Mayor and council we are live. Good evening everyone. Welcome to the Monday April 28th, 2025 meeting in the passing city council. Actually it's the May 5th. Well I'm sorry. You gave me the road put the wrong date you're right. May 5th. It's May 5th. That's the ceremonial. That's the ceremony thank you. Sorry about that Mayor. No worries. On the mayor's ceremonial, it's April 28th, it's not him. All right. I didn't do the ceremonial part. Thank you. We'll start with the calling of roll. Council Member Cole. Present. Council Member Hampton. God is good. Blessed in honor to be here. Council Member Jones. Here. Council Member Lion. Here. Council Member Madison. Here. Council Member Missuda. Here. Vice Mayor Revis. Here. Mayor Gordo. Here. There's a quorum of the Council, President. Thank you. Pledge of Allegiance, thankials. Pleasure allegiance. Pleasure allegiance. Thank you. Mr. Jones. Yes. We stand at the table. Right hand in your heart. We begin. Pleasure allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God and in the visible. liberty and justice are all. All right. Now we do have a couple of ceremonial matters starting with Chief Harris, Introduction of our new Sergeant in Arms. And thank you to Danny Morris, Sergeant Danny Morris for his service. Sergeant of arms. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Vice Mayor, members of the Council. Good evening. It's my pleasure tonight to do that the ceremonial piece I really love to do and that's to make the changes, bringing people in, sending people out, it's all good. We do want to thank Danny Morris, Sergeant Morris, who did a very good job representing and doing what he needed to do. And now it's time to make that transition on to our next Sergeant in Arms. A guy who's been around for quite some time and if you've never seen him and you don't know him, know as product because for the last few years he's been responsible for a lot of the event planning that you see around the roles well in the roles parade. So let's bring him in with a thunderous round of applause as soon as I'm done introducing him. Jason Van Heck has been with the Pasadena Police Department for 27 years. He's also veteran of the United States Army and I won't hold that against him as a Marine. I still think we're brothers in service, so thank you. He's been in the Army with the 28 years of service that involved multiple deployments as a criminal investigation as a division special agent. Jason is currently assigned as a supervisor in the event planning section where he's worked out the past seven years. He's planned staff and supervise hundreds of the city's events, big and small to include Rose Parade, all the Rose Bowl stadium events. And he's currently working on the plans for the upcoming FIFA Club World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympic Games. In 2014, Jason was promoted to the rank of Sergeant and worked several assignments as a supervisor including patrol, detectives, SWAT, event planning, and the Special Enforcement Section. Prior to 2014, Jason was a corporal since 2008 where he worked as a patrol corporal and a homicide detective. As an officer from 1998 to 2008, Jason worked in patrol detectives in the traffic session as a motor officer. Sounds like he's done a whole lot for this community and this agency, so we're getting a good one here. In a spare time, he enjoys spending time with his family and attending sporting events. Sometimes he gets to go to him on his own time and not just working, right, Jason? So with that, I'll bring on Sergeant Jason Van Heck. Thank you. Thank you, Chief. Thank you, Chief, for the form introduction. Thank you to the council members, Mr. Mayor, for having me here. I look forward to learning a lot and being part of this time-honored tradition to be witness to the history and the future of this great city of Pasadena, which I've served. Thank you for having me. Thank you, Sergeant. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the picture. Somebody's got a panel. Anybody, take a picture and send it to me. Here's my commander. Here we go. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. All right. Okay, we do have one proclamation. If I can ask Johnston, Colin Bogart, and Matt Stumbo to meet me at the lectern. Today, are celebrating, passing a bike month. Creating bicycle-friendly communities has been shown to improve resident health and wellbeing, boost community spirit, improve traffic safety, reduce air pollution, and street congestion. And is an integral part of the multimodal transportation system planned by federal, state, regional and local transportation governments. And so today, we, as a council, are declaring passing a bike month and encourage people to get out of their cars and ride a bike whenever they can. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. year by the local Pasadena nonprofit day one with support from the Pasadena Complete Streets Coalition. This year we have activities and events for all ages and abilities with beginner rides for people new to biking, kids education and safety events, and rise highlighting the local history and businesses. Speak a little further about the importance of bike month and some of the fun activities we have planned. We have Colin Bogart representing day one, he's the active transportation director there and also Matt Sombo, resident district seven representing the Pasini Complete Streets Coalition. Pass off to Colin. Excuse me. Thank you. Good evening Mayor Gordo, council members and city staff. As Scott just mentioned, my name is Colin Bogart. I work for day one and serve as the lead organizer for Pasadena Bike Month. We're so pleased to once again be working with the city, the Pasadena Complete Streets Coalition, and the Pasadena community to present a full month of bike events for our community in May. National Bike Month and Bike to Work Day are being celebrated in cities across the United States, and we're always proud to be joining that celebration. We have a great schedule of events and rides for every weekend this month, and then some. We're especially excited about a collaboration with Hastings Branch Library on Saturday, May 17th, where kids can decorate their bikes and helmets, get a bike safety check, courtesy of Pasadena Cicolore, and go on a short ride with their family. We're also planning a short family ride to close out the Family Fund Day at La Pintresca Park on Saturday, May 24th. The following day, Sunday, May 25th will be a Kids Bike Skills Clinic at Robinson Park, two to four PM. Children will be able to learn basic bike handling skills and rules of the road guided by certified cycling instructors. This year features increased partnerships with local bike shops, which are offering multiple fix-a-flat classes, and are also hosting group rides of their own. Local businesses and business associations like the Playhouse Village and Old Pasadena have also shown strong support this year for which we are grateful. I'd also like to mention that once again we're hosting an e-bike exppo. This year will be on Sunday May 18th at the Rose Bowl 3 mile loop near Seiko Street and Rosemont 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. There's a new bike shop in town so seven local bike shops will be participating and the public will have a chance to test ride electric bikes from all of those shops all in one location. We'll also have staff from PWP at the event so people can learn about the city's e-bike rebate program and how to apply. As I understand it they're still funding for this popular program especially for income-qualified households. Last but not least we're looking forward to hosting a bike-to-work day pit stop in City Hall on Thursday, May 15th, 7 to 10 a.m. Bike to work day is always a great opportunity for people to try biking to work and we encourage people to stop by for snack and some coffee on their way. It's also a chance for people to go multi-modal for longer distance commutes since I believe Pasadena transit, Metro and Metro link are free for bicyclists on bike to work day. For those who work from home we invite them to come by and say hi even if they aren't biking to the office. Fresh air and some time on a bike is always a great way to start your work day. All of this information is online in great detail at the Pasadena Bike Month website, which is at bitleit.ly-pacadena-bikemonth-capitalized-p-capitalized-p-capitalized-p-capitalized-m. Again, Pasadena Bike Month, we also have a phone number set up for people if they want to call 626-657-8744. Thank you. With that, I'd like to pass it to Matt, who has just a few words and then we'll wrap it. If we could, we have a very long agenda with a lot of people, so if you could just quickly. Certainly. Good evening, Mayor Gordo, members of the City Council, staff and fellow members of the Greater Pasadena community. I'm Matt Stumbo, I live, work, walk, drive, and bike and Pasadena. It's my pleasure to be speaking on behalf of the Pasadena Complete Streets Coalition and all volunteer organization. We've been leading walks and bike rides that share the beauty of our city and advocating for safer streets for over 10 years. We are very happy to be partnering with day one in the city of Pasadena for bike month 2025. And we'd like to thank you for putting staff, time, energy, and funding into bike month this year. We hope you'll celebrate bike month with us for many years to come. So I hope that everyone here will hop on a bike and come join us on the streets of Pasadena and I hope that you'll enjoy bike one that we have planned. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Lion. Just wanna say thank you for organizing all of this Collin and Matt. And we are looking forward to Council Member Cole and I will be joining you for the greenways ride on the afternoon of the 17th. And I cannot wait for the ice cream and pie ride. expanded from last year on the afternoon of the 17th and I cannot wait for the ice cream and pie ride. It's expanded from last year on the 31st, so I'll see about those. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So we do have a loss of a long time passing a resident and staff and friend to many of us. Today we pause with heavy hearts to remember someone who embodied the very best of public service and civic spirit. And that's our friend Ann Erdman. Ann was more than a dedicated public servant. She was a storyteller, a connector, and a quiet force behind so much of what made Pasadena shine. She was also a long time friend and mentor, I would say, to many of us, particularly in the world of public communication. Before she came to serve the people of Pasadena, I five years as a spokeswoman for the city of Palm Springs and before entering public service, she built a strong foundation in the private sector working for more than a decade in advertising and public relations. She understood the power of communication, not just as a tool, but as a bridge. And I would say to all of you that Anne's sense of humor, particularly on council issues, and putting together the passing of falllies is really something that stands out to me. I was proud to participate in those number of years and so we will all miss and sense a humor. And like I said, her willingness to poke fun at herself, at all of us individually as members of the council and the council itself, but always in good humor and always with the best of intentions and sometimes helping us see the follies of some of our ways. So with that I would ask that we recognize Andrew and her in passing and more importantly her contributions as a staff member as a resident and as a friend to us all. Thank you. Next, we will move on to public comment for matters not on the agenda. We do have an exceedingly long agenda tonight, and so I'm going to ask that speakers limit themselves to one minute for matters not on the agenda. If you wish to have more time than a minute, you're welcome to stay once we complete our agenda, and I'm happy to give you more time. Thank you. Rob Mathia, followed by Hidab, followed by Iris Chen, followed by Terry Stein. If you hear your name, please line up. Yes. Rob Mathia, are you here? If you can begin to line up in the middle of the room here, that'd be great. So as I call your name, if you could line up. My name is Rob Mathia. I'm a ordain minister, member of Pasadena Menonite Church, and a resident of Pasadena ever since our house burned down in the Eaton Fire in Altadena. But unlike my situation, the people in Gaza also have their houses destroyed, but they're We're also death, and since March 2nd, Israel has stopped taking allowing food into Gaza, and as a result, all the international organizations are reporting starvation. We are here to ask the City Council to pass a resolution asking the firefighter and police pension funds to consider divesting from those that profit from the death of Palestinians, companies like Chevron, Boeing and Caterpillar. You all pass resolutions all the time. And they say something about which you value. They say something about your time as expires. I'm asking you to have the courage and the moral obligation to make that move. Pedabh, followed by Aris Chend and Terry Stein and SD Chandler. Greetings of peace. I stand here asking for the city to pass a resolution supporting divestment by the fire and the police retirement system. How can we as human look away from this genocide that is taking place and how can we look away from innocent civilians being slaughtered? Babies butchered children, maimed. The city of Pasadena sadly is complicit in this by participating in this fund. I hope you support. Thank you. Thank you. You had 30 seconds left. Oh, God. Pasadena sadly is complicit in bombing and killing Palestinians through the police and fire fires, retirement, which invests in companies like Shivran, Buing and Carapiller. These companies are actively participating in this genocide, be it the business partnership with Israel, manufacturing weapons, or providing equipment using demolish Palestinian homes. Worse, Carapiller equipment is used to crush Palestinian families while sleeping in their cats. Thank you, my name is expired. Iris Chen, followed by Terry Stein, and ST Chandler. Welcome, ma'am. Good evening. A few months ago, I met Janna and her mother here at the Shreynard Hospital in Pasadena. Janna is a Palestinian teenage girl who was seriously injured during Israel's attacks on Gaza. She eventually had to have her leg amputated. Because the hospitals and medical infrastructure in Gaza were being systematically targeted and bombed, she had to evacuate to get the care she needed. Through Palestine Children's Relief Fund, she was able to come to Pasadena to get a prosthetic leg, medical treatment, and physical therapy. Imagine knowing that this very city that is offering her care is also investing in companies that have caused her so much harm. Companies like Boeing, manufacturer of the fighter jets, attack helicopters, guided munitions and bombs that are being used against Palestinian children and civilians, even as I speak. I strongly urge the council to pass a resolution supporting divestment from Boeing, caterpillar, and Chevron by the fire and police retirement system. Terry Steinfall, for