directive, we can certainly also entertain how local contractors can get some kind of a credit. So we still comply with the public contracts code in the lowest bid is the recommended award so long as they meet all of the licensing requirements and so on and so forth. But perhaps there can be some credit. Now I know that this item has been discussed before at the executive management level. And I know that there are certain limitations that we have as to how much credit we can give. So this is certainly that we can have a discussion and we can report back to the Council as to how far we can stretch this credit.

I don't know if that answers your question, but certainly using planted bids, we've been using that system now for a little over a year. And it automates how a contractor submit a bid and the evaluation process is also automated. And then what we do is we just look at the bid results to ensure that all the licensing requirements are being met.

Council Member Sarmiento? Thank you. So I think we already have that policy. If we don't, I don't know where it got lost because we gave direction years back. Not only were we going to try to do that, because obviously it's a good point. We have a lot of people who in the city that can bid on these and that should be bidding on these. And we should be outreaching as aggressively as we can to get them to bid if they're not. But I do recall that we did something called a local hire policy and a way to encourage bidders and contractors in the city to get some point increment

added to their bid when they were applying, just to motivate and incentivize them. So I don't know why that isn't part of the council's policy when it goes out to bid on any contract. contract, not just ones having to do with our community centers or our equipment or anything else, but I just thought that was a policy because I know we made a concerted effort to say we really do want to encourage bids from our local vendors and our local contractors. So I don't know if that, is there maybe some clarity on that?

Yeah, I just hope I didn't mislead you by what I was referring to is that perhaps there can be a higher level of incentive that we apply.

Beyond what the baseline policy is.

Beyond what we have already, yeah, because we do as much as we can to outreach. We can make them win outright when they compete.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Mayor President, I still want to be mindful. So under the Brown Act, we can answer quick questions. This is actually turning into a more detailed, but that's yet a quick question about. the process. Thank you. So it sounds to me like this is more detailed. What I might suggest is maybe city manager meets with you, goes over the process, or we can agendize it for a future discussion, because it's not on the agenda. But sometimes we can give you quick answers. It's just turning into- Yeah.

But there is a nexus between what we're adopting and what we're asking. So what we're asking is how a bid is processed. And so I think this explains sort of the fundamentals of how we get to this bid and how we're awarding this contract. So the only thing we would say is, can you circulate something to us, whatever the policy is, and if it's not robust as we try to make it, send it to us afterwards and let us know, and maybe that's something we can agendize more.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

If you're asking out how the bid process worked for this particular project, absolutely, we can have that discussion.

Okay.

So we are going to follow up. Councilmember Sarmiento?

Solorio, I think. Yeah, man. The other Sarmiento. On that same point, maybe we could bring this up in the Economic Development Committee. I know we have a meeting coming up in the near future. I know Council Member Penelosa is on it. I'm on it. And Councilwoman Iglesias. And it could be what's the current policy and then how we might improve it. I think, too, there's always been a lot of focus on public work stuff. But even on professional contracts, when I first came on, I saw that for a lot of the legal firms and others,

the bigger dollar things. We're using firms not based in Santa Ana and not that they need to get all the work, but I would like to see, not just for public work bids, but other professional bids, how we can do better. So that might be a place for the discussion as well. Thank you.

So I'm willing to entertain a motion on the item.

I'll second.

David PenalozaItem —

The pool's right. No.

I'll second his motion.

Oh. Okay, very good. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes. This is, we will continue, Madam Clerk, which is the next item?

Next item is 20B. That one, let's just go ahead and vote on it. I pulled it unintentionally, so I'll move it.

Which item is that?

20B.

20B as in boy? B?

B as in boy.

Okay, very good.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries. Next item, Madam Clerk.

23A.

23A.

And was that you Councilman?

So for this one, I think it's just a follow up question and I know I asked it when we were talking about the rancho for the land swap. Is this part of that deal?

Yes, this is one site. Okay, pardon. So, but can I just say the development of this park doesn't have anything, any bearing on the land swap?

Okay, so then it's the city, we're going to be appropriating the funds of $976,000. And so, say if the National Park Service comes back saying okay, we can do the land swap, so then what happens then? Do we get reimbursed from Santa Ana College for the development of this park?

Yes. I don't believe so.

Mr. Ron Ono would like to clarify that. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Ron Ono, Administrative Service Manager for Parks and Recreation. I think there's a little confusion. What the land swap is, is really the change of the deed restrictions. In Centennial Park, where the college is currently sitting 2.6 acres, it has the recreational use only. So what we're doing is we're purchasing three sites to transfer the deed restrictions onto the new sites to free up the deed restriction at Centennial. So it's not that we're swapping land, we're just changing title over to the new sites.

So then the deed restriction from Centennial has nothing to do with this?

No, what will happen is that the recreational purposes only deed restriction actually is going to transfer over to the three new sites. So all of a sudden now the three new sites has that deed restrictions on it. and when the deed restriction changes that will release the 2.6 acres at Centennial so that you will make a decision whether to execute another long term lease at that site. I know it's nothing to do with this development so the National Park Service has allowed us as we're going through this process to develop the new sites. We went after a grant

to do the Sixth and Lacey site from parks related grant program. We've got the money, we need to spend it as soon as possible. And the National Park Service allowed us to do that as we go into the process on the title switch.

Okay, so but if we approve this, doesn't mean that we are going to, I mean, that it would have to come back to the council for us to negotiate the terms? Is that what I'm understanding? For the deed restriction?

Centennial. Yeah, the development of this site is completely different from what's happening. Once the title switches, it's going to come back to Council on Centennial, whether you will approve a long-term lease or not. The park will still be developed as a park and will be retained as a park, the 16LAC site. With city funds. I'm sorry? With city funds. With money from the city.

Yeah, within the city. Okay, not, so Rancho or Santa College is out of the equation for this one.

Right.

Okay, thank you.

All right, can we have a motion? Yes.

I'll move it.

Second.

Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. I'll expo, the motion carries. How many more items, Council Member?

25B as a boy. Yeah, that's, yeah, just as a quick question, I don't know.

All right.

It's about the cameras, I think.

25B is it with the cameras? Yes. Okay.

I know we're having, which are the parts that we're going to have the cameras already up and going? What parts are we focusing on?

The parks that we're going to focus on are, we're going to complete Windsor Park. We are going to complete Jerome, Santa Anita, Shepa's and Memorial Parks.

So by when is Windsor Park going to be completed? Because I thought it should have been completed by the end of February

but it didn't happen. Yes. There needed to be with the police department we needed to work out some of the terms and everything that you have in this agreement before they would start work. So once this is approved they will start work tomorrow. tomorrow. So Windsor will probably take less than a month to complete.

Thank you. Thank you. Motion? I'll move it. Second? Is there a second? Second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. I'm glad Councilor Solorio is here today. It's a second motion. You're a good seconder. So with that, where are we, Madam Clerk?

Item 50A.

50A? Is there a second?

Second with question. Go ahead. So is this one with the city manager expanding the city manager's contracting authority? Yes, sir. So was there a brief, I know there was a presentation, but we did get the handout, and I thought that was good. We have a presentation.

We'll be glad to go over it if you wish.

You know, it's been a short meeting. I don't want to belabor the point, but this is basically expanding the contracting authority for the city manager, correct? Yes. And I saw the list of cities, where we fall, we fall towards the bottom. I think our limit is $25,000 when it comes to non-public works contracts. Yes. And it looks like we're going to 100. So that's quite a jump. So I just want to see what the justification is from going from 25 to 100 rather than 25 to 50. Sounds kind of arbitrary to me. So I know Anaheim, which is a comparable size, has about 50.

Irvine, of course, I see a million. but to me when you sort of delegate that responsibility to the city manager and look this is not specific to this city manager or anything sort of abdicating the role of the council and one of its core responsibilities which is fiscal you know purse strings and deciding how much is going to be done so can you just give me some background some rationale absolutely yes basically we're changing

the limits to be on par with other cities of same size like the city of Sana'ana. It's important to note that we're not changing any of the policies or procedures. For example, for construction contracts, we have to follow state code. We have to advertise for bids. We have to set a deadline for receiving bids. Bids have to be open in the public. None of that will be changed, and that applies whether a contract is $30,000, $50,000, even $10 million. We're applying the same procedures. Through this modification, basically we're taking language from the municipal code from different sections and

grouping it into one, and then increasing the limit that the city, instead of spending 15 to 20 hours of staff time on each item to prepare council agenda and come here, the city manager will have the authority to sign off on these agreements, but every quarter, every three months, the city manager will come to city council and present all of these items, say, here are the items that were under $250,000 that were approved according to the policies and procedures that have already been established by the city. So it's just a matter of being much more efficient in terms of

staff time. No, I understand that, but in essence, what we're saying is you have now, we're giving including a city manager or the city manager that is sitting here or the next city manager that's going to be our permanent or interim or whatever it is, we're basically saying you now have authority to go ahead and expend $100,000 of public funds without discretion of the council so long as it's disclosed at some point later. Same procedures that we have now for the $25,000. I get that. We're not changing that. But is that what we're doing? Yes, that's what we're doing. Okay. I don't know.

