[00:00:03]
CALLING TONIGHT'S MEETING TO ORDER.
[CALL TO ORDER]
PLEASE TAKE ROLL. COUNCIL MEMBER LUNA.PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER BURKHOLDER, PRESENT.
I'M HERE. MAYOR PRO TEM BHAT-PATEL HERE.
ALL FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.
MISS LUNA, WILL YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE? 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. I HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING.
[ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONCURRENT MEETINGS]
THE COUNCIL WILL BE SERVING AS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL AND THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS ON CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NUMBER FIVE. NEXT IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD MARCH 12TH OF 24.THE MEETING. THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD MARCH 26TH OF 24.
MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AS RECITED BY THE MAYOR.
NEXT IS PUBLIC COMMENT, I HAVE TO READ THE FOLLOWING.
[PUBLIC COMMENT]
THE BROWN ACT AND THE CITY'S MEETING RULES ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT ON ITEMS, NOT ON THE AGENDA, AS LONG AS THE COMMENTS ARE REGARDING MATTERS WITHIN THE CITY COUNCIL'S SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION.INFORMATION ON HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE COUNCIL MEETING IS ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THIS AGENDA.
THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVED NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR A TOTAL OF UP TO 15 MINUTES.
IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT NO ACTION MAY OCCUR ON ANY NON-AGENDA ITEMS. WHEN MAKING YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE TREAT OTHERS WITH COURTESY, CIVILITY AND RESPECT.
PLEASE CALL THE FIRST SPEAKER, MARY LUCID, FOLLOWED BY PAIGE TICINO.
WORDS MATTER, DON'T THEY? AND SO DOES THE SPIRIT OF INCLUSION AND THE SPIRIT OF EITHER ACCEPTING PEOPLE OR GETTING TO KNOW THEM, OR NOT GETTING TO KNOW THEM.
YOU CAN INCLUDE PEOPLE OR YOU CAN EXCLUDE PEOPLE.
YOU CAN LIE OR SHALL WE SAY, BE MISTAKEN.
SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE.
BUT WORDS ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF YOU KEEP SAYING SOMEBODY IS WHAT A GGRESSIVE. IF YOU KEEP SAYING THAT SOMEBODY WALKS AGGRESSIVELY.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.
BUT THE SPIRIT OF INCLUSION AND THE SPIRIT OF ACCEPTING BLACK, WHITE, GREEN.
WELL, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY GREEN PEOPLE, BUT IF I DO, I'D ACCEPT THEM BECAUSE I HAVE A GOOD SPIRIT.
I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED IN THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE LEVEL OF CARE THAT'S SHOWN TO SENIOR CITIZENS AT THE SENIOR CENTER.
THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BOTHER YOU ALL, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
DON'T YOU? ONE OF THESE DAYS YOU MAY BE OLD.
WHO KNOWS? THE RUSSIANS MAY BOMB US AT ANY MOMENT.
OR A TERRORIST OR THE EARTHQUAKE WILL GET US.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE STILL HERE, AND WE CAN PRACTICE LOVING KINDNESS OR WE CAN PRACTICE COVER YOUR
[00:05:05]
I DON'T KNOW WHY SOME PEOPLE FEEL THEY HAVE TO COVER WHAT ARE THEY DOING? MAYBE THEY'RE NOT DOING ENOUGH.I HOPE THAT YOU WILL, IN THE SPIRIT OF INCLUSION, OPEN UP THE DOOR TO THE SENIOR CENTER AND IMPROVING IT.
AND BY THE WAY, THE LIBRARIES ARE STILL CLOSED ON SUNDAY.
BUT I KNOW YOU'RE SAVING MONEY, SO MORE POWER TO YOU.
BUT WE EXPECT A LOT FROM YOU AS YOU EXPECT A LOT FROM US.
SO I'M HERE TO INVITE YOU TO AN EVENT ON SATURDAY.
THIS IS OUR 10TH ANNUAL ENDANGERED SPECIES EVENT THAT WE HOST WITH BUENA VISTA AUDUBON.
TECHNICALLY NOT IN CARLSBAD, BUT THE LAGOON.
THE BORDER GOES RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE LAGOON.
SO THIS IS AN EVENT WE'VE BEEN HOSTING FOR A LONG TIME.
SO WE'LL HAVE BATS AND SNAKES AND A LOT OF ACTIVITIES FOR KIDS.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU SOME FLYERS SO YOU CAN SHARE WITH OTHER PEOPLE.
PAIGE I'M SORRY YOU SAID THE DATE, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR THE TIME OR THE LOCATION FOR PEOPLE.
IT'S 10 TO 2 AT THE AUDUBON NATURE CENTER JUST ACROSS THE BORDER IN OCEANSIDE.
I'M HERE FOR A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS, SO I THOUGHT I'D DO A PUBLIC COMMENT TOO.
AND WHEN THAT CONCLUDED, I WAS ASKED BY AN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP CALLED NORTH COUNTY ADVOCATES TO TESTIFY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT LAWSUIT ALLEGING THAT CARLSBAD HAD NOT ADEQUATELY ENFORCED THE VOTER ADOPTED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND I RELUCTANTLY AGREED TO TESTIFY ON THEIR BEHALF.
THE TRIAL FOCUSED ON TRAFFIC, OPEN SPACE AND PARKS, AND AFTER CAREFULLY WEIGHING SUBSTANTIAL TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE, THE JUDGE CAME TO THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THESE YET.
BUT FIRST, ON TRAFFIC, THE JUDGE WROTE, QUOTE, THE CITY HAS IN PRACTICE TAKEN THE POSITION THAT IF THEIR ROADS AND INTERSECTIONS BECOME TOO CONGESTED TO MEET GROWTH MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, THEN THE CITY CAN MODIFY THE STANDARD AND OR CHOOSE TO EXEMPT ANY ROAD OR INTERSECTION THAT DOES NOT MEET IT.
ON OPEN SPACE, THE JUDGE CONCLUDED, QUOTE, SIMILAR TO THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ISSUE, THE CITY CAN CLAIM COMPLIANCE ONLY BECAUSE IT HAS EXEMPTED 17 OF THE 25 ZONES FROM THE PERFORMANCE STANDARD.
THE COURT DOUBTS THAT THIS IS WHAT THE VOTERS HAD IN MIND WHEN THEY ENACTED GROWTH MANAGEMENT.
AND FINALLY, ON PARKS, THE JUDGE STATED, QUOTE, THE CITY CLAIMS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PERFORMANCE STANDARD, BUT THE CITY'S COMPLIANCE IS ACHIEVED, IF AT ALL, ONLY THROUGH USE OF QUESTIONABLE DEFINITIONS OF PARK ACREAGE THAT A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD NOT CONSIDER TO BE PARKS.
IN ADDITION, THE CITY ASSERTS THAT IT IS ALLOWED TO TREAT PLANNED FUTURE PARKS TOWARD THE PERFORMANCE STANDARD, EVEN THOUGH THE SCHEDULED COMPLETION DATE IS FAR OFF INTO THE FUTURE. FROM THE COURT'S PERSPECTIVE, THIS ALSO APPEARS TO BE A QUESTIONABLE MANIPULATION OF THE PERFORMANCE STANDARD, AND THE JUDGE EVENTUALLY CONCLUDED THAT, QUOTE, THE COURT BELIEVES THAT THE CITY IS NOT ADHERING TO THE SPIRIT OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT.
FROM THE COURTS PERSPECTIVE, THE CITY HAS IMPLEMENTED A PURPORTED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT IS LARGELY ILLUSORY BECAUSE THE CITY SIMPLY CHANGES THE PLAN OR EXEMPTS ITSELF FROM COMPLIANCE WHENEVER IT CANNOT COMPLY.
ULTIMATELY, THOUGH, THE CITY'S ATTORNEYS CITED SOME APPELLATE CASE OPINIONS THAT SUGGEST THE CITY HAS THE LEGAL RIGHT TO DO ALL THESE THINGS, AND THE JUDGE AGREED WITH THAT ASSESSMENT, STATING, QUOTE, APPELLATE CASE LAW APPEARS TO ALLOW THE CITY TO DO THESE THINGS.
I JUST WANTED TO READ THESE INTO THE RECORD, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THEM.
SO I KNOW MAYBE THE CITY IS PROUD THAT THEY DEFEATED THE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP IN THIS LAWSUIT.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE CITY REALLY WINS.
AND ON A SEPARATE MATTER ON ON MY DRIVE OVER HERE, I'M A LITTLE BIT SHAKEN BECAUSE I WAS DRIVING ON LA COSTA AVENUE TO GET HERE, AND AND THIS TOPIC WILL COME UP LATER AND THERE WERE TWO CARS ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER IN THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT LANE, AND A LARGE SUV SWERVED
[00:10:03]
OVER TO THE RIGHT.THE CAR ON THE RIGHT THEN SWERVED INTO THE BIKE LANE.
AND THERE WAS A BICYCLIST THERE THAT I COULD HAVE BEEN KILLED.
AND I'LL BRING THIS UP IN THE.
THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS.
NEXT IS CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ONE THROUGH EIGHT.
[8. ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE 2023 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT, AND APPROVAL OF A ROADWAY RECONFIGURATION AND ASSOCIATED LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHBOUND EL FUERTE STREET FROM FARADAY AVENUE TO PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, CIP PROJECT NO. 6001-23SS]
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON ANY OF THOSE? YES. YES.STEVE LINKY ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
EXCUSE ME. I'M SORRY TO THE SPEAKER.