Janna and for others, may we be a city and a community that invests in people's well-being and not in their destruction? Thank you, ma'am. Terry Steinfall by S.T. Chandler, Ronald K. Matthews, then Pete Irving, then Yaudi, and then Alan Shea. Good evening. I am a local lawyer, community member, Jewish member of our community. I'm here to echo the calls to Agenda as a resolution. We all know that how we spend our money reflects our values. It's true in a family, it's true in a city budget, and what we do with our dollars matters. So the city has an ethical investment policy, and I'm calling on you all to, let's have a conversation about how we use it in an ethical way. Right now, a genocide is being perpetuated in Palestine. First responders are being targeted. World Central Kitchen is being targeted. All of us still feeling the scars of the fire, those of us who were affected. So many of our community members displaced were fed and protected by the very first responders who we're not standing up with our dollars to support. So let's put this on the agenda. We can talk about it for longer. I'm putting it much into one minute as I can. I have a lot more details I wanted to share with you. Let's stand in the values that make this community such a special place to live. Thank you. And to all the speakers, you're also welcome to submit your comments in writing, or once we get through the agenda, we can open public comment up again for an additional minute. Bestie Chandler, followed by Ronald Matthews and Pete Irving and Yaddi and Alan Che. I add my voice to the call for divestment from Israel we apartheid in genocide. Pasadena has already invested $100,000 towards bombing innocent Palestinians through the police and fire fighters retirement fund as your constituents are aware those companies play active roles in this genocide. My ask for you to pass the resolution comes as Israel's devastating blockade on all humanitarian food aid is now entered its third month and health officials in Gaza report that at least 57 Palestinians have already starved to death continuing to invest in these companies and profit from this genocide is simply unconscionable. Unicef reports of a 9,000 children have been admitted for treatment for acute malnutrition so far this year and aid groups are blasting the new Israeli proposal to take control of aid distribution. I hope that we can all agree that no amount of money or profit is worth complicity in a genocide against anyone. Thank you, Mel. Thank you. Ronald came Matthews, then Pete Irving, then Yaddy, then Alan Shay. Ronald Walker. Hello, honorable Mayor and members of the Pasadena City Council. My name is Ronald Matthews. I serve as a local hiring coordinator and advocate for equitable workforce development across Pasadena. And I speak today not only in my professional capacity but as a committed member of the Black male forum. I'm here to stress the critical importance of strengthening and enforcing local hiring policies to ensure that our residents, particularly those historically underrepresented in the construction trades, are first to benefit from the significant investments being made in Pasadena's infrastructure and public facilities. Pasadena's first source hiring ordinance was designed to prioritize local workers, especially those facing systematic barriers to employment. However, enforcement has often fallen short. with the passage of PUSD measure R, we're not, we now have a great opportunity to line bond fund. to employment. However, enforcement has often fallen short. With the passage of PUSD measure R, we're not, we now have a great opportunity to line bond funded construction with community benefit by ensuring living wage careers go to passing in families first. Furthermore, the project labor agreement for the Glendale Passing in the Burbank Airport is a regional commitment to fair labor practices, but we must ensure that it also supports passing the workers and contractors. This requires transparency. You could submit your comments on the survey. Perfect. Pete Irving followed by Yachty, followed by Alan Shay. Pete Irving. Yachty. Yachty, welcome. So for the upcoming fiscal year, the police department states that intense to purchase more surveillance equipment, including more license plate readers and establishing an active intelligence center. Sounds kind of like a real chime. Crime center kind of like what goes on in communist countries like China. In the past, the council has pitted privacy against public safety and I hope that given the current government, the current climate at the federal government that that will change and that you guys will now start seeing privacy as a public safety issue and I just want to say so that the public is aware that there are a lot a lot of politicians at the state level that are working really hard to actually strengthen our our privacy. I am working with my organization on 200 bills sponsoring three including one that will strengthen the strengthen the privacy protections at the local level and municipal governments. And so I hope that this is