I mean, I guess what's the compelling reason to go from 25,000 to 100,000?

It is basically we did a survey of other cities, similar sizes, and we concluded that these limits are appropriate for the city of the size of Santa Ana. And that's why we're recommending this.

But in the list of cities, the 33 other cities in the county, the city that's most comparable in size to ours is Anaheim and they have a limit of 50,000 and we're going above that why would we do that you know the the limit

of 25 was set many many years ago I don't know their background on Anaheim maybe it was theirs was set maybe 10 15 years ago you know given today's you know market cost of projects and services provided or that are acquired by the city we felt that hundred thousand is a reasonable number especially because of you know once we looked at all of these projects that we prepare council items to come here for approval for it and it looks like we're going 20 from

twenty five thousand to 250,000 for public works contract that's for construction projects exactly so look I'm and I don't mean to you know lay it all on you and I know you're responding during the presentation but look in In principle, I just don't see how we can delegate that or increase that limit and expand the authority that excessively, right? So I get an incremental increase, I understand that. And I see that there's efficiencies with giving the city manager and the staff the ability to unilaterally make contracts. But that is taking away the decision making from this body.

And we were elected to do specifically that, for better or for worse. People don't agree with the way we deliberate on contracts, on amounts, on things that are given. but that's still something that we should own. So I just don't like when we delegate that to staff, at least in this increment. So I appreciate it. I can't support it, not at this increment. I could support it at 50, but that's where I'm at. But I appreciate staff doing this.

If I may. Thank you.

City Manager and then Mayor Pro Tem.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to reiterate that these are budgeted items. These aren't items that require appropriation adjustments. At the beginning of each year you develop a policy document that policy documents called a budget that gives us the green light to go do these projects We would like to deliver these projects in a more efficient manner either fast-tracting them or also Providing you potential staff say savings for example between July of 2018 in December of 2018 We would have eliminated 61 requests for council action which would have been 24 public works items and 14 other public works items.

20 staff hours per staff report. Up to 2,400 staff hours saved. If you'd like us to be efficient, if you'd like us to get things done, we need policy support on this.

Thank you. Mayor Pro Town. Thank you. I just say I support the item and I make a motion to approve and the reason being is because we do need We need to be efficient. We're sitting up here and we have these long meetings. All these things come forward. The city manager needs to have the latitude to go ahead and move forward. Like the gentleman here was saying, Mr. Fouad was saying that we still have to do all the bidding. There's still rules, regulations. If we feel that we need to intervene at some point, we have a question about something, well, it will come before this council.

but I also believe that if we want to get things done, we're not, you know, we're gonna, we're holding ourselves back. And so I'm in agreement with this and that is my motion to approve.

Is there a second? Mr. Mayor, I have a comment. Okay, second by Jose. I have a question. Question. I'll make a second. Go ahead, comment.

David PenalozaItem —

I just wanted to voice my support for half of this. I do believe that there should be more than $25,000 for the city manager to be able to approve contracts, not just $25,000. There's a staff report in here for a $4,000-some-dollars-and-change amendment. It's a 15-page staff report for $4,000. I know it's public funds, but at the same time, that seems kind of unnecessary. necessary, so I would be more comfortable with doing something maybe around 50,000 or in that range to be up there with Anaheim.

David PenalozaItem —

Like Councilmember Sarmiento said, that's the next comparable city to our size and it just doesn't make sense to go from 25 to 100. That's it.

Councilor Salorio. Thank you. I'm open either way, but just some comments. we've had this $25,000 value for a long time and so really in terms of purchasing power that probably is like a hundred thousand today but but but it is a big jump and I like the idea of on that aspect of it going to Anaheim's value at 50,000 because let me give an example even though things are theoretically in the budget and so there's no surprises sometimes there are you know last year this council voted to put Measure X on the ballot. I think everybody knows I opposed it. Next thing you know, out of the blue, one day

there's two or three mailers paid for by the city promoting those measures and they never came to the council. And what staff did was they got creative and even though in the past we were told there's no money in the city manager's office, all of a sudden they found money for what they wanted to do, which was these three mailers and that was a surprise and sometimes on things like that when it happens bad there's no way to fix it. And so that's my concern particularly on non-public work stuff that higher value. And we can make these increases and later on if it gets abused we can bring it back down.

But I do think that for staffing purposes with the public works piece I'm less concerned with the professional amount. But I agree with Councilmember Sarmiento's suggestion of on the non-public works aspect going to 50,000. So maybe that's a friendly amendment by Councilmember Sarmiento, but I think there's some sense to it.

I think there's-Go ahead. I think there's a motion on the floor in a second, but if that was a motion, a substitute motion from Councilman Solorio and I heard the same comment from-I think it'd be appropriate.

I'm happy to amend the motion to 50.

All right, and I'd be supportive of that. If it'll make some progress, let's do it.

May I have a question? Yes, go ahead. Is it 50 for both, or is it 50 just for non-public works?

The way I understood is for the non-public works. Correct.

And how about the public works, you're okay with the 250?

I'm okay with the 250, because those are more infrastructure related. These are more discretionary when it comes to non-public works.

Well, I'm not comfortable with it, okay.

All right, those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries. One no. Councilor Iglesias, for the record, please.

Thank you.

So next item.

55A.

Move the item.

We have a motion and a second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries.

55B as in boy.

Motion to approve. Second.

Those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries.

55C.

55C, before we start with more dialogue, I do want to confirm something I got right from our city manager and that others saw. Because this does involve an appropriation, this requires five votes for passage. Is that correct, City Attorney?

The job description part does not.

But the item as a whole? The item... I'll go back and read the e-mail. I know you were copied on it. I'd be happy to read it. But I think both you saw an e-mail. I think that one of you two...

So you're saying if there's no money, it doesn't matter what else? But there is money.

Yeah, there is money. So maybe it impacts everything. Correct. So it's a five-person vote.

May I clarify? Yes. Thank you. The mid-year report that came before you a couple of meetings ago, that included the appropriation adjustment for this item, knowing that this item was on its way. So now, because the mid-year has been delayed, they just happen to be on the same agenda. so the appropriation adjustment is in 65B, but it relates to 55C, and you are correct for the appropriation adjustment in 65B. There are five votes required.

But for 55B, and I'm looking for it, I was told that it was a five-vote item. And I don't think you responded. I think it was our city attorney or city manager. I'm looking for it. In the meantime, we can discuss it.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

I'm not aware of this item and I wouldn't have responded on a finance item, so maybe you got that from the computer.

Well, I'm going to keep looking for it.

All right, so at this point, thoughts? Mayor Pro Tem.

Madam City Attorney, what was that that you said? I wasn't clear on that.

What did you say? It was so low that I-

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

I'm sorry. Sorry, I do recall seeing some email traffic on this issue, but I just was letting Council Member Solorio know that I wouldn't have responded on this particular item because it's a human resource and finance item. I do recall seeing an email on this issue and I'm looking for it now.

Okay, I found the item, it's an email that I got on March 1st by our acting city manager and he copied everybody else and this was everybody's input. The question was, please confirm, and this is 55C, that it's a mid-year, whether it's an appropriation or just a resolution, whether it requires five votes. And he responded, the HR changes in 55C require appropriation adjustment, which was also in the mid-year report, yes, the adjustment requires five votes.

But that as an aside, I do feel that those two items are linked. and so maybe we take that other item first because right now part of the issue is there's duplicative matters in this item as well as with the mid-year budget which creates confusion so it's generally not good to have two items that are so overlapping and I have concerns just in that we have a few departments that are saying that raise their hand saying I need a position for this I need a position for that but we didn't open citywide an opportunity for all the departments to say what staffing needs there are. So for us to so early before

the budget be picking who gets extra spots I think is unfair. Also the jail which has been an ongoing question of you know costs and operations etc. there's a portion that would make the change of what type of classification is needed to administer the jail. The proposal is to put in a police captain instead of a jail administrator. And having done jailing and prison work for many years, including the assembly, the job of managing the jail is different than being a police officer. And so I want to make sure that the job categories and everything else are appropriate.

And so I'm just saying maybe we postpone this for two weeks or send it to the budget committee just so we can really flesh out all the details. But there are some concerns that I have.