SO I'M GOING TO LEAVE AND THEN I'LL COME BACK FOR THE OTHER ITEMS. EXCUSE ME.
I WAS BEHIND TWO CARS ON LA COSTA AVENUE GOING EASTBOUND.
THE THE LARGE SUV IN THE LEFT LANE SORT OF CREEPED OVER AS WE WERE GOING AROUND A CURVE.
AND THE, THE THERE WAS A WHITE SEDAN AND IT OVERREACTED, I WOULD SAY, BECAUSE BUT THE CARS WERE VERY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER, OVERREACTED AND LURCHED TO THE RIGHT. AND THERE WAS A BICYCLIST RIGHT THERE AND I'M STILL MY HEART IS POUNDING FROM WHAT I WITNESSED.
I'M JUST GOING TO SKIP THE REST OF IT.
I THINK YOU ALL KNOW MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE NARROWED TRAFFIC LANES.
ALL THE GUIDELINES SAY THAT THEY SHOULD BE 11FT.
BUT THEIR RESPONSE AT THAT MEETING WAS THAT THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALTRANS GUIDELINES BECAUSE THEY WERE GRANTED A DESIGN EXCEPTION TO NOT FOLLOW THE STANDARD, AND THAT THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE FEDERAL AASHTO GUIDELINES BECAUSE GUIDELINES ARE, QUOTE, REALLY ONLY SUGGESTIONS THAT THE CITY CAN FOLLOW OR NOT FOLLOW. SO THE CLAIM THAT THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THESE ESTABLISHED GUIDELINES ACTUALLY RELIES ENTIRELY ON THE FACT THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN IGNORE THEM.
SO THIS GOES BACK TO MY ORIGINAL CONCERN IS THAT THESE ARE LOCAL DESIGN DECISIONS BEING MADE BY LOCAL AND LOCAL ENGINEERS, AND THEY MAY BE ACCURATE AND THEY MAY NOT BE, BUT THEY'RE NOT CONSISTENT WITH NATIONAL GUIDELINES.
AND I WOULD CALL THEM LOCAL EXPERIMENTS.
AND I KNOW MR. FRANK AND MR. KIM WHO ARE MAKING THESE DECISIONS THEY WANT THE BEST FOR EVERYBODY, AND I WANT THE BEST FOR EVERYBODY.
AND WE JUST HAVE A SORT OF A DISAGREEMENT ON THIS.
BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT THIS IS A BAD POLICY TO HAVE THESE NARROW LANES.
AND THEN GO FORWARD ONE SLIDE.
AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE.
THANK YOU. ADDRESSING ITEM NUMBER EIGHT DOES THE COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? MOTION, PLEASE.
[00:15:01]
JUST EIGHT. OKAY.MOVE APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEM EIGHT.
IT PASSES WITH FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES, NOTING MISS ACOSTA WAS ABSENT FOR THAT VOTE.
OKAY, SO BACK TO CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS NUMBER ONE THROUGH NINE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF EIGHT.
[CONSENT CALENDAR]
IS THAT THE ONLY SPEAKER CLERK? YES. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? MOTION, PLEASE.PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
[10. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT OF TWO MEMBERS TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION]
NUMBER TEN IS THE MAYORAL APPOINTMENTS OF TWO MEMBERS TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? WE. WE DO NOT.
OKAY. IT'S GENERALLY MY POLICY TO WHEN WHEN WE HAVE SOMEBODY DOING A GOOD JOB ON THE, THE ANY BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS AND THEY ASK FOR REAPPOINTMENT, IT'S MY, MY HABIT THAT I USUALLY GIVE THEM THE SECOND TERM.
THOSE ARE GOING TO BE MY TWO RECOMMENDATIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? I KNOW BOTH OF THEM, AND I CONCUR WE'VE INVESTED A LOT IN THEM FOR FOUR YEARS, AND LET'S GET NOW.
LET'S GET OUR MONEY'S WORTH THE NEXT FOUR, WHICH IS NOTHING.
THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT.
LET'S SEE. WE DON'T NEED A SECOND.
I MADE THE MOTION. PLEASE VOTE.
ITEM NUMBER 11 CITY MANAGER, PLEASE.
[11. ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL UPDATE FOR THE THIRD QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2023-24]
GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH ITEM NUMBER 11 IS THE ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL UPDATE FOR THE THIRD QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 23-24.GENTLEMEN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CITY MANAGER. GOOD EVENING.
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR.
I'M DAVID GRAHAM, CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER.
NATIONAL ECONOMIC TRENDS ARE MOVING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION, THOUGH UNCERTAINTY STILL REMAINS.
REVISED DATA FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS CLOCKED OUR ECONOMY AT APPROXIMATELY $17.1 BILLION, WHICH IS ABOUT A HEALTHY 9% INCREASE OVER 2021.
THE 40 BUSINESS EXPANSION, ATTRACTION AND RETENTION PROJECTS THAT WE WORKED ON LAST YEAR CONTRIBUTED $100 MILLION TO INVESTMENT IN THE CITY AND CONTRIBUTED TO THIS OVERALL HEALTHY ECONOMY.
DIGGING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER INTO INFLATION.
THE SHARP INTEREST RATE HIKES OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS HAVE CURBED INFLATION SINCE ITS PEAK THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THIS SLIDE, BUT IT'S NOT DOWN TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE'S TARGET OF 2%.
AND WHEN COMPARED TO MARCH 2023, LOCALLY, PRICES WERE UP 3.5% FOR ALL ITEMS AND 3.8% FOR NON FOOD AND ENERGY ITEMS IN THE SAN DIEGO AREA, SIMILAR TO OTHER ECONOMIC TRENDS AROUND THE COUNTRY.
THIS IS ACCORDING TO THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS.
AT A RECENT NORTH COUNTY ECONOMIC SUMMIT, THE TAKE FROM THE WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL AND INVESTMENT BANK WAS THAT FED MAY BEGIN TO CUT RATES THIS FALL AND CONTINUE INTO THE FIRST HALF OF 2025.
SOME OF THE REASONS FOR THAT AND SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT LOCALLY WE'RE FACING ARE THAT THERE STILL ARE CONCERNS FROM OUR BUSINESSES ABOUT THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS, AND SO INFLATION IS A CONCERN THERE.
NOW, LOW UNEMPLOYMENT CAN BE A GOOD THING, OR IT CAN ALSO BE A CHALLENGE TO THE ECONOMY.
[00:20:04]
VERY LOW UNEMPLOYMENT CAN NEGATIVELY IMPACT ECONOMIC GROWTH, BUT CARLSBAD IS ACTUALLY IN A GOOD SPOT.UNEMPLOYMENT TICKED DOWN WHEN COMPARED WITH A SLIGHTLY HIGHER RATE IN JANUARY AND AT 4.4% IN MARCH.
LOOKING FURTHER AT SOME OF THE JOBS AND JOB POSTINGS ACTIVITY IN THE JOBS MARKET.
JOB OPPORTUNITIES CONTINUE TO OUTNUMBER THE AVAILABLE EMPLOYEES.
THERE WERE OVER 1500 CARLSBAD COMPANIES THAT POSTED UNIQUE JOB POSTINGS, 8800 PLUS OF THOSE THAT WAS AN INCREASE OF 1100 FROM THE PREVIOUS QUARTER.
AND WHILE WE'VE SEEN SOME HIGH PROFILE LAYOFFS THAT MAY CAUSE SOME CONCERN, THIS LEVEL OF ACTIVITY IN THE JOB MARKET INDICATES RESTRUCTURING AND RIGHTSIZING RATHER THAN A RESPONSE TO A BLEAK ECONOMIC OUTLOOK, PARTICULARLY AS WE SEE INFLATION COMING DOWN.
NOW ATTRACTING WORKERS TO CARLSBAD, SOMETIMES RUNS INTO THE BUZZ SAW OF THE HIGH COST OF HOUSING.
AND WHILE THAT'S POSITIVE FOR HOUSE OWNERS, IT IS A CHALLENGE THAT HOUSING COSTS STILL REMAIN HIGH IN CARLSBAD, EVEN WITH HIGH INTEREST RATES THE MEDIAN HOME PRICE IN CARLSBAD IS AT $1.54 MILLION.
AND WHILE WE SEE THOSE PARTICULAR CHALLENGES IN HIRING WORKERS AND KEEPING THEM HERE OR FINDING COST OF LIVING, WE HAVE WORKED ON SEVERAL PROGRAMS TO ALSO JOIN WITH OTHER CITIES OUTSIDE THE REGION WHILE WE'RE STILL ATTRACTING PEOPLE INTO WORKING IN OUR COMPANIES.
WE ARE SEEING THAT REGULAR ISSUANCE OF OUR BUSINESS LICENSES HAS NOT REALLY SPIKED OR DROPPED RECENTLY, INDICATING THAT THERE'S CONSISTENT BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF BOTH INFLOW AND OUTFLOW.
AND IF WE LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT BASED UPON BUILDING PERMITS, YOU WILL NOTE THAT IN THE FIRST QUARTER, WE SAW ABOUT 769 FEWER RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS, BUT A CONSISTENT LEVEL OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING PERMITS.
SOME OF THE REASONS FOR THIS COULD BE THE COOLING DEMAND FOR SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS, BECAUSE OF THINGS LIKE CHANGES TO NET METERING RULES, AND ALSO THE HIGH COST OF BORROWING THAT COULD ALSO DAMPEN SOME OF THE PERMIT ACTIVITY ON A SMALLER SCALE.
IF WE SEE HIGH VACANCY RATES, THEN WE HAVE DEFINITELY COMPANIES THAT ARE LEAVING.