a consideration when you guys are looking at the budget and these kind of programs. And I don't want to hear that the cake is baked and that we do consider privacy as public safety. Thank you. Alan Shay. Mr. Shay, Shea, welcome. Good afternoon. I'm mayor and council members. We're going to make this real quick. I'm here about agendizing items. We've asked for last five years a number of items should be agendized from police oversight to now measures dealing with underground wiring also with where we stand on even the fires. All these things need to be a gendys because what we're running into in the community is they're running out of money. So unless this city council is going to create a new fund, which we can agenda is that, since we did give 2.6, 7 million to the goals, the golf course, I think we should be able to find 2 million, 3 million for funding to start helping people who need help as a result of either getting places to live or getting their homes back in place. This is a Pasadena issue that we need to address. Thank you. Thank you. That completes public comment on today's matters not on the agenda. Okay. We'll move to the- Mr. Mayor. Yes, I was in the queue. Oh, I'm sorry.. School, go ahead. Respectfully Mayor, last meeting I asked that we agenda as the issue of ethical investment at a finance committee meeting. Under under resolution 9716 I'm going to make that a formal request and simply ask under our rules of If you you can find the right time for us to agenda is that. Next we'll move to be consent calendar. We have one speaker card on item six. Mayor I'd just like to make a comment on item one. We don't really need to pull it, but if you have a moment. Sure. I have a comment for them. And Mayor, I'm going to need to recuse or pull item 8. Item 8. 8. So we'll hold 1 and 8B and 6. And 6, 1, and eight, B. Those second. We've moved and the rest has been moved and seconded. Are there any objections? Seeing none, matters approved. Did you want to do the public comment first. Yeah, I want to do. Well, which item is the public comment? I'm six. Six. Your pleasure, Mayor. Yeah, let's do the public comment first. David Whitehead. Mr. Whitehead, welcome. Good evening, Mayor Gordell and City Council members. Thank you for this opportunity to speak on consent calendar item number six regarding the revised fees schedule for accessory dwelling units. I'd like to take a moment to thank Councilman Hampton and the members of the Economic Development and Technology Committee for helping to advance this matter. Additionally, and to an even greater extent, I'd like to recognize the very hard work of the city's planning and community development department in carefully crafting the revised fees schedule. I've been in touch with the department throughout this enormous effort and I sincerely appreciate the courtesy, professionalism and receptiveness of the staff. They have been extraordinary. I hope the director page will extend my gratitude to all of the department's hardworking staff. On a personal note, with their revised ADU fee schedule, I can now submit my blueprints for review and I am hoping to break ground on a project in the next three months. Again, thank you to all involved. Thank you. Thank you. That completes public comment on the consent calendar. Okay. You have a question for everyone. Questions related to number one? Mayor, I just wanted to note that I support the staff action and just wanted to point out less to anyone not catch the entirety of the report that we are engaged in brush clearance in the lower of Royale that we're not going to misbead in that. We know how important that is and that it's happening through purchase order with the vendor. And then we hope by September to bring forward a new recommendation. So really no need from staff to respond. And just to confirm this. Let's agree with me. And then you can. Yes, just to confirm it. It's correct. The purchase order has been issued and the work started earlier this week. Oh, thank you. I had a similar comment to the Councilman from Madison. And I just wanted to say that just a minute ago we had representatives of I guess our GOVIS team and they worked closely with OBA and I was wondering if we could talk to OBA about doing some of this breast clearance in our parks and most in particular in the lower oil and all throughout the rail. So just for that as you're going back to submit new costs for proposals. Thank you. Yeah, I agree with that and previously asked that we look at having a full timetime crew much like we do with MASH or maybe as part of MASH that would do year-round clearance in the Eroio and trail restoration. I think given what we've experienced in the earlier part of this year, we could offer people training, a job, doing the work of protecting homes in and around the oil. And so I'd ask that the staff give some thought to that as part of the budgetary process for this time around. I appreciate you saying that, Mayor, because that segues to, you know, genising the annex buildings at Ha'Ha Manga, because the Crete group was looking at doing