David PenalozaItem —

Okay, any other comments? I have a comment. Please. I think we should just ask our executive directors that are here tonight of what, you know, because I've personally met with all three of them, our Parks and Rec Director, our HR Director, and our Chief of Police, and I know that the need across the board of various departments of what the needs are and different personnel that is needed, I think that you know if we could start with the HR director you know though those positions are needed to hire all across the board all the other vacancies

David PenalozaItem —

across City Hall and the police department is that correct Mr. Pham? Yes

good evening Mr. Mayor and counsel Stephen Pham HR director yes sir the HR department is an internal service department our job is to make sure that we have the resources to support the organization especially when it comes to recruitment training development and all of that and since the last recessions the HR department has lost a total of 12 positions today I'm still down by about the same amount of vacancies but the needs for supports and recruitments have continue to grow. The reason I'm asking for one of these positions is to provide

more support to our police department. The Chief and I have made some commitment this year that we would really bolster our recruitment efforts and to do that like PD I need manpower and this will allow me to basically deploy my staff better and able to do training, recruitment and also other services that

requires from the HR department. Thank you. Councillor Salonio. So as an example I mean that's an appropriation request they want money to fund a certain position. We've also heard from I think the staff and my colleagues there's an interest now that there's more resources coming of hiring more librarians of hiring a variety of other positions and I'm not saying that this these jobs aren't important but I'd like for us to look at the budget overall rather than a few select positions, and again, I just view that there is an appropriation related to this, and this is also in the other item.

So I'm just not comfortable supporting it as it is.

Well, look, if it fails today, then it'll just float until it's brought back later. May that be appropriate. So is there a motion either way? Go ahead, Mayor Pro Tem.

What is the amount of the appropriation?

It's on page 55C3 if you want to look at it. Got it.

For the police department, the appropriation is $26,535.

And for human resources, the appropriation would be 85,996 for the staffing requests.

Thank you, Ms. Downs, appreciate it. I'll make a motion to approve.

Is there a second? I'll second. Those in favor, please say aye. Aye.

Those opposed, no. No.

So motion fails. Wait, yes. Did we even talk about, and I apologize, I'm a little distracted, but did we talk about sending this back to committee and maybe just addressing it there? Yeah, we could.

I think later this month we do have a budget committee and so we could. Why don't you make a motion for that?

Yeah. I'll move that it-

Go back to committee for discussion.

The appropriate committee would be edited.

Yeah, and I'll second that motion. those in favor please say aye aye aye aye those approved for going back to committee committee yeah okay those motion carries yeah so with that um i know we want to excuse uh councilor vince sarmiento uh i'm not going to divulge what but uh personal reasons and please uh hope everything works out well Vince and so now we go on to the next item is that 55 Diaz and David I'd entertain a motion Jose do you want to make a motion 55 D

all right can't thank you counselor Iglesias she's getting the role of this she makes the motion he makes a second those in favor please say aye aye we vote yes and we go on to the next item. 65A we already handled, 65B is in boy. 65B is tied to

that prior item so I'd recommend that we also send this back to the Edibet Committee. To the

Budget Committee or whatever? Yes. All right is there a motion? There's a motion for that. Is there a second? Going back to the committee I'll second. Alright those in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye those opposed motion carries. 55-65C I doubt we have five votes for anything. Go ahead.

Paul Gonzalez. Paul Gonzalez followed by Michelle Martinez followed by Chris

Schmidt. Go ahead Paul. Good evening counsel. Paul Gonzalez for the record Mr. Mayor. I am here to speak on the item requesting funding for the memo of understanding to pay the generous raise y'all gave to the Police Officers Association about a month ago. First I want to start by thanking Mayor Pro Tem Juan Villegas and councilmember Cecilia Iglesias a month ago. You were both very principled and courageous in voting no on the MOU and the funding for the MOU. I appreciate that and your community appreciates that. So thank you and I

encourage you tonight to stay strong and in the future because it looks like this is gonna get kicked down the road some more so please stay strong we're depending on you to to execute your fiduciary responsibilities to this city but beyond that I'm asking this council to demonstrate some leadership and courage by recognizing you made a mistake by approving this ridiculous contract it is a bad deal it was a bad deal a month ago it remains a bad deal and I'm asking this council to rescind that bad deal it was not negotiated in

good faith it was not negotiated publicly there was no room for input from the community about our priorities so I would ask that you go back to the drawing board rescind the MOU and then take the time to commission a full forensic audit of our city's finances we need to know what we're dealing with before we go granting 25 million dollar contracts and so that my understanding is that the funds for that audit have already been appropriated all you got to do is call for it so call for it and then once we know what we're dealing

with come back to the table and negotiate contracts in good faith with input from the community thank you very much thank you sir Michelle Martinez

Thank You mayor pro tem and city council members you know I had a different speech today but what I just wanted to share with all of you obviously you all don't have the votes here today a mayor laughing councilman Sarmiento is not here and councilman Reyna has resigned as of March 1st we'd like to articulate to you all here today, and it was mentioned by Councilwoman Iglesias, was over the pensions. I think you all have a fiduciary responsibility. You took an oath in office, and that was to protect this city. And if you don't take that obligation seriously,

I think you need to reconsider being on this dais. And because when you look at a $600 million unfunded liability. That is serious. And yes, Councilman Solorio, many cities across this state are facing this challenge. And so are school districts. But why are we comparing ourselves to them? Why shouldn't we be responsible? We should not be comparing ourselves to Anaheim. We should not be comparing ourselves to the school district because it's been very clear from the prior governor that he was not going to bail cities out. It's been confirmed by this current administration that they're not going to bail cities out. Who they're

going to bail out is school districts and you all have to understand that 58% of our property tax goes to our school district now. So you have to imagine that we care about public safety and we want to make sure that they are highly compensated, that they have the best training, but you have to understand that Santa Ana has been very conservative when it comes to going out for debt. We have very little debt. So guess what? When we have financial insolvency, we are going to go after retirement pensions. That is wrong.

We made a commitment to our employees to making sure that we can pay that retirement. They deserve it. But unfortunately, if you continue on this path, we will end up in insolvency. So I want to urge you and encourage you to move forward and ask our finance director to do a comprehensive financial audit on this city's finances so that we all can understand where this city stands. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Michelle. Thank you, Michelle. Chris Schmidt.

The man, the myth.

Mayor Pro Tem, City Council members. I find it interesting that when residents of the city ask the city for money to make improvements that directly affect our quality of life, we're constantly told there's not money. Yet when items like this come up, all of a sudden we have millions of dollars available. I'm going to give you a list of items that I'm aware of that have been requested. As you know, we haven't been watering trees. There are over 1,500 trees in our city that need to be replaced, that have even fallen or are diseased. A request was made two years ago. We're told we don't have the money.

There are defective curbs and gutters and sidewalks in our city. I reported a defective curb in my neighborhood three years ago, and they said, well, there's a long priority list. We don't have a lot of money in the cement omnibus, so you're just going to have to wait. Santa Anita Park got a state grant for a new synthetic sports turf. We need a million dollars to match that grant. We're told we don't have that money. Raitt Street. Council Member Solorio, how long have we been talking about repairing Raitt Street? So this is the last project. In 2016 the City Council approved

$400,000 for a median drought tolerant drip irrigation system. Public Works designed it. Public Works put out an RFP and then we're told sorry the money's not there how come when we ask for things for our quality of life we're told there's not money there but all of a sudden there's millions of dollars for pay raises before we start giving out money we need to take care of the basics mr city manager fixing potholes fixing sidewalks improving our parks i would really request you go back and ask what needs to be repaired just to fix the quality

of a life in our city before we start handing out millions of dollars in raises thank you thank you

Chris Jairo Cortes.

Good evening members of the council. Good evening councilman Peñalosa. I came here also similar to some of my fellow Santana residents to speak in opposition of this contract. I think one of the things that really concerned me the most was also the lack of public debate that took place before the approval of this contract and the lack of justification that members of this council who voted for this contract provided for their support for this

contract and so I think you know that's something that we need to rectify and And as a resident, as a member of this community, as a community organizer, it's something that really has piqued my interest. And that's why we sent an invitation to Councilman Peñalosa to come before his fellow residents, before his neighbors in Ward 2, and explain his vote. because I think as residents we have a right to know the reasoning behind

supporting actions like this especially as Chris mentioned when we come before the council to request funding for projects that we support we're always faced with the excuse that there's no funding so I would hope that you come to this debate that you come and and explain your decision for this vote and explain to us why this vote is not going to harm our city's financial position. Thank you.

Thank you, Haydum.

Never said anything.

Thank you, Haydum. Madam Clerk, is there any other speakers?

No.

On this item? Okay, thank you. Any comments from the... Yeah. Okay, Council Member Solorio.