AND SO WHAT WE CAN SEE ON RETAIL, WHICH IS VERY POSITIVE, IS AT 5.4% IT CONTINUES TO DECREASE AS FAR AS VACANCY GOES SINCE THE PANDEMIC. INDUSTRIAL IS IN POSITIVE TERRITORY, THE TICK UP THAT YOU SEE IS LIKELY BECAUSE OF SEVERAL LARGE PROPERTIES THAT CAME ONLINE.
AND FINALLY, YOU LOOK AT OUR OFFICE NEEDS AND THIS IS A REAL CHALLENGE AROUND THE COUNTRY AT 13%, EVEN THOUGH IT WENT UP SLIGHTLY BETWEEN THE TWO QUARTERS, IT'S LOWER THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE OF 18% AND FAR LOWER THAN THE 20 PLUS PERCENT VACANCY RATES WE SEE IN OFFICE AND SOME OTHER MAJOR CENTERS AROUND THE COUNTRY.
WHY HAS OUR ECONOMY FARED SO WELL? WELL, DIVERSITY IS REALLY ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT DRIVES OUR ECONOMY, AND YOU'LL SEE SOMETHING FRESH AND NEW WE HAVE UPDATED THE PATENT DATA IN THE ECONOMIC SCAN FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE 2019.
AND NOW SINCE THEN, IN 2021, 2022 AND 2023, MORE CONSISTENT LEVEL OF PATENTS WITH THIS DATA, WE ARE STILL IN THE TOP FIVE CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES FOR PATENTS PER CAPITA, SOMETHING NO OTHER CITY OF OUR SIZE CAN CAN TALK ABOUT.
SO WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS AS WE COME THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR DATA? THE FUTURE DOES LOOK BRIGHT FOR THE CITY OF CARLSBAD.
MOST ECONOMISTS ARE PREDICTING THAT GROWTH IN 2024, LIKELY LATE 2024 AND POTENTIALLY IN 2025.
[00:25:02]
OUR DIVERSE ECONOMY PROVIDES THE SORT OF RECESSION FIGHTING DIVERSITY THAT MEANS PEAKS AND VALLEYS IN CERTAIN INDUSTRIES GET SORT OF SMOOTHED OUT ACROSS HAVING VARIOUS DIFFERENT SECTORS THAT WE RELY UPON IN IN OUR CITY.AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA REALLY SORT OF VALIDATES THE CITY'S INVESTMENTS IN ITS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN THAT TAKES A DIVERSE APPROACH TO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE SUPPORTING OUR INDUSTRY CLUSTERS, OUR SMALL BUSINESSES AND KEY AREAS LIKE TOURISM.
WITH THAT, I WOULD PASS THE PRESENTATION OVER TO OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR, ZACH KORACH.
THANK YOU, MR. GRAHAM, AND GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM COUNCIL MEMBERS.
WE ARE PRESENTING THREE DATA POINTS FOR EACH OF THESE REVENUE CATEGORIES.
THE SECOND COLUMN REPRESENTS WHAT WE EXPECTED TO RECEIVE DURING THE FIRST THREE QUARTERS THIS YEAR.
OVERALL THROUGH THE FIRST THREE QUARTERS, THEY HAVE EXCEEDED BOTH LAST YEAR'S ACTUALS AS WELL AS THIS YEAR'S EXPECTATIONS, WITH THE PRIMARY EXCEPTION OF TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES.
AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDE.
SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE FIRST THREE QUARTERS OF GENERAL FUND REVENUE DATA COMPARING CURRENT YEAR WITH THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR, FOCUSING ON THE TOP THREE REVENUE GENERATORS FOR THE GENERAL FUND PROPERTY TAX, SALES TAX AND TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX.
WE CAN SEE OVERALL POSITIVE TOTAL GROWTH AMONGST THOSE THREE CATEGORIES, BUT WE ARE BECOMING MORE AWARE OF INDICATIONS OF A SLOWDOWN STARTING WITH PROPERTY TAX IT IS UP $3.7 MILLION OR 7% HIGHER COMPARED TO LAST YEAR, MAINLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO INCREASES IN AIRCRAFT TAXES THAT WE'VE REPORTED OUT ON PREVIOUSLY, BUT ALSO INCREASE CONTINUED INCREASE IN ASSESSED VALUES IN CARLSBAD, INCREASING 6.2% OVER THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
SO THE REVENUE DATA HERE IS MISSING THAT SECOND AND FINAL ALLOCATION.
MOVING ON TO SALES TAX, IT IS UP $2.5 MILLION, OR 6% COMPARED TO LAST YEAR.
THE INCREASES HERE ARE MOSTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW AUTO SALES.
WE TALKED ABOUT IT ALSO DURING THE MID-YEAR REPORT JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, BUT A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS INCREASE RESULTED FROM THE CORRECTION OF AN ERROR THAT WAS IDENTIFIED BY THE CDTFA, THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION, WHEREBY ONE PARTICULAR AUTO DEALER WAS MISREPORTING AND ASSIGNING THEIR SALES TAX RECEIPTS INCORRECTLY TO ANOTHER JURISDICTION THAT HAS, SINCE FOLLOWING ITS IDENTIFICATION, BEEN CORRECTED AND REMEDIED.
NOW, DESPITE THE INCREASE THAT WE'RE REPORTING THROUGH THE FIRST THREE QUARTERS.
HOWEVER, WE ARE ANTICIPATING THE REMAINDER OF 2024 AND BEYOND TO BE MORE OF THE NEW NORMAL THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE EXPERIENCING IN THE POST PANDEMIC, VISITOR TRENDS THAT THAT WE'VE OBSERVED.
THE FIRST, FOR INCOME FROM INVESTMENT AND PROPERTY, IS UP $1.7 MILLION, OR 36%.
[00:30:09]
RELATED REVENUES.THIS REVENUE SOURCE INCLUDES BUILDING, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING FEES.
MUCH OF IT DEPENDS ON THE NATURE OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING SUBMITTED FOR CITY REVIEW.
THAT SAID, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOWER AMOUNT OF BUILDING PERMITS RECEIVED THIS YEAR COMPARED TO LAST.
THE FINAL CATEGORY, OTHER REVENUES COMPRISES REVENUES CATEGORIES SUCH AS AMBULANCE FEES, FINES AND FORFEITURES, INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES, AS WELL AS INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CHARGES, WITH MUCH OF THE INCREASES BEING TIED TO AMBULANCE FEES.
WITH THE RECENT FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR.
IT CURRENTLY HAS A WORKING BUDGET OF $241.7 MILLION, AND FOR REFERENCE, THE WORKING BUDGET IS COMPRISED OF THE ADOPTED BUDGET PLUS ALL OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS AT THE END OF THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR, PLUS ANY APPROVED BUDGET CARRY FORWARDS THAT ARE BROUGHT FORWARD FROM LAST FISCAL YEAR TO THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
AS OF MARCH 31ST, 2024, WE, THE GENERAL FUND, HAS A REMAINING BUDGET OF $64.5 MILLION, OR 27%, WHICH IS CONSISTENT AND IN LINE WITH PREVIOUSLY REPORTED THIRD QUARTER REPORTS.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES BY CATEGORY.
THE FIRST COLUMN THAT WE'RE REPORTING OUT ON IS THE TOTAL WORKING BUDGET.
THE SECOND COLUMN IS THE FIRST THREE QUARTERS OF LAST YEAR'S ACTUAL EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES.
IN LOOKING AT PERSONNEL, WE ARE SHOWING AN INCREASE OVER THE PRIOR YEAR.
HEALTH INSURANCE AND WORKERS COMPENSATION.
TRANSFERS ARE RELATIVELY CONSISTENT YEAR OVER YEAR AND VERY CLOSELY TIED TO THE ANNUAL AMOUNT THAT IS A RECOMMENDED AND AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO FUND FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER 91.
HERE WE HAVE THE EXPENDITURE AND ENCUMBRANCE DATA PRESENTED NUMERICALLY.
AND A QUICK DISCUSSION ON A FEW OF THE CITY'S ENTERPRISE FUNDS.
WATER AND WASTEWATER WATER REVENUES ARE DOWN 2%, DRIVEN BY A 2% DECREASE IN WATER VOLUME SALES, OFFSET BY AN INCREASE IN USER RATES THAT WENT INTO EFFECT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.
INCREASES IN EXPENSES ARE MAINLY DUE TO BUDGETED SALARY INCREASES, ALONG WITH A 9% RATE INCREASE IN THE VARIABLE COST OF PURCHASE WATER FROM SAN DIEGO WATER COUNTY SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY.
REVENUES ARE UP 4% AND EXPENSES ARE DOWN 16%.
WE ALSO REPORTED A SIMILAR TREND AS PART OF MIDYEAR.
IF YOU RECALL, THE GOLF COURSE ITSELF BECAME FULLY DEPRECIATED, MEANING THE CITY NO LONGER NEEDS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ANNUAL DEPRECIATION EXPENSE FOR THAT PORTION OF THE GOLF COURSE ASSET, AND AS SUCH, IT IS DRIVING THE EXPENSES DOWN.
IN ADDITION TO RECEIVING THE REPORT THIS EVENING, THERE IS ONE RECOMMENDED ACTION, AND THAT IS TO CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD AUTHORIZE A $5.2 MILLION TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE RISK MANAGEMENT FUND, AS WELL AS INCREASING THE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SAME AMOUNT FOR THE RISK MANAGEMENT FUND.