something similar to that, not trying to skew it in one direction, but I think that, you know, I'm a genising that as soon as possible after the budget discussions. So thank you. Most of them will approve of the region. And Mariff, I may I agree with that comment is that we should include OBA in the discussions for that because I've attended numerous of their graduations. And the first thing they always ask is about inquiring about work within the city. So why not give back to our community and educate them while getting them paid? Yes, Mayor Mayor, if I may. Good evening, Mayor Gordon, members of Council. We've actually had conversation with leadership of OBA the past month and they have expressed interest to continue working with us at a few sites, including the lower oil to do some brush clearance. So we're in communication when they will incorporate them in the process as we move forward for long-term trail maintenance and other projects that we may have. I mean, the OBA group that employees, trains and employees, people from our community does that work for the National Forest Service. And so there's no reason we in Pasadena shouldn't be doing the same thing in and around the Eroio and our trails. And it's not just the Eroyo, but in long, the foothills where the city boundaries are close or property within the city boundaries. Mayor, I'll second the motion. I do want to point out that we had a town hall last week about this topic. There are a lot of moving parts as one can imagine. For example, there are times when one should not be clearing brush, times when one should. There's also an issue about ingress and egress if there were to be an event that's very important for public safety and for those that use the Orion. So I'm confident the staff is on top of this, and I just want everyone to know that we are too. So I'll second the motion. And the motion was for I'm one, not in six. No six is. Vice mayor has a question about six. Oh, okay. Actually just have a comment. So it could be for all of them except eight P. Before we move to that, I just want to clear the direction I'm hoping, well, what I'm hoping staff comes back with is not just clearance. You know, if it's not appropriate during a certain part of the year to clear that it still remains appropriate to clear trails and restore trails in the arroyo as well and so I'm looking for a combination of both Ms. Revis Just very briefly wanted to thank mr. Whitehead district five resident for being so active and engaged through the whole ADU process. It's made our final product much better to have such active engagement so So thank you to Mr. Whitehead. And my neighbor. So is the motion on 1 and 6? Okay, I'll second. Okay. Moved, seconded. Are there any objections? Seeing none, they're approved. Just one thing, I mean, this to the city manager manager for item six I would ask for the PIO to advertise that we have reduced A fees for ADU's for anyone who's planning on building ADU. Thank you. Okay Thank you Yeah, so 8b Yes, may I am going to recuse myself from item 8B. Yeah. So 8B. Yes, Mayor. I'm going to recuse myself from item 8B because it involves setting a public hearing and involving bugle. Heaven where I own property. So step aside for this item. Okay. So we'll allow this Revis to step out of the room. And... So we'll allow Ms. Rivas to step out of the room. And is there a motion on AP? So move. The move seconded. Are there any objections? Seeing none, that matters approved. Next, we'll move to item nine. 9 and this is a public hearing. Mayor out of the units of caution because I own property next to this location I will recuse myself from the public hearing. Thank you Mr. Jones. Okay, Mr. Clerk. This is a time and place for the public hearing for review of the Arts and Culture Commission decision to disapprove the proposed artists and concept art plan for 2 9 15 2915 East Colorado Boulevard, the passing of Russ Nac Porsche dealership. The city clerk's office received one letter expressing concerns with the viability of the Russ Nac Porsche project due to long delays. And the recent denial of the arts component by the commission that letter was distributed the council posted online as part of the record for this public hearing. Thank you. All right. Do we, we, we had a long decision. Do we need a full presentation on this matter? Okay, we are sitting to know about, so I guess we can rely on the staff important. I do have some questions, maybe others do. Sure. And we do have two speaker cards on the side. So the council has received the report and the materials and is familiar with this matter. Mr. Madison. Mayor. Thank you. I'm very supportive of the project as I think we all should be because of the tremendous benefits that Russ Nack has brought to our community and will continue to bring. The one question I had for staff was there appears to be a utility to this particular art project in the sense that it showcases some of the cars that are for sale. And it's very hard for me personally to legislate what where art ends and commerce begins. But is there any guidance