Thank you, Mayor Patema. Villegas, we've discussed this a few times. Just two or three key points I'll make. Number one is government agencies by and large are labor organizations. So the bulk of all the costs go towards labor costs that include salaries, pensions, benefits, etc. It's ordinary for city, it's ordinary for school district. So it's always going to be the case that you're spending the lion's share of general fund resources in support of labor costs. All labor organizations have collective bargaining, and so we do go through a long process.

This actually process was about six months late at least, but we do collective bargaining with everybody. The increases are 5% year one, 4% year two, 4% year three. We know that we aren't competing well with other law enforcement agencies. It used to be we were one, two, or three. Now we were about six compared to the stats that I mentioned the last time. This will help. We last year, for example, we had a bad year because we have a lot of separation just due to retirements, for example, or transfers out.

So last year in 2017, per data from the police department, we hired 22 officers, which is actually pretty good, but we lost 28. So actually for last year, we were negative six. So we have some ground to make up. We, at least as of last week, have 64 budgeted but vacant positions in the police department. And so there's a lot of salary savings there. The last time when we did the math, really, there's a lot of resources there that could be paid for by the salary savings. And I know there's the hope that we're going to hire 20 between January, start date between January and the end of June.

I'm hoping that will be the case, but I'm not optimistic honestly. But even if we do, then the benefit would be the chief won't need to spend as much money on overtime. And so that will be helpful as well. So we're not going to go bankrupt anytime soon. And if there are challenges, we're going to correct like other cities and districts do. I believe there's enough resources there that no appropriations is necessary for this year. but I am in support of item number two because it's consistent with what I just said but even if we pass nothing today there are absorbable dollars in the

police department that can fund year one of the increase so I'm not concerned if there's not five votes today or not for either of these items or four for two

all right thank you very much councilmember Iglesias

David PenalozaItem —

I just wanted to say that no invitation was ever sent to me, for the record. I don't know what kind of PR stunt you guys are running, but it was never sent. And second, when you come and stand outside our council chambers and call our police officers criminals and make it public, that's insulting to me, and that's insulting to our law enforcement officers, and your argument is going to lose substance. And it has. because officers are not criminals and that's all I have to say.

Thank you very much, Councilmember Iglesias. And we lost our mayor by the way, he had to leave so.

It's just us four now. Okay, so for this I do have a question for staff on this one. I know that for the appropriations, do we have enough money right now in the police department? Who is going to answer this question?

Thank you, Catherine.

Our projections are that we will not have enough money to satisfy all of the obligations of the police department through June 30th. It's hard to predict. You know, I don't have a crystal ball. But it looks like we will not have enough. I don't know exactly how much that is. But the overtime, we have spent very high overtime during during the first part of the year.

How much is that, how much have we spent of the overtime?

4.3 million on a 5.5 million overtime budget for the first half of the year.

So then we have about 1.6 million that is left? 1.2. Okay, for the police department, okay. So, and I know this is, when you say we don't have enough money right now, but I guess once we start talking about next fiscal year, then I guess the amounts are going to change. But what I would like for you to explain to me is right now in the path that we're going, our budget doesn't seem to sustain or be able to support ongoing raises.

So if you could explain to me the trend that we have right now, which is are we spending more than what we have? I know that Council Member Solorio said that it's happening all over, but just because it's happening all over doesn't mean it has to happen here in Santa Ana. So what we need to do is to make sure that we're doing our fiduciary duty to make sure that we keep the city in the black. So I don't know, I know right now we're in the black, but moving forward, where do you see us going? Because I know this is a three year deal, but then after again, it's a re-opener again and something else.

And it's just only one labor agreement that we're talking about, but then we have the other ones that are going to be coming forward to us. So if you could explain to me what's our practice right now. Are we receiving more than we're spending?

During the budget process, we'll have a more full conversation about our five to ten year outlook on the city's fiscal position. But there are things that we do know that are historically accurate and seem to be accurate going forward. We know that absent Measure X, if you set that aside, we know that our expenditures increase faster than our revenues. That's a fact. It's historically accurate, and this is what we think is going to happen going forward.

Part of the reason that we think this is going to continue to be the case is because of our increasing pension contributions, which have been touched on today and of course the increasing labor costs and labor costs are 60% of the general fund budget. So we do know those things. We also know that

let's see

again it's very difficult to have a full conversation about the future absent the the actual budget discussion. This is an isolated item. We're not looking at the entire budget, but when it comes time to have budget discussions, we will be offering recommendations to the City Council to make sure that we course correct and make sure that we do not overspend

in the future. And I know that you said it's only for one item, but I believe this item is going to affect everything else. So just for transparency purposes, it's good for us to let the public know where we stand financially. And it seems that we're not in a great position to be giving out and appropriating money that we don't have. So this appropriation would come from our general fund, right? That is correct. So our general fund, how much money do we have?

With the mid-year report, this was before the contract was approved. we were estimating that we would be spending approximately just a little bit less than a million dollars, $600,000, more than what we take in. So if we actually do spend all of our appropriations, then we would be spending approximately $5 million more than what we take in for the current fiscal year, 18-19, with this contract increase.

So then that would bring, so what's our general, I mean, our balance, our general fund balance?

We estimate that the general fund balance with the mid-year report, it was estimated to be $56 million at the end of the current fiscal year. Again, if we spend all of the appropriations, including the obligation for this contract, that would leave us with $52 million at the end of the fiscal year. And the city council's reserve policy would require a minimum of 46 million to be kept on hand.

Okay, so then I know we talked about it with the mayor. So in the future then we'll look over, I think this is something for Sonia. We can have something for their new city manager whenever their city manager comes to be one of our priorities to have those study sessions. because I would like for it to be public to see where we are financially. And for us to do a forensic audit, is that something, too, that we can definitely do? And then how long does it take to do a forensic audit?

A forensic audit is usually an audit that's done when you believe that there is some wrongdoing.

So if the city council were to direct us to do a forensic audit, then we would also need direction on what the scope of that audit might be and then obviously funding for it.

Okay, well that's a big conversation with the city manager. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Councilmember Saludio.

Yes, thank you. I know based off what questions we ask, we obviously get different answers and so they communicate different things. First of all, just big picture wise, Measure X passed, even though many of us didn't support it. that's estimated to bring in approximately how much?

$60 million a year.

$60 million a year. Also, about a couple years ago, no cannabis revenue was coming in. This year, I believe, it's estimated to be $7.5 million.

That's approximately right.

It's going to grow. Maybe next year it might be $10 million as an example. So already there, those two buckets are $70 million that we didn't have a couple years ago. The first year cost for this item is 4.3 million and then it adds up with future years, so no question there. But there's plenty of room for other things, and I agree, this is going to set the stage for other collective bargaining contracts, etc. So we're in no collision course with bankruptcy just based off that. With respect to the audit, we do a number of audits.

Your last conclusion is a good one in that if we want to do a special kind of audit, we just got to write up the right scope. But there's various audits on most of our funds. Is that correct that we do a few audits? Yes. We have. One or two that we approve today, as a matter of fact, in our agenda. So I don't want folks to believe that we don't do audits on our funds. With respect to us ending the year this year with $600,000 in the black only, does that assume that the one-time money that this council appropriated, and I showed you the slide, that

one-time money, which I think was $10 million, are you assuming that that would remain in the general fund or are you planning to take it out and that's how we end up at $600,000?

No, that would remain in the general fund.

So even if we keep that in the general fund, you're estimating we're going to end the year only with $600,000 in the black, even with the addition of the Measure X dollars as well?

$600,000 spending more than what we take in, and that was before the approval of the POA contract.

But just to be clear, though, you're saying that even with keeping the $10 million in there and the $15 million through the end of the year and any other savings, you're estimating we're going to end up 600,000 in the red? Yes. Okay, that had not been communicated before. I'm not sure I agree, in particular because of all the vacancies we have in PD. Also with respect to how much the POA contract might be short given vacancies and other items. In your last report that wasn't all in it this time, I think you really, and we reviewed this when we met recently with the chief.

Really after all that we were only like $200,000 short of being able to, with this year's dollars, general fund dollars, absorb the full cost.

You say we have something that says we're only 200,000 short?

And your last identical report that had more information. And maybe we could bring that back another time, but based off the previous report, I'd be happy to review it with anybody, including the budget director and the chief, but we're really only like a $200,000 gap, because there was assumptions made on overtime, how many vacancies we may or may not fill. And I'll tell you right now, and I hate to say, we're already behind on hirings. We thought we might have an additional eight starting by March 20th. An additional eight officers hired by starting March 20th, that's not gonna happen.