MANY OF THESE CLAIMS ORIGINATED MORE THAN FIVE YEARS AGO.
[00:35:04]
$5.2 MILLION TO ACHIEVE THAT.SO THE TWO RECOMMEND [INAUDIBLE].
AS FOR NEXT STEPS, STAFF WILL OF COURSE CONTINUE TO MONITOR REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES.
AND NEXT TUESDAY ON MAY 21ST, STAFF WILL BE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL PRESENTING THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR PRELIMINARY TECHNOLOGY AND CAPITAL BUDGET FOR THE CITY COUNCIL. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.
WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS? THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS.
AND THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.
SO REALLY JUST THIS, THIS INITIAL OUTLOOK SETS THE STAGE FOR THE PROCESS THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH.
AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUING THIS.
I THIS IS A LOT OF GOOD NEWS IN HERE, BUT ALSO SOME THINGS TO BE PREPARED FOR IN THE FUTURE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF HOURS WORTH OF WORK GOES INTO THIS, AND YOU PRESENT IT ALL IN 15 MINUTES MAKES IT SOUND LIKE YOU JUST PUT IT TOGETHER YESTERDAY.
WE ALWAYS TURN OUT HAVING A VERY WELL BALANCED BUDGET.
AND I CREDIT A LOT OF THAT TO YOU AND YOUR YOUR FOLKS.
MOTION FOR THE RESOLUTION, PLEASE.
YES. MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 12 CITY MANAGER, PLEASE.
[12. REPORT REEVALUATING PROPOSITION H, BASED ON A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CARLSBAD TOMORROW: GROWTH MANAGEMENT CITIZENS COMMITTEE AND IN RESPONSE TO CITY COUNCIL MOTION]
THANK YOU SIR. ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REPORT REEVALUATING PROPOSITION H BASED ON A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CARLSBAD TOMORROW, THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT CITIZENS COMMITTEE AND IN RESPONSE TO CITY COUNCIL MOTION MAKING, OUR PRESENTATION TODAY IS OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR, ZACH KORACH, ALONG WITH OUR SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY ALLEGRA FROST.SO IN 1982, THE PROPONENTS OF PROPOSITION H EXPLAINED THAT THE PASSAGE OF PROP 13 AND THE GANN INITIATIVE SPENDING LIMITATION WAS CAUSING THE CITY RESOURCES TO BECOME MORE CONSTRAINED.
IN RESPONSE, THEY DECIDED TO PUT PROPOSITION PROPOSITION H ON THE LOCAL BALLOT TO ENSURE THAT CARLSBAD DID NOT SPEND LARGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO PURCHASE OR TO DEVELOP PROPERTY WITHOUT ADEQUATE REVIEW AND INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC.
PROPOSITION H WAS ULTIMATELY APPROVED BY THE VOTERS, AND IT REQUIRES VOTER APPROVAL FOR REAL PROPERTY PURCHASES OR IMPROVEMENTS TO REAL PROPERTY IF THE COST EXCEEDS $1 MILLION IN CITY FUNDS.
FOLLOWING THE PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION H, THE CITY COUNCIL CONVENED A CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO RECOMMEND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES WHICH HELP CLARIFY THE PROJECTS WHICH REQUIRE A PROP H VOTE, AND BASED ON THIS INPUT, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS IN 1983. ADDITIONAL IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS WERE ADOPTED IN 2005, AND ULTIMATELY THE TEXT OF PROPOSITION H WAS INCORPORATED INTO THE CITY CHARTER IN 2008.
SO I'LL REPEAT THAT RULE AGAIN.
IT'S REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO REAL PROPERTY REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL IF THE COST EXCEEDS $1 MILLION IN WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS CITY FUNDS. THERE'S A DEFINITION OF CITY FUNDS AND THAT WAS INCLUDED IN PROPOSITION H.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE PLANNED LOCAL DRAINAGE FEES, PARK IN LIEU FEES, PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES WATER FUNDS AND SEWER CONNECTION FEES ARE ALL EXAMPLE OF FUNDS THAT ARE NOT CONSIDERED CITY FUNDS.
[00:40:07]
REQUIREMENTS DUE TO THE FUNDING SOURCE.THEN, WITH REGARDS TO THE PHRASE IMPROVEMENT TO REAL PROPERTY, THAT PHRASE WAS DEFINED BY THE REGULATIONS AS EXCLUDING THE REPLACEMENT, REPAIR, MAINTENANCE OR ROUTINE REFURBISHMENT OR UPGRADES OF EXISTING FACILITIES.
SO AGAIN, THAT MEANS YOU MIGHT SEE SOME PROJECTS THAT INCLUDE REPLACEMENT OR REPAIR AND COST MORE THAN $1 MILLION AND THEY ARE EXEMPT FROM THE PROP H VOTER REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IT IS BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF PROJECT.
THE CITY COUNCIL HAS PLACED SEVERAL MEASURES ON THE BALLOT SINCE 1982 TO OBTAIN VOTER APPROVAL OF PROJECTS EXCEEDING A MILLION, EXCEEDING $1 MILLION IN CITY FUNDS.
SOME EXAMPLES ARE THE PURCHASE OF HOSP GROVE, A COUPLE OF OUR ATHLETIC FIELDS, FIRE STATION TWO, AND MOST RECENTLY, THE MONROE STREET POOL RENOVATION PROJECT.
SOME OF THE FUTURE PROJECTS THAT WE ANTICIPATE MAY REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL INCLUDE FIRE STATION SEVEN, ROBERTSON RANCH PARK, AND ZONE FIVE PARK. BACK IN 2002, THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERED OPTIONS TO REVISE PROPOSITION H EXPENDITURE LIMITATION AND ULTIMATELY DECIDED TO PLACE TWO ITEMS ON THAT BALLOT.
THAT MEASURE ULTIMATELY FAILED.
THEN THERE WAS PROPOSITION C, IT WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE SAME BALLOT THAT PROPOSED AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO SPEND AN AMOUNT OVER $1 MILLION TO CONSTRUCT CAPITAL FACILITIES, INCLUDING SWIMMING POOL COMPLEX, TRAIL LINKAGES AND OPEN SPACE, THE SAFETY TRAINING CENTER, AND A PORTION OF CANNON ROAD.
AND THIS MEASURE, PROPOSITION C, WAS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
SO MORE RECENTLY, THE CARLSBAD TOMORROW GROWTH MANAGEMENT CITIZENS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER A BALLOT MEASURE TO INCREASE THE $1 MILLION EXPENDITURE LIMIT, AS WELL AS INDEX THAT AMOUNT TO INCREASE OVER TIME.
SO THE FIRST OPTION HERE WOULD BE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER PLACING A MEASURE ON THE BALLOT TO INCREASE THAT $1 MILLION LIMIT AND INDEX AN ANNUAL INCREASE. NOW, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HAVE DISCRETION AS TO HOW THIS OPTION COULD BE FURTHER CRAFTED.
OPTION THREE IS A COMBINATION OF BOTH ONE AND TWO.
OPTION FOUR, THE FINAL OPTION, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION, IN WHICH FUTURE NONEXEMPT REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IN EXCESS OF $1 MILLION WOULD CONTINUE TO REQUIRE VOTER VOTER APPROVAL.
SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL MOVE FORWARD WITH RECOMMENDING A MEASURE BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT, THE COST FOR DOING SO FOR THE NOVEMBER 2024 GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT WOULD LIKELY COST BETWEEN $135,000 AND $170,000.
IN TERMS OF NEXT STEPS IF THE CITY COUNCIL CHOOSES EITHER OPTION 1, 2 OR 3, STAFF WILL RETURN WITH PROPOSED BALLOT MEASURE REFLECTING THE CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION AND FOR REFERENCE, THE DEADLINE TO PLACE AN ITEM ON THE BALLOT WOULD BE AUGUST 9TH OF 2024.
THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS? WE HAVE TWO STEVE JEAN WALKER.
[00:45:18]
SO THIS IS THE MAIN ITEM I WAS IN ATTENDANCE TONIGHT FOR.FOR LARGE DISCRETIONARY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT USE CITY FUNDS AND THE QUESTION IS, HOW DO YOU DEFINE THESE FOUR COMPONENTS? OKAY. SO AS FAR AS THE NUMBER $1 MILLION IN 1982 WOULD BE ABOUT $3.25 MILLION TODAY, YOU COULD CHOOSE A DIFFERENT NUMBER.
DISCRETIONARY VERSUS NON-DISCRETIONARY.
SO SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT THAT I GAVE AT CARLSBAD TOMORROW WERE FIRE STATIONS.
DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE TO VOTE FOR THAT.
AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS THAT INCREASE CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE MANDATED GROWTH.
OF COURSE, MAINTENANCE AND DIRECT REPLACEMENT PROJECTS WOULD BE EXEMPT.
IN ADDITION, I'VE SEEN INSTANCES OF WHAT I WOULD CALL PIGGYBACKING, WHERE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ARE ROLLED INTO MAINTENANCE PROJECTS IN THE SAME PROJECT AREA, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF PROP H.
AND THEN FINALLY, IS THE DEFINITION OF CITY FUNDS.
BUT THE CITY DIDN'T REALLY LIKE PROP EIGHT, SO THEY MADE IT VERY RESTRICTIVE.
ALL RIGHT, SO IN MY OPENING COMMENTS AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, I WAS CITING THE JUDGE COMMENTS ON GMP, AND HE MENTIONED THAT THE BALLOT LANGUAGE WAS TOO BROAD TO ENSURE VOTER INTENT, AND THE PROP H SPONSORS WERE IMMEDIATELY FRUSTRATED BY THE INTERPRETATION OF THEIR BALLOT LANGUAGE.