in the code or the guidelines that we can look to and just addressing that? There's nothing that prohibits them in this particular installation from parking the cards there. As we tried to explain in the staff report that the treatment of the space underneath that trellis structure and the artwork, it's treated differently. It's part of the art space, but there's no permanent barriers there that would prevent it from being used for other. They intended to use it for social gatherings or events and things like that and then also for parking cars. So it's not required parking. They're gonna have limited cars that are on display. It's gonna be separate from cars if someone's just coming to look at the car lot. They're to be displayed in a different manner. But there's nothing that conflicts with the guidelines in terms of allowing them to park the cars there. And were there discussions with the applicant about any limitations on that space or what? Yeah, I think we outlined the three primary concerns of the commission and the staff report and one of the concerns was the Parking and display of cars adjacent to and around the art piece and whether or not that detractor from the art piece or not And it was of the opinion of some that it did and others it didn't But there's no conflict with the guidelines with them parking the cars there. They're allowed to do so and for the applicant Is it an integral part of the proposal? I think we could ask the applicant that. And they prepared our concept plan. It was part of their whole entire concept. So I think if they wanted to respond to that, they would probably be the best to respond to that particular question. All right. Well, we can hold that until they come to the lectern or not. Thank you, Mayor. Those were my quick. Did you want them to come to the lecture? Well, let's see what the other questions are and we'd rather than do a piecemeal. Okay. Mr. Cole, followed by Ms. Rebus. In the July 15th report on the last appeal of this project to the City Council on page seven, there's language that says that the proposed trellis meets the standards to be considered a structure. The sculpture structure would provide a five foot set book with landscaping and comply with the front set back standard along Colorado Boulevard. So is this piece of art or is this a structure that complies with the set back requirement? It's both and they're allowed to be both. Why, where does it say that they're allowed to be both? So starting back from the zoning review when the project was before the planning commission, actually going back further as we explained through the reviews in the in the staff report when it went to the design commission for preliminary consultation One of the recommendations of the design commission was that they consider placing a structure at the corner some type of a structure That would engage the pedestrian so when Rustack responded to the first round of reviews with the commissions when they went back to planning commission and one of the changes that they added was adding a trellis-like structure to engage the pedestrians and also have it serving as their art piece. There's nothing that says you can't have fun. This is considered functional art. There are requirements that it can't be designed by the architect of the building. It has to be designed by an artist and meet the art guidelines, but you can have functional aspects of a building that also are art. So in this case, it checks multiple boxes. It meets the definition of a structure for the setback requirements, but it also meets the definitions of the requirements for an art piece as well. Appreciate that. Thank you. Miss Revis. Thank you, Mayor. I have a question along similar lines as I, my colleagues. It just sounds like this, the planning commission was having a philosophical discussion about whether or not this is public art. And in reviewing everything, it seems apparent based on your, their staff report and what you're saying is that there is no definition of public art out there, or that is applicable here. We're just looking at the guy, our own guidelines. We do have public art guidelines and they define what's eligible and what's not eligible criteria, which we have outlined in the staff report. So there's those specific individual guidelines, but not some broader philosophical or conceptual idea of what is public art versus what is not. Right. As long as it means the requirements of the type of structure that's allowed, which again functional art is allowed, also 3D objects of any type I'm looking to see if I'm sure I'm quoting that correctly. It actually meets two different criteria for art, it's not just one. And the guidelines say that we should be as open as possible to what art is. I mean, that's behind this is that we went art to be engaging and we would be open and flexible to different types of media and in different types of art. And this is unusual in that we typically don't have something that maybe is a freestanding structure that meets a setback that's also an art requirement. But Russ Nack also could