We're hoping that we're gonna be able to hire like amount towards the end of the month, but that's not gonna happen. And at the point that you're so short on dollars, you can manage overtime, as well as if you really do hire these 20 new officers between January and June, you're going to need less overtime. So I don't have any questions that the chief and his budget team can't manage through it. I would hope that they're not going to end in the red. And we've had some internal meetings on that and we could debate it up here. But we're behind already in hirings and that always creates savings. And it's not a good situation.

I'd rather fill the savings and not have overtime because we have officers that are too tired. Again, whether there's a motion or not for this, it's not necessary.

Thank you, Council Member Salorio. Thank you. Speak freely, please.

Thank you. If I may clarify, I connected the dots on the $4 million that you were talking about. So we had vacant positions, or at least when we did the mid-year report, we had calculated that we had vacant positions that total a value of $6.5 million. And we indicated that we would be using $2.5 million of that on additional overtime above and beyond what we had budgeted. but so we said that maybe and and the words here are that the four million

would be potentially available but since that time that this report has been written we've learned a lot more about the police department's efforts to recruit and fill positions. Okay if we want to discuss that let's bring up the

chief so we could see where we're at on on hirings and everything else. Maybe this isn't the time, but I just feel like we're misinforming the public, like we're making all these grounds on hiring when we're behind. I think your staff report mentioned that at the time there was 61 vacancies, is that correct?

And as a week ago, we were at 64 vacancies. So already there's three more positions where you're going to have partial years savings on that.

So Chief, if you could give just a general update on, let's start with last year again. I used the numbers that I got from the department saying that last year we hired 22, which was good, one of the better years, but we lost 28 as a function of retirements and separations. Is that accurate?

Yes, it is.

Okay. And through the end of last year, do you remember how many vacancies we had? I think it was 61 either through the end of, I think through the end of December?

Yes, we currently have 64 vacancies.

So we have 64 vacancies now. That wasn't in the staff report. As of March 20th, because I don't know why the department said that that was a particular date that additional folks would start. you had thought that between February 15th when the three of us met we thought between February 15th and March 20th that you would be hiring an additional eight new people as a start date how many do you envision that between that time period February 15th and the and March 20th how many people would have

started and not hiring but start date so at that meeting sir we discussed that we had hired three officers in the month of January right right and that we were targeted to hire an additional eight in the month of March not a specific date

but in the month of March separate communication you said eight by March 20th but and because of the lead time with all these we should know the names of most of these if they are going to start literally in in two three weeks so by March 20th how many folks do you think are going to be on the job so of

the eight that we had discussed four of those will be hired March 25th okay and not an additional four but five will be hired April 8th and the reason for the delay and we're talking about what is essentially two weeks is the department today is down to one polygrapher I've got two additional folks being trained what we're not going to do is we're not going to compromise right you want quality level and quality of officers that we're bringing in so so those additional essentially two weeks is what we're talking about so March 25th

is targeted for four and April 8th for an additional five for a total of nine

Right, but already because it started at the end of the year already there's additional salary savings there because they're being hired two weeks or three or four weeks later and then not in the original staff report. At that point in time there were only 61 vacancies, now there's 64. So I would tell you that all that adds up to at least the $200,000 that at the time we thought we were short. And then the other question would be if you are able to hire those new 20 people between January and the end of June, do you think you might be able to reduce some of the overtime that has been projected,

or do you still feel that you might spend the full amount?

Well, it depends. If they are recruit officers, we do not materialize their service out in the field for about seven months. So the overtime there would continue. If there are lateral officers, once again, it's very limited how much we would save because they'll be in a training program for four months. So we're now into the next fiscal year. So probably not much. We do intend, again, the target is to hire between three to five officers per month moving forward for the balance of this calendar year.

And that would be great. Last year we had a fairly good year on the hiring, 22. So hiring 20 in six months I think is going to be a challenge, but I hope we're successful. And I just expand on this a little bit more, just I think there's a lack of understanding on where we're at with some of these. And again, if we theoretically are only short about $100,000 just between these additional savings right here and your management ability on reducing overtime or other things, it's manageable out of, what's the total size of your department this month, budget wise?

so we are authorized for 383 positions

budgeted the police department financial budget is a hundred and twenty oh the total budget yes yes correct two million so two hundred thousand dollars of that is like point zero four percent or something and so I have faith that that you're going to be able to end the year in the black. Yes, that's my concluding point. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any other comments before I go? Thank you, Chief. You know, everyone spoke. Now I'm going to speak. Chief, you and myself and Council Member Solorio and at the time, Raul Godinez, the city manager, we sat down and we had a very good conversation about hiring people, and you had clear direction and a mission to go out and hire folks because the city needs it, correct? We all talked about that. You said yes. And now you're delivering. Problem is that we can't afford it. Can't even afford the raise, in my opinion. Thank you, Chief. Thank you. Thank you very much.

The raise, in my opinion, that took the money from the personnel that we need. And yeah, our officers work a lot. I care about them very much. Because every day I don on a uniform just like them at my position at the county. I work with this man right over here, this officer. He knows me very well. We walked the streets out here when I was walking Footbeat over here. He was assigned to the Civic Center. I know the good work that our men and women do in our city. They're very brave, and they're very, very professional in what they do. And it's a tough job in this city. This city is very active. And yes, we want to give them a raise.

And yes, they should get good benefits. And yes, you know, their families deserve this. They put everything on the line for all of us here. But we have to be responsible. And I explained myself at the last council meeting when we spoke regarding the MOU. I felt so bad for them that I wrote this letter. And it's in the comments in the staff reports. I wrote this letter to the men and women of the Santa Ana Police Department explaining my position, why I was a no vote on the MOU. Because simply when I asked our director, the finance director, can we afford this? She said no and explained. And I think it fell on deaf ears.

In response to this, I will address this. And with all respect, Jerry Serrano, who I know very well, a friend. But, you know, he has a job to do and I understand. And so he writes this letter to the men and women. And so here I brought these up and I added them to the Granicus so I can address it because I think I need some clarification. And one of the things he addresses in here to the men and women of the police department in this memo, it says here that in the second paragraph that this is a public safety measure. And it's not a public safety measure. It's a regular tax measure.

A public safety measure requires two-thirds votes of the city to go on and, you know, for it to be approved. and all the money goes to law enforcement. So I understand that his intention, but this is wrong. Okay? It's inaccurate. And there's some other inaccurate information here. And the reason I wrote my letter is because I don't want to mislead anyone. There's going to be a lot of noise. I get it. A lot of people don't pay attention to politics. They don't pay attention here. They kind of know what they read in the paper. And that's all they know. It's very unfortunate.

We need more communication, more information out there to the public. But I wrote my letter so I could be clear in my stand. I love our police department. I love all of our employees. But the public safety area is very special to me because, you know, I'm in that area. I'm in that arena. But I believe in being fair for all of our employees. These men, we have so many shortages here at the city. They all work hard. They all deserve a pay raise. Yes, the economy is doing very well right now. but sooner or later, it's going to take a plunge. Who knows when? If it's two years from now, it's five years from now, ten years from now.

So when I hear people talk about Measure X, which that money isn't supposed to go to law enforcement salaries, it's supposed to help with law enforcement, training, vehicles, equipment, repair, things at the jail, things at the PD, that helps with that cost, because they do a lot of work with the homeless. You know, it's a 24-7, you know, operation. And that's why public safety costs so much. But Measured's is to help this city, you know, clean up and get some of the repairs done. And I give my word to the public that that money would be used only for that. And

I will fight for every penny. Yeah, some of it has to go to public safety, and I understand, because that's what it's for. It's in the measure. But it can't all go to salaries. Can't do it. So in here, Mr. Serrano writes about that there's cannabis money. Well, that cannabis money has a policy against it.

That policy says that a third of it has to go to law enforcement, code enforcement, and education because we have to, I believe and we believe in educating our youth that you shouldn't be doing drugs. But cannabis is legal now, so we had to do something. Some of that money has to go back. So that's one thing regarding the funds. The other one is the reserve funds we have, which also has a policy that says that you have to pay it back. So if we borrow money from there, you have to put the money back. So why take it in the first place? And then there's the Measure X money that we talk about.