SO THE SPECIFIC BALLOT LANGUAGE IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND WE SHOULD STOP USING PROP H AS AN EXCUSE NOT TO DO CERTAIN PROJECTS, AND WE SHOULD STOP HAVING TO DEVISE CREATIVE FUNDING SCHEMES TO AVOID VOTES.
AND TO MAKE THIS WHOLE PROCESS MOST TRANSPARENT, I WOULD SUGGEST LOOKING AT A LIST OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS AND PENDING PROJECTS, AND LOOK AT THE BALLOT LANGUAGE AND DECIDE WOULD THEY FALL UNDER A PUBLIC VOTE OR NOT.
SO THOSE ARE MY SUGGESTIONS AND I APPRECIATE THE TIME.
HI, AS PROPOSITION H WAS PASSED IN 1982, IT ALLOWED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE PROJECTS UP TO $1 MILLION.
PROJECTS WITH A HIGHER COST NEED APPROVAL FROM THE VOTERS.
THE PRESENT VALUE, AS STEVE NOTED OF $1 MILLION FROM 1982, IS ABOUT $3.25 MILLION TODAY.
THE COST OF EVERYTHING HAS INCREASED, AND THAT'S EXPECTED OVER TIME, ESPECIALLY 40 YEARS.
OUR CITY COUNCIL MUST MAKE DIFFICULT BUDGETING DECISIONS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT CARLSBAD RESIDENTS HAVE LIVED VOLUNTARILY UNDER PROP H FOR 40 YEARS. IT FORCED THE ELECTORATE, THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE STAFF TO MINDFULLY PLAN FOR FUTURE SPENDING.
IN THESE LAST FEW YEARS, THE CITY APPROVED 110 NEW HIRES, PROVIDED $2 MILLION, A $2 MILLION FORGIVABLE LOAN TO LA POSADA, WHICH IS A PRIVATE ENTITY AND SPENT $8 MILLION ON WINDSOR POINT.
JUST RIGHT NOW YOU APPROVED $5 MILLION FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE RISK MANAGEMENT FUND.
AT THE SAME TIME, LIBRARIES REMAIN CLOSED ON SUNDAYS AS A COST SAVING MEASURE.
[00:50:01]
RESPONDERS. IN THE PAST, DEVELOPERS PROVIDED FUNDING FOR THE STREETS, PARKS AND OTHER AMENITIES AS PART OF BEING ALLOWED TO DEVELOP IN CARLSBAD.SPENDING PRIORITIES NEED TO BE TOP OF MIND, AND PUBLIC SAFETY SHOULD BE AT THE TOP OF THAT LIST.
FOR THESE REASONS, I URGE YOU NOT TO SUPPORT EXEMPTING ANY CATEGORY FROM PROP H.
THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION.
SO JUST A FEW QUESTIONS OF CLARITY.
NUMBER ONE WOULD BE THIS IS GOING TO ONCE WE DECIDE WHICH DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO, UNLESS WE TAKE NO ACTION, IT'S STILL GOING TO GO TO THE VOTERS TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
AND THEN FOR THE OPTIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED BEFORE US THE ONE THAT THE GROWTH.
I'M JUST GOING TO CALL IT GMCC.
THE GMCC, THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, THEY SPECIFICALLY WANT ARE IN LINE WITH OPTION ONE.
AND THEN IN ORDER FOR US TO MAKE THE TIMELINE FOR AUGUST 9TH, I'M ASSUMING WE'D NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING BY BECAUSE SINCE WE HAVE COUNCIL RECESS, SOMETHING IN JULY. YES.
EITHER THE LATTER PART OF JUNE OR JULY.
OKAY. I THINK I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.
OKAY. ACTUALLY, I'VE ASKED OR YES, THAT WAS THE OTHER ONE.
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS. SO FOR THE THE I KNOW WE MENTIONED THE PROJECTS WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT STANDARDS WAS ON ONE OF THE SLIDES WITH REGARDS TO POTENTIAL EXEMPTIONS.
IF WE WANTED TO CONSIDER DIFFERENT VARIATIONS OF EXEMPTIONS THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE FOR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES, I'M ASSUMING JUST TO CONFIRM AND FOR THE PUBLIC'S PLEASURE THAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE TRAFFIC UPDATE LIKE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT UPDATES AND SUCH.
WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF I'LL REFER TO THEM AS NON-DISCRETIONARY RESOURCES OR FUNDING SOURCES.
THAT FUND A NUMBER OF THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.
BUT, YES SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL BE INTERESTED IN CRAFTING LANGUAGE TO EXEMPT TRANSPORTATION RELATED PROJECTS OR TRAFFIC RELATED PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE AT THE CITY COUNCIL'S DISCRETION? OKAY. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MISS ACOSTA? THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION WHEN MR. LINKY WAS SPEAKING ABOUT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION, HE MENTIONED THAT EXEMPTIONS WERE NOT SO MUCH PART OF THE DISCUSSION.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT ARE THE EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT PART OF STAFF'S RESEARCH SINCE, YOU KNOW, RECENTLY OR DID THAT COME OUT OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE? THOSE WERE OTHER OPTIONS WE WERE LAYING OUT THE COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER.
THANK YOU. MAYOR JUST ONE QUESTION.
GIVEN THE NEW JUST IN TIME APPROACH TO FUNDING FOR PROJECTS, WILL DEPARTMENTS.
AND YOU MAY, MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW THIS.
I'M NOT SURE, MR. KORACH, BUT WE'LL SEE.
WILL THE DEPARTMENTS CONTINUE TO FACE ROADBLOCKS TO COMPLETING PROJECTS IF THE LIMITS REMAIN THE SAME AS $1 MILLION? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER.
I DON'T BELIEVE THE LIMIT WOULD WOULD CREATE ANY ANY ROADBLOCK, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE WERE OPERATING UNDER THE OLD METHODOLOGY OR SYSTEM OF CIP, AS OPPOSED TO CONVERTING TO JUST IN TIME.
[00:55:05]
THE ROADBLOCKS, I'LL SAY WOULD BE MORE ALLEVIATED.I THINK FROM A TIMING STANDPOINT, SHOULD THE LIMIT BE PASSED BY THE VOTERS FOR AN INCREASE? SO EXPLAIN TO ME HOW YOU CAN TIE THOSE TWO THINGS TOGETHER, PLEASE.
BUT GIVEN THE JUST IN TIME APPROACH TO FUNDING PROJECTS, I'M NOT SURE HOW THEY TIE TOGETHER.
WHILE WHEN A PROJECT COMMENCES OR IS INTRODUCED AND BECOMES PART OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
YES. ONLY THE SCOPING OR DESIGN COSTS WILL BE INCLUDED.
HOWEVER, WE WILL BE ALSO PROGRAMING ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
WHETHER OR NOT THAT WILL, THAT WILL BE IN A TASK TO, TO ADDRESS.
AND EVEN THOUGH WE'RE FUNDING THESE THINGS DIFFERENTLY, THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED WITH THE PROJECTS.
THANK YOU. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M GOING TO USE JUST LIKE FIRE STATION TWO FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE DECIDED THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, HOW LONG DID IT TAKE BEFORE WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE FUNDS APPROVED BY VOTER BALLOT? DO YOU DO YOU REMEMBER APPROXIMATELY.
I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION OFFHAND.
I'M ACTUALLY. I'M LOOKING FOR MY FIRE CHIEF WHO'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO MY HISTORIAN ON AND I'M SORRY, I'M JUST PICKING ON THE FIRE STATION BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE FIRST THING THAT CAME INTO MY HEAD.
OH, THAT'S OKAY. AND I'M JUST GOING OFF OF MEMORY HERE.
I THINK THE FUNDING WAS, WAS SET ASIDE IN A VALUE BETWEEN, SAY, $8 TO $15 MILLION.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE EXACT DOLLARS WERE, BUT IT TOOK A FEW YEARS AFTER THE VOTE.
AND EACH TIME WE HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS ON AN H BALLOT IS THAT ALSO COST BETWEEN $100 AND $35,000 AND.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT. WHAT WAS THE OTHER NUMBER? $170,000. THAT IS THE THE CURRENT ESTIMATE THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS.
IT DOES TEND TO BE A BIT CONSERVATIVE.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE THAT COSTS ARE GOING TO BE INCREASING EFFECTIVE THIS YEAR.
SO THE $135 TO $170,000 RANGE IS REASONABLE.
OKAY, SO I GUESS MY POINT IS, EVERY TIME WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE VOTERS TO ASK TO SPEND MORE THAN A MILLION BUCKS, FIGURE IT'S GOING TO COST US AN EXTRA $135 TO $170,000 JUST TO ASK FOR THE PERMISSION.
CLOSING STATEMENTS, MISS LUNA.
I THINK IT WOULD BE PRUDENT IF MAYBE WE PUT THIS OFF FOR A COUPLE WEEKS TILL WE TOOK A LOOK AT OUR BUDGET SO THAT WE WOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT PROJECTS WOULD BE AFFECTED.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WOULD AFFECT OUR TIMETABLE.
THAT WAY I WOULD HAVE THE ENTIRE PICTURE.
I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES SENTIMENTS ABOUT THE BUDGET.
I JUST DON'T SEE THE VALUE IN THAT.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T THINK WE CAN REALLY BUILD MUCH FOR $3.25 MILLION EITHER.