This city is not going to get better unless we protect that money and we use it for what it's meant for. And I'm surprised that we're hearing up here voices talking about scrounging for money, you know, for everything that you're going to make. I hope we don't operate our homes that way because, you know, being broke is not a good thing. Hey, I've been there. I've been there. And you know what? When you don't have a lot of money, guess what? Your kids don't have a lot of money. so you got to be careful and for us up here if we know that our purse only has so much

you know if this city is not doing well then guess what the rest of the city if the purse is not well the rest of the city is not doing well that's why we're charged with trying to do the right thing we have to be careful we're not going to take things up to the very edge to every last dime oh here we go 200,000 and see if we can make it or give me a break You know what? In the past, you know, and I support, like I was saying, I support our police department very, very much. You know, during the government shutdown, I wrote a letter to Donald Trump,

and I said, hey, we need, if you could please, Mr. President, work with, you know, the House to end the government shutdown because our jail is suffering. We're not getting paid by the U.S. Marshals for it. And that was like a million something a month. Also, our housing, the Section 8 housing money was going to suffer, was going to hit. I wrote one to Donald Trump. I wrote one to Nancy Pelosi. I wrote one to the two senators in our state, Kamala Harris and Feinstein. Thank you very much. And Luke Correa, because they're at the big boy table. We need help. I'm always looking out for our law enforcement.

I went to D.C. to advocate for more funds so we can have a, everyone knows I want to bring a family justice center here, and it needs to go under the police budget. And so I'm doing everything I can to help out. I'm not one of these guys that gives money at the PD, and then I hope that, you know, I buy your loyalty. That's not me. That is not me.

That's the bottom line. Everyone knows and everyone agrees that we need our police department, and we need to do what's best. But, you know, we have to take it a step at a time. And right now, we haven't even collected any Measure X money funds, any Measure X money yet. I can't believe where, you know, this has happened. And so I wanted to make that very, very clear. But in the past, I will give credit to the PD that back in the recession that happened a few years ago, SEIU took a race and they ended up having furloughs. And the PD, they passed their raise, and they said, no, we're not going to. They passed on it.

And they said, we'll wait to help out the city. And that was a great thing. But the fire department back then, no offense to the fire chief here, but the fire department back then sat on a fire. Their union said no. They didn't want to reduce anything. And guess what? They went to OCFA. We ended up having to do that to save money. So, and that was a time during the recession. No one can control that. So in the future, if there's another recession, and we're caught off guard because of these raises and all the purrs, costs, and everything, what are we going to do? Are we going to do it? Is the PD next?

Do we have to contract with the Sheriff's Department because we can't afford our own PD because they cost themselves out? Come on. They price themselves out of a job? No. I'm trying to protect it. And that's all I got to say about that because there's no more. We don't have five people to approve number one here, so I think we would have to go with option two on this item. Is that correct, Madam City Attorney?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

That is for your consideration and the staff recommendation is that you adopt item number two as your second option.

Well, I have a motion. Option two is to leave things alone.

That's all we have because we don't have five so we can't do one.

Leave things as is and just with understanding that the police department to fully operate through June 30th with what they already have.

So is there a motion?

I'll move it.

David PenalozaItem —

I'll second.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Okay, very good. Motion passes. Next item, Madam Clerk.

That would be the special open meeting item 65D, recommendation that the city council discuss and direction to staff regarding the declaration of a vacancy and appointment to Ward 4 council office as required by city charter section 403. the candidate application process, and possible dates to conduct candidate interviews.

Is there a motion?

65B, do we have speakers on here? Do we have any speaker cards for this item?

Okay, D Delta. Okay. I'm sorry. So we will hear the speakers. And the first speaker is

Carl. Let me get my glasses on here.

We got 65 D Delta. Go ahead, Carl. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Thank you council for being here tonight. You really in the next few weeks have a golden opportunity to resolve a wrong that was done last year. And I think tonight I really emphasize the fact that you need to have another person up in this diet. I would really strongly suggest that we do not wait till November to fill this position. I live in Ward 4. I sit on the ETAC council which is very happily legally to do, but that position was put, I was put on there by David Benavides, and the position should be filled right now by the new council member, but we don't have someone.

So by waiting until November, it means Ward 4 is not gonna have representation. I've talked to the acting city manager about this committee forming to look over the use of the tax money, and he says, go to your council person and let them recommend you, while I don't have a council person. so I would really appreciate if you end up appointing someone to fill that position I also would like a man that Phil Becerra be the person that you put there and the reason why is Phil knows the city very well this opportunity to talk to him knows that he knows the city he's performed on the Planning Commission very well and

everybody on the Planning Commission he has always come prepared and if you talk to him you'll realize that he really studies the issues he gets out and talks to citizens including neighborhood associations he knows that the city wants so my recommendation is please don't go to a November vote fill this position and I recommend that Phil be put in that

position thank you thank you sir Stephanie Ortiz no Stephanie

Michelle Martinez

Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem and members of the City Council. Twelve years ago when I was on this dais, we had to go through this process as well because Councilman Solorio went to the State Assembly, and that's how we were able to appoint Councilman Vince Sarmiento, who I did not support that appointment at that time, just to be very clear.

And what I want to state here today is the following. what the public is wanting to ask and what they've observed as of recent is that there's a culture of pay to play. And that culture has to end. And there is rumor out there that there's possibly that you may appoint someone. And there's two fashions controlling that appointment. I hear that it's a developer. I hear that is an interest group that you are all considering and passed a budget approval for raises or trying to.

And so I'm not going to make any assumptions here. But what I want to be very clear that I've sat back in that dais. I've sat in those closed sessions. I know what happens. And so I want to urge all of you to please note that there are higher authorities looking at what's happening in this city. And if I am asked for a deposition or to be subpoena, I want to state for the record here today that what I know, I will put in the record.

Enough is enough. There are former mayors and former city council members that are starting to get active. Because what is happening? Who is running this city? You were elected by the people and for the people to make decisions. You are all intelligent. You are all great people. I don't dispute that. You all have great hearts. But who elected you? Special interest groups did not elect you. Developers did not elect you. The people did. I'm a voter. I'm a resident. I pay taxes here. People care about the employees.

I'm not here. Look, it's 9 o'clock. Man, I didn't expect to come here before you all to speak. I wanted to have fun, enjoy my life. but I have a responsibility as a resident to tell you that whoever you choose in this appointment, if you choose to go to appointment, make sure that you're doing it because it's the right person

for the job. Thank you. Thank you, Michelle. John Fashima. John.

Okay, last of Pedroza.

Okay, Pedroza going once, going twice. Yes? Okay, very good. That's the end of the speaker cards. Do we have any comments from the council members?

Questions?

Council member Soloco.

Go ahead, go ahead.

Go ahead, Council Member Iglesias.

I just have a question just for clarification. Madam Attorney, what is the process now? We're here now to fill this vacancy, so where do we go from here?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Okay, so the very first step in your process is that you're going to declare the position vacant. The resignation letter was submitted.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

The very first step in your process is for the city council, under the terms of the city charter, has a duty to declare the position vacant. That's what one part of the item is for you this evening. So you just take that action to declare the position vacant. Once you do that, you have 30 days from the date of the vacancy, and the charter reads as follows. It doesn't say the city council may. It says the city council shall fill the vacancy by an appointment. However, if you fail to fill the vacancy by the appointment, then you must call a special election.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

So I think the next step in your process tonight is to first declare the position vacant, And then the second step would be to give direction to your city manager and staff and your city clerk's office as to what kind of process you'd want to follow to potentially fill the vacancy. If you try in good faith to fill the vacancy, it doesn't occur because you don't have the necessary votes, then you would be pushed into having a special election.

What's the application process? What does that look like?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

We know that you had an application process back in 2006. We can, as one option, take that process out and dust it off and send it to you all to take a quick look at. You've had some other cities recently here in the county, including the city of Orange, go through a process. There's various staff reports from throughout the state of California that staff has already gathered. So really the next step is up to you. What do you want the application process to look like? And that's why this item's on the agenda tonight, so that we can either A, you give us direction, We can schedule a special meeting at which you can take action or

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

we can come back to you on the 19th based on the direction you give us tonight.

Councilmember Salorio.

Yes, I think for tonight one of the more critical things is that we just for formalities purposes do declare the vacancy. And then I think in addition to that we can give direction on process and other items. Regarding the latter, in addition to this meeting which was good that we put on the agenda and when we're discussing it, I would suggest that we do a Nixle announcement. I would suggest that that Nixle announcement and related information is put on our social media platforms and our website. I would suggest and maybe staff looking at some of the recent things like what the school district did and

in Fullerton in particular that individuals be asked to submit letters of interest, address, resumes, something indicating their interest in being considered and that between now and our next City Council meeting that they provide that information to us. And then I'd like for this item to be on the next agenda so that if we do get good candidates and maybe that night we do in interviews that we have the opportunity to make an action that night or Or to take other steps then. And our mayor is not here, but I do plan on talking to the mayor and staff on.

Is there a need for a ad hoc committee or a special meeting to screen the number of folks down or to do some initial interviews? But I feel like we don't have enough folks here tonight to address that piece, which is why I think just for tonight, declaring the vacancy, putting out some initial information,

requesting these interest items and for it to be provided to the clerk's office because that's probably the most universal interface with the public unless if the staff wants it to be sent somewhere else. But those are my initial thoughts, at least on some basic steps. Thank you.