[01:00:04]
SO AT THIS, AT THIS MOMENT, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TAKE NO ACTION.I THINK THIS WAS AN EXCELLENT RECOMMENDATION COMING OUT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, AND I'M GLAD THAT WE DID THE RESEARCH TO FIND OUT KIND OF A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY, MAKE THAT PRESENTATION AND LOOK INTO SOME OF THESE CATEGORIES THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE EXEMPTED.
IT'S ALSO GREAT TO KNOW WHAT THE VALUE, WHAT THE COST WOULD BE TO PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT.
BUT INCORPORATING THE MAYOR'S COMMENT INTO THAT, EVERY TIME WE GO BACK TO VOTERS, IT COSTS US AGAIN ANOTHER $130 PLUS THOUSAND DOLLARS TO TAKE THAT TO THE VOTERS.
SO I WOULD WANT TO BE REALLY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT WHAT THE EXEMPTION CATEGORIES MIGHT BE.
CERTAINLY, THE PUBLIC COMMENT WAS VERY HELPFUL IN LOOKING AT WHAT THE INCREASE MIGHT BE.
SO $3.25 OR WHATEVER THE, THE EQUIVALENT IN TODAY'S DOLLARS IS OF THAT $1 MILLION.
AND WITH AN INDEX PLUS SOME EXEMPT CATEGORIES THAT MAKE SENSE, MAKE SENSE ACCORDING TO WHAT WE HAVE ON THE DOCKET, AND WHAT IS PART OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY REGULARLY AS A CITY.
SO I AM INTERESTED IN THIS OPTION ONE INCREASING THE $1 MILLION LIMIT.
SO WE CERTAINLY NEED STAFF TO GIVE US SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT WHAT THAT WOULD BE.
I LIKE THE $3.25 AND TIE IT TO AN INDEX.
I DO LIKE THESE EXEMPT CATEGORIES, BUT I THINK WE NEED MORE INFORMATION.
SO IN THEORY I'M IN SUPPORT OF OPTION ONE, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE REST OF THE COMMENTS.
YES, THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
AND OF COURSE THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE PUBLIC AND COLLEAGUES, THE COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVE THAT BROUGHT THIS RECOMMENDATION FORWARD HAD VERY MANY DISCUSSIONS.
AND IT WAS COMPRISED OF A REALLY GOOD CROSS SECTION OF OUR COMMUNITY, INCLUDING PEOPLE THAT HAVE SERVED ON COMMISSIONS, FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS. I THINK WE HAD A REALLY GOOD CROSS-SECTION OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING AND EDUCATION OF HOW OUR CITY WORKS AND WHY THIS WAS PUT INTO PLACE.
SO FROM THAT, AND JUST FROM WHAT WE'VE SEEN TODAY, AND OF COURSE, THE AMAZING AMOUNT OF RESEARCH THAT'S GONE INTO BRINGING THIS FORWARD, I AM ALSO COMFORTABLE WITH OPTION ONE, I DO THINK THAT DELAYING IT WOULD DELAYING HAVING THIS CONVERSATION WOULD JUST MAKE IT.
COME BACK AT SOME POINT AGAIN BECAUSE WE'LL BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION AROUND, WELL, IF WE HAVE THIS $1 MILLION LIMIT, I MEAN, THERE MIGHT BE TIMES WHERE A PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY IS GOING TO I MEAN, IT'S IT'S IT'S DEFINITELY GOING TO BE OVER $1 MILLION.
AND I THINK FOR ME, THE EXEMPT CATEGORIES WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE TIGHT ON WHICH ONES THEY ARE, I THINK PUBLIC SAFETY IS A NO BRAINER. I THINK THAT'S EASY ENOUGH WHERE I WOULD HOPE THAT ALL OF US WOULD BE ABLE TO AGREE ON THAT.
THE OTHERS, I WOULD THINK, YOU KNOW, IF WE REALLY HAVE TO AND BASED ON FEEDBACK OR WHATEVER YOU COME BACK WITH WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO INCLUDE THOSE MAYBE IN IN THE OPTIONS.
I JUST THINK PUBLIC SAFETY SHOULD DEFINITELY BE TOP OF MIND, TOP PRIORITY.
I KNOW WE ALL ALL THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S EASY ENOUGH FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.
AND ALSO WE DON'T WANT TO DELAY IT FOR SIX YEARS.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, FOR US TO HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THERE ARE UPDATES BEING MADE TO A FACILITY THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE SIX YEARS AGO AND THEN ARE BEING MADE SIX YEARS LATER, THERE ARE GOING TO BE NEW UPDATES THAT NEED TO BE MADE BY THAT POINT.
SO I THINK TAKING ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, I DO THINK THAT'S NECESSARY.
AND THEN THE VALUES END UP CHANGING.
AND NOW WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT, OKAY, HOW ARE WE GOING TO FACTOR THAT INTO OUR BUDGETING.
SO I PERSONALLY DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD TAKE IT TO THE VOTERS.
AGAIN, IT'S UP TO THE VOTERS WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO END UP MAKING THAT CHANGE.
BUT AGAIN, I'D BE HAPPY TO HEAR WHAT OTHERS HAVE.
WELL, THE MAYOR, SINCE HE'S THE LAST ONE, WHAT THE MAYOR HAS TO SAY AS WELL.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES CARLSBAD GREAT IS WHEN WE HAVE A NEED, WE FILL THE NEED.
AND THEN I'LL JUST KEEP USING THE FIRE STATION TWO AS THE EXAMPLE.
WE USED TO JOKE THAT THAT FIRE STATION, HOW IT WOULD BE HOW HOW IRONIC IT WOULD BE THAT THAT FIRE STATION WOULD BURN DOWN BEFORE WE ACTUALLY GOT IT RE REBUILT. AND WE JOKED ABOUT IT, BUT THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF TRUTH TO THAT, BECAUSE IT TOOK SO LONG FOR US TO GET THAT THAT FIRE
[01:05:08]
STATION REPLACED. AND IF ANYBODY SAW WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE BEFORE IT WAS REPLACED, YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.THE WALL THE OUTSIDE WALLS WERE MADE OF WOOD SHINGLES.
BUT I UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT PROP H WAS VOTED INTO PLACE FOR A REASON.
SO MY MY PROPOSAL WOULD BE THAT OPTION ONE, BUT INCREASE THE $1 MILLION LIMIT TO A $5 MILLION LIMIT AND TIE IT TO SOME INDEX, AND I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO STAFF TO RECOMMEND THAT INDEX.
BUT I DO BELIEVE IN THE EXEMPTION FOR CATEGORIES SUCH AS PUBLIC SAFETY.
I'M I'M WANTING TO FOLLOW OPTION ONE, BUT I ALSO WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS COMMENTS ABOUT IF WE EXEMPT EVERYTHING, THEN WHY EVEN HAVE A PROP H.
SO WITH THE BARE MINIMUM PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES WOULD BE AN EXEMPTION.
AND I THINK THAT INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO ALSO BE AN EXEMPTION, BUT I THINK IT ALREADY WAS.
HAVE SOME TYPE OF ESCALATOR I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO STAFF, AND WITH THE BARE MINIMUM THAT PUBLIC SAFETY AND NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE ARE EXEMPT. AND I'D BE OPEN TO COUNCIL MEMBERS REMARKS ABOUT PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND LIBRARIES, GROWTH MANAGEMENT STANDARDS AND RENOVATIONS.
MAY, MAY. I'LL SECOND FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION, BUT MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION? ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE NUMBER THAT WE JUST PUT OUT WITH REGARDS TO IT INCREASING IT TO $5 MILLION.
I'M NOT SURE I'M 100% COMFORTABLE WITH WITH THAT.
I WOULD WANT TO HEAR FROM STAFF.
OBVIOUSLY WE HEARD $1 MILLION IN WHEN THIS WAS PASSED IN 1982 COMPARED TO NOW IT'S $3.25.
I'D BE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMFORTABLE, MAYBE AROUND THAT NUMBER.
I FEEL LIKE IF WE COME UP WITH THE OPTIONS UP HERE, MAYBE IT WON'T BE THE THE BEST.
SO WE'RE NOT JUST THROWING NUMBERS AT YOU.
AND IT'S THIS IS COUNCIL DIRECTION.
SO YEAH, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS, IS ESTABLISHING A REASONABLE BENCHMARK FOR OUR CITIZENRY TO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH AND SO IF THAT NUMBER IS $3.25 WE CAN PUT THAT IN.
SO YEAH. SO THEN IT JUST BECOMES WHAT DOES COUNCIL FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH.
BUT STAFF COULD CERTAINLY COME BACK WITH OPTIONS IF, IF THAT'S COUNCIL'S DESIRE.
AND I AM OPEN TO NEGOTIATING THAT NUMBER DOWN DEPENDING ON COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL.
I JUST WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU WHAT YOU THINK.
ONE OF MY REASONS IS I I THINK THAT WE NEED TO STAY NIMBLE.
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY THE THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE FOUND IS NECESSARY NOT TO THEN CHARGE THEM TO GO TO A BALLOT EVERY TIME WE WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING.
WE SAW THAT LONG LIST OF THINGS THAT WE'VE HAD TO GO BACK TO THE THE PUBLIC WITH.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, AS YOU'RE TAKING, AT LEAST IN THE LAST FIVE, TEN YEARS, AS WE'RE TAKING YEARS TO GET THIS TO THE BALLOT, THE COST OF THE PROJECT IS GOING UP SIGNIFICANTLY AS WELL.
I WANT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE OUR RESIDENTS WITH THE THE FACILITIES THAT THEY DESERVE.
BUT I'M ALSO OPEN AS LONG AS WE HAVE THE BARE MINIMUM OF THE EXEMPTION FROM FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE, THEN I'D BE WILLING TO TO ENTERTAIN, WHAT DID YOU SAY 3.25? THAT WAS THE NUMBER THAT WAS SHARED WITH REGARDS TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.
SO BUT I, I THINK I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING THE VOTERS REGARDLESS.
SO I WAS THINKING ABOUT THAT DURING.
BUT I'D LOVE TO HEAR WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY.
WE ARE GOING TO BE ASKING THE VOTERS, BUT WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT IT IS.
WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE VOTERS, TOTALLY, TOTALLY.
[01:10:07]
NUMBER MATCHES CONSTRUCTION PRICES.SO I WOULD WANT TO VERIFY THAT NUMBER.
I THINK IT MIGHT BE MORE THAN $3.25 MORE CLOSER TO THE $5 MILLION.
SO MAYBE IN MAKING THE MOTION WE COULD, YOU KNOW, STAFF WILL BRING BACK THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE.
AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THEY COULD BRING BACK ALSO SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH THAT VERIFIES THAT, THAT THAT IS AN APPROPRIATE NUMBER OR IF NOT, GIVE US A RECOMMENDATION FOR A BETTER NUMBER.
WE COULD GIVE SOME PLUG AND PLAY WHERE WE JUST LEAVE IT BLANK AND THEN.
YEAH. AND, AND EXPLAIN WHAT THOSE DOLLAR VALUES AND HOW WE ARRIVED AT THOSE.
OKAY. GREAT. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD COMPROMISE.
AND THEN FOR THE EXEMPTION CATEGORIES I ALSO AGREE THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS.
I AM INTERESTED IN SOME OF THE OTHER ONES TOO, AND COULD MAYBE MR. KORACH OR OR MR. CHADWICK SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT WHAT THE SECOND BULLET MEANS PROJECTS NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT STANDARDS, BECAUSE THAT MIGHT BE A VERY IMPORTANT EXEMPTION CATEGORY. BUT I JUST WANTED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS.
AND THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE OPTIONS DEPENDING ON WHAT TYPE OF STANDARD IT IS.
TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, ROADWAYS THAT WE CAN EITHER EXEMPT THE ROADWAY, OR YOU CAN COME UP WITH A PLAN TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARD. AND SO IF IT WAS A PROJECT THAT WAS NECESSARY TO MEET GROWTH MANAGEMENT STANDARDS, THAT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, THEN THIS WOULD BE AN EXEMPTION FOR THAT PROJECT, THE WAY IT COULD BE A PROJECT OVER $1 MILLION.
I THINK WE'D HAVE TO WORD IT CAREFULLY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS EASY TO APPLY.
THE LAST BULLET IF YOU COULD ELABORATE ONE MORE TIME ON WHAT THE RENOVATIONS AND EXPANSIONS OF EXISTING FACILITIES WOULD BE, BECAUSE WOULD MONROE? STREET POOL AS AN EXAMPLE, FALL UNDER THAT, I KNOW IT DIDN'T THIS LAST TIME, BUT LIKE, I'M TRYING TO GET A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT THAT MEANS IN THE LAST BULLET.
CORRECT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MONROE STREET POOL WOULD BE A GREAT EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT THAT WOULD FALL INTO THAT THAT CATEGORY WHERE IT WOULD UNDER THIS CLASSIFICATION NOT REQUIRE A PROP H VOTE.
BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING A COUPLE OF OPTIONS FOR THE INCREASED NUMBER, WHETHER IT'S THREE AND A HALF OR FIVE, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, BUT WITH SOME DATA BEHIND IT, SOME FACTS.
THANKS, MRS. BURKHOLDER. THANK YOU.
SO IT'S KIND OF OBVIOUS BASED ON THE LINE OF QUESTIONING AND THE SORT OF INSERTING THIS AND TAKING THIS OUT, PROTECTING THIS AND NOT THAT, I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE THE DECISION RIGHT NOW, TONIGHT TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
HOWEVER, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO REVISITING THIS.
I PREFER IT TO BE DONE AFTER OUR BUDGET IS ADOPTED.
I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT RAISING THESE INCREASES.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION TO TO MAKE A REASONABLE DECISION ABOUT INCREASING IT $3.2 $5 MILLION WHATEVER IT IS, I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO MAKE SOME EFFECT, SOME ACTUAL CHANGE.
SO I JUST REQUEST THAT A CONTINUANCE OF THE ITEM UNTIL AFTER THE BUDGET IS ADOPTED.
MISS LUNA. I ALSO HAVE AN OPEN MIND, BUT AS I STATED IN MY EARLIER COMMENTS, I THINK IT WOULD BE PRUDENT IF WE JUST TOOK EVERYTHING THAT'S BEING RAISED BECAUSE I THINK, AS OUR CITY MANAGER SAID, THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED IN PROPOSITION H, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RUBRIC WAS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BASIS OF THAT WAS.
AND SO WE'RE SHOOTING OUT $3.25 WE'RE SHOOTING OUT $5.
IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT A NUMBER OUT THERE, LET'S MAKE IT A REAL NUMBER.
RIGHT NOW I DON'T SEE A BASIS FOR THE NUMBERS.
I THINK THE THE COMMITTEE WAS LOOKING AT YOU KNOW, COST OF LIVING IN, IN THAT, BUT THEY WERE BASING IT ON A $1 MILLION 40 YEARS AGO THAT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE BASIS OF THAT WAS FOR.
SO DO WE NEED $5? DO WE NEED $7 MILLION? DO WE NEED $3 MILLION?
[01:15:01]
ALSO, I THINK WITH OUR JUST IN TIME AS WELL AS WE CAN LOOK AT THAT AND TAKE A LOOK AT OUR EXEMPTION CATEGORIES, A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES BROUGHT UP LIKE.SO WHAT PARK AND REC FACILITIES ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? WHAT PUBLIC FACILITIES ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? AND WE CAN CUSTOM TAILOR THAT AS WE ACTUALLY HAVE A BUDGET IN FRONT OF US WITH REAL PROJECTS, REAL PROJECTIONS, INSTEAD OF JUST SPECULATING UP HERE.
SO I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE RIGHT NOW WITHOUT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME ON THE BUDGET.
I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR OUR BUDGET IN WHAT NEXT WEEK, THE WEEK AFTER.
I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FACTS IN FRONT OF ME TO REALLY DO THAT AT THIS POINT.
I'M VERY OPEN MINDED ON HOW WE SHOULD CRAFT THIS AND WE WANT IT.
I WANT OUR CITIZENS TO TO SEE THE THOUGHTFULNESS.
BUT. PUSHING IT UP AGAINST ACTUAL PROJECTS AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS JUST IN TIME.
WE ARE PROPOSING SOME STAFF INCREASES, I MEAN, A DECREASES, OUR BUDGET DECREASES.
SO I THINK THERE'S JUST A LOT FLOATING AROUND.
AND BY THE NATURE OF THE QUESTIONS OF EVERYBODY UP HERE I JUST WOULD FEEL WAY MORE COMFORTABLE THROWING IT OUT A COUPLE OF WEEKS TILL AFTER WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND HEAR ALSO WHAT OUR CITIZENS ARE COMMENTING, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BUDGET WORKSHOP ON WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE TOWARDS THE BUDGET, WHICH I THINK MIGHT INFLUENCE WHAT OPTION WE MIGHT PURSUE. SO RIGHT NOW I WOULD I IF I HAD TO TAKE A VOTE TODAY, I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE NO ACTION BECAUSE I CAN'T WEIGH THIS AGAINST SOMETHING THAT'S TANGIBLE.
MISS BURKHOLDER. SO HAVING SAID ALL THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION, A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE WITH STAFF TO COME BACK BASED ON THE FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL TONIGHT, AND WE REASSESS AFTER THE BUDGET.
WOULD YOU? I'M JUST THINKING OUT LOUD.
WOULD IT WORK TO TO PRESENT THE BUDGET? I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE TIMELINE TO PRESENT THE BUDGET AND TO THIS ITEM AT THE SAME ON THE ON THE SAME NIGHT, OR IS IT BETTER TO WAIT IN BETWEEN.
OBVIOUSLY THE BUDGET IS IT'S A SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENT.
OUR, OUR PREFERENCE WOULD BE KEEP THAT AS A STANDALONE.
ULTIMATELY, THE BUDGET IS ADOPTED ON JUNE 18TH.
AND THAT WOULD GIVE ENOUGH TIME TO GET IT ON THE BALLOT IF WE CHOOSE TO TO DO THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? THE DEADLINE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON THE BALLOT WOULD BE AUGUST 9TH.
I'M FINE WITH US IF WE IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT, WE CAN.
HOWEVER, I DO FEEL THAT THERE SHOULD BE.
YES, WE'LL HAVE THE BUDGET IN FRONT OF US, WHICH WE ALL HAVE ALREADY SEEN.
I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PROVIDE ANY SORT OF DIRECTION WITH REGARDS TO, HEY, WE WANT THIS LANGUAGE INCLUDED OR THIS LANGUAGE INCLUDED, THEN WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK AFTER THE BUDGET.
BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO NARROW THIS DOWN.
SO AT THE VERY LEAST THAT THERE'S SOME NARROW DIRECTION ON WHEN THIS GETS PRESENTED TO US AGAIN.
AT THE VERY LEAST, THERE ARE SOME MORE FLESHED OUT OPTIONS SO THAT WE AREN'T SITTING HERE DISCUSSING THE SAME THING EVEN AFTER THE BUDGET DISCUSSION.
BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'VE ALL SEEN IT, WE'VE ALL BEEN BRIEFED.
SO I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT.
I'M SORRY, BUT AND COUNCIL MEMBER BHAT-PATEL THAT'S EXACTLY.
I MEAN, THROW SOME GUIDELINES OUT TODAY WHAT YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT EXPECTING COMING BACK.
AND THEN WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS SEE HOW THOSE NUMBERS ARE THAT RANGE.
I MEAN WE'RE LOOKING AT $3.25 TO $5.
AND LIKE I SAID, MAYBE WE NEED $7, MAYBE WE NEED $2.
THIS WON'T GET US HERE SO THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING TO COMPARE IT AGAINST.
[01:20:02]
SO I'M GOING TO ASK STAFF, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE AT THE CONCLUSION OF ALL OF THIS CONVERSATION, THAT IF WE POSTPONE THIS, AS MISS BURKHOLDER REQUESTED, THAT NOW YOU HAVE ENOUGH TO WORK WITH, THAT YOU WILL COME BACK IN THE FUTURE WITH IDEAS, NOT JUST NOT JUST BRING IN THE EXACT SAME PRESENTATION AND ASKING FOR DIRECTION YOU'LL YOU HAVE ENOUGH.I'M SORRY. THEY'RE GOING TO NEED FORMAL DIRECTION.
MISS BURKHOLDER, WOULD YOU BE OPPOSED TO GIVING STAFF DIRECTION AS TO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BRING BACK IN AFTER THE BUDGET? RIGHT. SO I'VE HEARD IT SAID THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ACTUAL THE NUMBERS.
DO THEY MAKE DOES IT MAKE SENSE AND WHAT NUMBER DOES MAKE SENSE BASED ON 2024 AND THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE QUEUE? I'VE HEARD IT SAID THAT WE WANT TO BE AWARE OF THE EXEMPT CATEGORIES AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DEFINITELY EXEMPTING PUBLIC SAFETY AS PART OF THAT.
BUT ALSO WHAT DOES WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? AND THEN I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY PROJECTS WOULD WE BE HELPING NOT GOING TO THE VOTER. I MEAN, MONROE STREET POOL WAS NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE SORT OF IT WAS JUST SORT OF ALL OF A SUDDEN POOL IS GOING TO THE VOTER KIND OF IN MY RECOLLECTION.
BUT SO WHAT WOULD WE BE SAVING IN ESSENCE, WHAT WOULD WE BE SAVING BY NOT TAKING PROP H THINGS TO THE VOTER ALL THE TIME? IF THE NUMBER WAS AT $3.25 OR $5 OR $7 OR MAKE IT MAKE SENSE FINANCIALLY AND FISCALLY.
AND THEN I MRS. BHAT-PATEL, DID I GET YOUR INPUT? DID I SUMMARIZE YOUR INPUT? YES. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M HEARING I THINK I GOT MRS. ACOSTA, MRS. LUNA, WE'RE GOOD.
COUNCIL MEMBER I BELIEVE THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSION ABOUT TYING IT TO AN INDEX OR CPI.
SURE THAT THAT WAS PART OF MRS. ACOSTA'S. YEAH.
AND WHAT WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE IN TEN YEARS? I DON'T KNOW, SO I THINK THAT'S SPECIFIC ENOUGH.
AND MAYBE IF NOT, WE CAN WATCH THE TAPE BACK.
CAN WE ASK THE ATTORNEY TO SUM THAT UP THE WAY SHE UNDERSTOOD? DID I GET YOUR INPUT, THOUGH? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU.
AND WOULD WE BE BRINGING BACK A NUMBER THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE BASED ON THE COST OF INCREASED TO COST OF CONSTRUCTION? IT WOULD INCLUDE A CPI OR SOME SORT OF INDEX THAT MAKES SENSE FOR THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS.
WE'D BE BRINGING BACK CATEGORIES OF EXEMPT PROJECTS, DEFINITELY TO INCLUDE PUBLIC SAFETY.
IS THAT SATISFACTORY? AND I THINK JUST ADDING THE RANGE.
SO WHETHER IT'S $3.25, $5 OR $7.
MAY I JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION? YES. JUST TO MAKE IT SIMPLER, BECAUSE, MISS FROST, YOU JUST SAID A LOT BASED ON WHAT WE ALL SHARED UP HERE.
WHAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN WAS IF AND THIS IS A SUCCINCT WAY OF SAYING EVERYTHING WE ALL JUST SAID, WITH STAFF COMING BACK TO US WITH A RECOMMENDED LIMIT AND TYING IT TO AN INDEX, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD COVER WHAT WE ALL SAID? AND I FEEL LIKE HOPEFULLY THAT COVERS THE RANGE THAT WE ALL DISCUSSED.
AND THEN WITH EXEMPTION CATEGORIES, I KNOW I THINK YOU ALREADY COVERED ALL OF THAT, THE EXEMPTION CATEGORIES, I SAID PRIORITIZING PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEN AND THEN SOME. BUT THE PART THAT I JUST WANTED TO MENTION WAS THE WITH STAFF COMING BACK TO US WITH THE RECOMMENDED LIMIT AND TYING IT TO AN INDEX.
MRS. ACOSTA MUDDY THE WATERS A LITTLE MORE.
I DON'T WANT TO CREATE A FRANKENSTEIN.
I WOULD LIKE A DATE ON JUNE 11TH.
AND AND MY THANK YOU FOR THAT.
AND THEN MY SECOND POINT OF CLARIFICATION IS THE ACTION TODAY WAS INFORMATIONAL SO THAT WE COULD GET DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL, THAT THEN WE WOULD COME BACK. WOULD COUNCIL'S EXPECTATION BE THAT WE WOULD AT THAT MEETING, THEN WE WOULD HAVE A PREPARED BALLOT MEASURE FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION OR.
[01:25:06]
OKAY. I THE PLUG AND PLAY VERSION.I'M IMAGINING RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE COULD TWEAK IT IF WE FEEL LIKE IT'S NECESSARY.
OKAY, SO WITH RETURNING ON JUNE 11TH WITH A RECOMMENDED LIMIT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A BLANK FOR A RANGE, BUT WITH A RECOMMENDATION TYING IT TO AN INFLATION INDEX, BUT ALSO CREATING CATEGORIES OF EXEMPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
ALL RIGHT. IS THAT A SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION OF YOUR MOTION? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION. AND A SECOND.
PLEASE VOTE. THAT WAS EXHAUSTING, BUT IT PASSES FIVE ZERO.
ZACH YOU GOT A LOT OF WORK OUT AHEAD OF YOU.
THANK YOU. AND THAT BRINGS US TO THE CONCLUSION OF OUR COUNCIL MEETING.
[COUNCIL COMMENTARY AND REQUESTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS]
COMMENTS. MISS LUNA, MISS BURKHOLDER, SORRY.JUST THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE.
WE ARE GOING TO EACH COMMISSION.
AND SO THIS PAST WEEK AND THIS WEEK MR. HABER AND I DID GO TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE HOUSING AND HOMELESS SERVICES COMMISSION.
OUR COMMISSIONERS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, ARE VOLUNTEERS.
AND SO IT'S REALLY NICE FOR THEM TO KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING A LOT OF HARD WORK TO HELP SUPPORT THEM AND THAT THAT LINES OF COMMUNICATION ARE OPEN AND HOW THAT ALL THAT PROCESS WORKS. TOMORROW A NUMBER OF US WILL BE TRAVELING TO DC MEETINGS ON THURSDAY, BACK ON FRIDAY.
I WAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY WITH MR. GRAHAM TO GO TO THE NORTH COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT AGAIN THIS YEAR.
IN ADDITION TO THE ADVOCACY TRIP THIS WEEK, NEXT WEEK, WE WILL BE HAVING OUR LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING HERE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON TUESDAY, I WILL YOU'LL HAVE TO CHECK THE WEBSITE FOR THE EXACT DATE AND TIME.
OKAY. 1 P.M. NEXT TUESDAY BEFORE COUNCIL.
WE ALSO HAD OUR CITY SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING THE OTHER DAY, AND I WANTED TO SHARE WITH FOLKS THAT IT WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL AND POSITIVE MEETING WITH ALL THE SUPERINTENDENTS. THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY DIVISION MET THIS WEEK, WAS THAT THIS WEEK? GOSH, THINGS ARE FLYING BY SO QUICKLY.
AND THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY HAS ITS BIG MEETING WHERE WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THE WATER AUTHORITY'S BUDGET AND RATES NEXT WEEK. SO LOTS GOING ON.
YES. WE HAD THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES DIVISION MEETING.
WE HAD AN NCTD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING YESTERDAY.
I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER LUNA WILL BE FILLING IN FOR ME ON THURSDAY FOR NCTD WHILE WE'RE IN DC AND THEN TODAY WE HAD THE PLEASURE OF JOINING COUNCIL MEMBER ACOSTA AND I HAD THE PLEASURE OF JOINING OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT VOLUNTEERS FOR THEIR LUNCHEON TO JUST THANK THEM FOR THEIR SERVICE.
I GOT TO JUDGE AN ENTREPRENEUR'S CONTEST FOR THE JUNIORS AND SENIORS AT PACIFIC RIDGE HIGH SCHOOL, AND IF THEIR IDEAS ARE ANY INDICATION OF THE FUTURE, I THINK OUR FUTURE IS BRIGHT.
CITY CLERK. WE'RE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.