Madam City Attorney. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Council Member.

David PenalozaItem —

I have a comment real quick. I don't know if we, so, and I know I asked you this already, We just want to clarify for the record and so the people in the public could know. Yes, last night I was at the Park Santiago neighborhood with the 25-25 meeting and a lot of residents were asking me. And I was trying to be very careful because I wasn't sure exactly what the process was. And so there's a 30-day window, correct, from March 1st, which was last Friday. So the clock's been running. So now we're five days in, correct?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Correct.

David PenalozaItem —

And if we don't meet that window, we go to a special election, which would be November of this year?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Correct.

David PenalozaItem —

Correct. And this is just, I'm asking the questions that I was asked last night by residents. And this, an appointment would have to be, I'm not comfortable with an ad hoc as well I know, because I want to make sure that everyone's involved in the process, so that's important. And I just wanted to make sure that that was clarified with the 30-day window and when that expires.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Yeah, that will be March 30th, I believe, as calendared by the City Clerk's Office. So if you have not voted, if at least four of you do not vote to make an appointment, it would have to be an individual from Ward 4 as those boundaries existed when the election first occurred in November of 2018. And the only qualification that you would have to, that one person would have to satisfy, is they will have to have shown that they've been a resident in that ward for at least one year.

David PenalozaItem —

One year, okay.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Correct.

David PenalozaItem —

And I agree with what Council Member Solorio said about the mixo and putting it out on our social media platforms. But if I could just make a suggestion that we're very specific, bullet points, very simple on those rules. you know one-year resident we will be asking for or I don't know what the what the yeah and and it would be the old or current ward for boundaries not the the new ones that were voted in last fall and I think these things are important to make sure that are clearly stated just so that the community really

David PenalozaItem —

understands the process because up until last night I was still kind of unsure of what that was so that's important that's that's specified yeah I just like to

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

mention this is really important for us who are taking notes and trying to make sure that we do what the council asks when one council member gives us direction or what sounds authoritative direction really has to come in the in the in the form of a motion so I just didn't know if councilmember Slaria was making a motion or whether you're having dialogue and discussion not yet okay so I just want to make sure when you refer to that just so you all might want to take your notes because when you make the motion, I try to capture as much as I can,

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

but sometimes we don't get everything because you all give us different directions and we don't get a clear motion.

Madam City Attorney, so the proper way to declare the vacancy would be from you because you received the letter from Mr. Reyna?

No, the council would declare the vacancy.

Okay, so if I can get a motion or Jose, if you can help us with a motion on declaring the vacancy.

Yeah, just at least to get us started, and we have a boilerplate of some recommendations. So my motion would be first to declare a vacancy in,

to declare the vacancy in Ward 4 as required by City Charter Section 403. So that's number one. And that we'll be pursuing an appointment, also pursuant to the same charter section. Process wise, we are directing staff to do outreach via its existing communication platform, which are Nixle, social media, our website. We want to have very specific and simple information about

what makes one eligible, which includes where they live, which boundaries, expectations. We also need to mention that we need a letter of interest, a resume, or some other document showing their interest and and ability to meet the qualifications and the reasons for running. And that with respect to interviews, at a minimum, we consider having interviews at the next city council meeting.

And I'll leave it at that because apparently on ad hoc and others, there's not yet that interest. So I think right now just for minimum communications, I think that'll get us started. And if in between now and then or at the following meeting, we could take into account other items. And if there are friendly amendments to add anything else to that motion, I'd be more than open. But I think those are the basic elements.

To bring it back, Council Member Iglesias.

Just for clarification, so this is just to say there's a vacancy and that we're moving forward with a process, which is by the sounds of it, is something that we've done in the past when the other appointment had happened.

Correct, it was done in December 4th of 2006.

Okay, so, and it incorporated a lot of what Council Member Soloria was saying.

Actually, that's correct. I do have the boilerplate from that year, and basically what he has conveyed, we will follow.

Okay, so then we're giving them a deadline to apply by whenever it, how much of that?

Or before the next City Council meeting.

What's the deadline to apply? Because I think that's going to be something. Maybe staff could suggest a deadline.

When is it Tuesday for an excellent council meeting?

Which is next week.

Yeah, that's where you're supposed to. So ideally before this, so it could be included in the agenda item. But we may have some late entries that can be and should be considered the night of. So I don't want to preclude that, but maybe we could say that it'd be preferable if they do it by what? Noon on Tuesday, what's the exact date?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

That's the 11th, I understand.

Noon, Tuesday, March 11th, 12th?

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Tuesday the 12th.

Yeah, so noon Tuesday the 12th. Because even if we were to set that as a hard deadline, again missing some people here. And if we get some very good applications after that just because of the short window that we have. We could still consider them.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

Well, my advice to you as a city attorney would be to give a hard and fast deadline, even if you want to extend that deadline. Okay, that's fair. Because when we do that.

We can always extend a deadline. So it's a deadline to submit this information to the clerk's office in writing or via email, but it needs to be in the city's receipt in the city clerk's office by noon on Tuesday, March 12th.

So there's clear direction from the staff to the staff?

That could be modified later, but at least I think it meets some basic elements.

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

One thing I just throw out there for the city council's consideration is you actually mentioned, Councilmember Salario, some of the other cities that have done this. more recently and I don't know if it was done in our 2006 process is they did have applicants complete at the time of their application a form 700 so that you would have you would also know what interest might be precluding them from participating in decisions. Don't know if you want to do that but I know that some cities are doing that now because they've had situations where they've appointed people only to find out

Sonia R. CarvalhoItem —

that maybe they had a big project coming up or something of that nature and so I don't know if that's something you want to consider. I'm recommending that

I am recommending that we add that. That's fine, I'll accept that as a current amendment. Okay, I'll second the motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. Okay, we're going to recess the City Council meeting and convene a joint session of the City Council and the Housing Authority. We will have item 80A. Move the item. Second.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay, motion carries. Next item is ADB. Can I have a motion? Move the item.

Second. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay, those opposed? Okay, motion carries. I'm going to recess the joint session, convene to the Housing Authority meeting.

Let's see if we can have a motion to approve any minutes from the January 15th meeting and the February 5th meeting. And accept all the excused absences.

Do we need a motion, Madam Clerk, to accept those minutes?

Yes, motion to accept.

Okay, is there a motion to approve? So moved. Second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Okay, we're going to move on to the business calendar. the joint session of the city council and housing authority agency

those items have already been considered at the regular open session

ADA and ADB. Okay we're going to move on to adjourn the housing authority meeting and reconvene the city council meeting and we have 90A the city manager's comments. Mr. City Manager.

Thank you Mr. Mayor Proctel. I just want to let you know there's a Willoway ad hoc meeting on March 13th. The mayor's not here He's heading up that ad hoc to reach out to him separately. There's also some community budget meetings coming up on Tuesdays as well, March 13th, March 20th, and March 26th, and March 28th. The primary goal of these meetings is to seek community input and begin to develop the next year's city budget.

The orange, oh, the O.C. streetcar construction is coming up. Construction work began yesterday on the future location of their maintenance hall.

Down near 5th Street, so we'll see some movement there. Community members can expect the presence of some crews and increased truck traffic due to that construction project. We're excited to get that moving along. You'll also see some potholing activities, meaning some utilities are exploring areas of our street. in the street car league in preparation of future construction of the street car. And with that, I'm going to approve the city member.

Thank you, Mr. City Manager. And we're going to move on to the public comment, and I apologize for not hearing the comments first. Do we have Tiffany Huang in the audience?

Welcome.

Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem and City Council members. I'm here to talk about the homeless shelter that is going to be built on 2229 South Yale Street. It's going to be in replacement of the Omega Engineering Building. It's approximately 600 beds. Two weeks ago we had a community meeting where approximately 150 members of the Santa Ana residents showed up and we did discuss this.

It's very important to us. We feel like the location is not good and needs to be changed. Currently, there is three schools within a half-mile radius of that location. One of the schools is Mitchell Elementary. There's also Valley High and Godinas High, as well as the Centennial Park. These are all locations where children are, and it concerns me that there's going to be a homeless shelter within the vicinity of those children.

I'm concerned about the safety of the children as well as the residents. We would like a change of location for the homeless shelter. We would request a public hearing where we can further discuss this change in location if possible.

and I just want to say this is a near and dear topic to me that's why I stayed until the end of the meeting to discuss this I do have two children at home one three-year-old and a newborn

so this is really important to us thank you thank you very much family it's important to all of us

and your words are heard loud and clear. Mr. Carlo Bonini, last speaker.

Mayor Pro Tem and council that's left. I'm sorry I missed the last city council meeting, but I was stuck in Arizona at a soccer tournament.

What I've been hearing and seeing with the city, plus what's going on with the budget. I can tell you right now, the people of the city of San Antonio know when the city gets hot, where a lot of officers need to be involved, they're going to use that money up. It's just going to happen.

I heard the past week that I was here with some people considered about main place. Big development's going to go in there and everything like this. But some of the retail people that are over there are talking about leaving. Because even during the holiday season, it's hard to get in and get out. So if people are planning to put a big development over there, I don't see the main place lasting. And I got a feeling it's going to end up like Laguna Malls. Well, there's nothing there anymore except for a few shops.

So on all these developers coming in here, you need to press them hard. Get things that you, the city, want. If they wanted to put a development in, then you get the city. Just like where I live down in the south side of town, where Sigurdsturm High School is in Greenville, I would have had that street widen. that had another turn pocket lane put in. They could have shrunk the property back a little bit, but it's still the same. Nothing happened. So hopefully we can start seeing in the future to get things for the people of Santa Ana. If developers want to come in here, then you need to request what they want.

And I hope it gets better. I'm sorry that Ward Ford is empty now. It was a wasted vote. I thought he was going to be good, but now it's gone. So hopefully the next person that steps in the pocket will do good for the City of Santa Ana. Okay, I've been here for a long long time in this city and I hope somebody that's been here a little bit longer than me see the future for the City of Santa Ana to go on. Thank you.

Thank you sir. We're going to move on to City Councilmember comments. Can I start with Councilmember Solorio? Any comments?

Sure. A few things. by the way, the very specific date on the 150th anniversary for the City of Santa's founding is October 26th. So put that on your calendar. I know that City staff is beginning to work on this with other city employees, but also external partners like the Heritage Museum of Orange County, Downtown Inc., and the I've seen in a business council. I do know that there are some budget items that maybe haven't been approved related to that. If there is a need where they need resources sooner than later, maybe under the city manager's budget authority.

If there's a need between now and the end of the fiscal year, that could be considered that way. But again, the celebration or the main date is October 26th. So we do have a lot of time, but it's a good time to be planning. I want to thank the school district, all the downtown organizations and city staff that were part of Boca de Oro this past weekend. A lot of rain, but there was still a lot of good activity, a lot of good volunteers, and a lot of students showing what they could do on the performance site at many levels. And then finally, I do know that we're beginning these budget presentations.

And I do like that the focus will be on input because the city council has yet really to give staff direction on what type of positions we want to fill, what type of programs we want done, what we're going to do with Measure X dollars next year. And so I would worry that we get too out front on what we're promising the community without getting council input and direction.

I know that because there's a new council some of the committees are still being formed and a critical one is the budget committee because I think they should have at least the start on working on some of those things and ultimately everything goes back to the council. but there's no issues with getting just general input but without overstepping, but that is good because we do wanna have a lot of input out in the community and here in these council chambers. So I just put that out there and I look forward to working with our city staff on coordinating when that meeting date might be because I think per the council's action,

I think it's supposed to be sometime in March. So thank you. Council Member Penalosa.

David PenalozaItem —

Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem. I just wanted to, again, thank Upward Bound, operating out of Santa Ana College. I used to be in the program 15 years ago, which helps low-income students that are disadvantaged in our city kind of bridge that gap between high school and college and give them the opportunities that they usually wouldn't have normally. They invited me to Santa Ana College to speak to the current kids participating in Upward Bound and Talent Search and Student Support Services through the TRIO programs, which are federally funded programs that help a lot of disadvantaged students here in Santa Ana. So thank you.

David PenalozaItem —

I was able to talk to them and award some scholarships to them. Present, I should say. and this Thursday I'll also be presenting a couple scholarships at Saddleback High School my alma mater so Saddleback so that's exciting five students from Santa Ana local schools as well looking forward to that and mr. City Manager acting City Manager thank you for the work you've been doing and staff and And that's it. Thank you. Good night.

Councilmember Iglesias.

Okay, so I just have a quick question, I guess, in its process. I attended the, I think it was the Neighborhood Association meeting. We had a joint association meetings, and I believe you were there too, when Supervisor Doe and his office talked about the homeless shelter that's being proposed at Yale Street. I know that what he expressed was that it's already gone through escrow. I mean, the building's been, I guess, bought already. But my question to you would be, what is the process now? So I don't know if that's something that we can put, like, for an 85A so we can have more of a discussion here with the council.

And what the process would be moving forward, the input that the city is going to have on the operations of that shelter. because the way they explained it was that, like the young lady said, it's going to be about a 600-bed shelter. And what they're trying to do is close the bus terminal here in downtown and put all of those beds at that shelter. So there's about approximately 400 or maybe a little bit more here at the bus terminal.

and also the link is not a permanent shelter so I believe the reports that we get about 175 280 so I believe that's where the 600 is gonna come we know so they can fill those beds but once they fill those beds at 600 then there's going to be need again for another shelter so my question is if we could we can put this like an 85A and we can bring it back to the council so we can talk about it more in depth of what's, you know, what the process is for the operations.

Because in that side of town, we feel that we were left out of the conversation. And if we could have an impact on the operations, I know that every city should be able to provide shelter, especially now with other, I think, five or six cities in South County that are being sued for not providing the amount of beds. So where are we as a city in saying what is our responsibility for our residents only? Not taking in to being a regional homeless shelter because I believe that we're going to be getting people from all over the county.

and my understanding it's about 125 beds that are allocated just for Santa Ana and the rest is going to be for countywide. So is that something that I would like for us to see if we can put it as an 85-8 so we can have a further discussion on how we can, as a city, have an input in the operations of it.

Let me give you some background. As you all know, you've approved an MOU with the county to share the responsibility and to share some of the funding for this future site. It'll be up to the county to build it and operate it through probably a service provider, and they'll be doing that. We have asked in that agreement that the council has approved, we've asked for a seat at the table regarding the Memorandum of Understanding and the operations plan. because what we've all learned is how you operate these facilities is key to avoiding impacts to the neighborhood and impacts to the surrounding.

You'll see a very different environment between the link and the courtyard. I think we all can agree upon that as watching it. What I would like to suggest, though, is allow me to invite the county to come speak to the council at a future council meeting and give you an update on that program. And then certainly you can do an 85A any time after that.

Okay, so then they'll let us know, so would it be at the next meeting? Because the thing is, I know he's very busy, so if it could be at the next meeting so he can give us an update.

He certainly has staff. I certainly wouldn't pressure the supervisor himself if he wasn't available, but I would certainly invite him to send a representative to speak to the council so you can move this along in a timely manner. Okay. I can reach out to the county if that's what you would like.

Yes, because I want us to have an input on the operations and also maybe, I know they've already bought the building, but what input do we have as a community to really say, you know what, it's not the proper place because there's a lot of, like it was shared from the last speaker, we do have, actually there's more schools. We have Jackson, which is in our neighborhood, Windsor Village. We have Mitchell Elementary. We also have Godinus and Valley. And Adams is not that far from there either. So there's a lot of other schools. And we also have the Heritage Museum of Orange County.

So having the presentation is just going to be kind of an update. But I would like to have more of a further discussion.

Well, I think it starts your dialogue. Start your dialogue to ensure that you do have a seat at the table regarding the operations plan for this facility.

And then one more, if I may. Yeah? And I know you want to go home. But we talked about, you know, the impact of the agreement that was approved for the police officers. Is there a way that we could also put that like an 85A to talk more about the impact of what it's going to have on our budget? So this way when we talk about our, when we have our study sessions for the budget, we already kind of have a heads up information on what's coming.

I think 85A is the way for you to gain the adherence of other council members to agendize something in the future. it's a way for you to start a conversation regarding a policy and certainly 85a would do that it wouldn't be the time to really dive in and expect a full-blown staff report but it certainly is the time to get your brethren on board to direct staff to put something

on the future agenda all right thank you uh madam clerk and i apologize i drawing a blank on the name of the gentleman that's helping us um well not michael but michael yeah but the uh larry yes larry up larry herrera he is welcome larry and he's joining us here uh this evening at the council uh meeting and he's helping us out at the city i want to say welcome to him i also want to thank the rest of the staff for the hard work that they've done for the last couple of weeks we We appreciate it.

I know they got the agenda out early so we can get to work and discuss and work on it. And also I want to thank, personally I want to thank our acting city manager, Stephen Mendoza. Keep up the good work, sir. Thank you very much for holding the fort down. And our next council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 19th. And with that, I adjourn this meeting. Good night, everyone.

I love you

Thank you.