have just paid the public art fee and not done anything. And so they really spent an extensive amount of time listening to the design commission and trying to come up with a way that they could engage the community. They work with Art Center, they went through a design charret and a design store multiple day charret on coming up with a concept. And they're trying to really do something engaging at the corner that's different. And sometimes that causes some ripples, you know, as we go through our commission process because it is something different. but it is allowed. It's allowed for the guidelines as an art piece and it meets the definition of a structure per the zoning code as well. Got it, that's all. we go through our commission process because it is something different, but it is allowed. It's allowed for the guidelines as an art piece and it meets the definition of a structure per the zoning code as well. Got it, that's helpful. So it meets all the guidelines and there's nothing out there saying it can't be functional as well. That's correct, okay. It's specifically, our guidelines allow functional art. There's requirements for it. Again, like I was saying, it can't be designed by the architect, it has to be designed by an artist to meet all the art guidelines, which in this case it does. Okay, thank you so much. Now I would suggest that having public art that's also functional encourages more public art throughout our city and so we should consider that as well. Did we want to hear from the applicant? Are there any other questions? I don't see anyone else in the queue. There was a Mr. Madison. Maybe you can just restate you the question that you have. No, I think I'm fine with the staff's response. Are you okay? Yeah. Okay. There are two public comment cards from members of the public. Okay. Two public comments cards. Gabbo, Lizardo, followed by Joe Feinblatt. Gabbo. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you for having this call for review. I'm one of the arts commissioners and I was one of the votes against the staff recommendation at last month's meeting regarding this art project. I'd like to offer some manner of clarification. I gave a more detailed and thorough explanation of my personal reasons to my council member before this meeting. But just as a matter, it is a matter of judgment for the commissioners, all of us, and I only speak for myself, whether or not the public, whether or not the private development public art guidelines are met by each piece. Staff has done a fantastic job throughout this process from planning to council, through design, to council, to planning, and then finally to arts. But at the end of the day, it's the commission that makes the judgment on whether or not to recommend to council. And then in this case, it's your decision in this denovo hearing whether or not in your judgment the guidelines are met. So I would encourage you to look at all the guidelines and evaluate them for yourself just as every one of the commissioners did when deciding on this project. I would like to just say all of us on the commission engaged in thoughtful and thorough discussion and nobody felt that any insult or disrespect was intended to either commissioners who held different views or to the applicant. As I see my time, I just like to once again thank staff for their fantastic work. It is very difficult to do this on a good day. It's even more difficult to do this with two hands tied behind your back as they have often been during this process. Lastly, despite my vote, I'd like to recommend that the council approve this and reverse the commission's recommendation. Thank you very much. Thank you. Joe Feinblatt. Joe, welcome. Thank you Mayor and Council. I too is one of the people who voted against recommending this. And it was a hard decision. Lots of things are weighed in this. But I want to look at why is it that Council in the past has approved a program for public art. And I think the purpose is not to do something which is helpful to a commercial being that might be helpful to the city to and it's for the appreciation of the people of the city and And if you look at what people, I look at this work of art and said, that's really interesting. They had lots of ideas that they were supposed to be including in it. And unfortunately, I thought that it wasn't as strong in meeting what the design intent was to what they actually showed us. And I thought, if the public goes by this, driving by this down Colorado Boulevard or walking down the sidewalk, would they really notice this and the qualities that the artists that are put there. And I think that they probably wouldn't. They'd probably see this as a structure and closing some very valuable, interesting looking cars. And that's what they would remember from the experience. So I can't say that they shouldn't build a structure like this, but I think it could be a little bit stronger. And I want them to really think about the possibility of ways of making it an object that when people come to Pasadena and drive by it and stop by this dealership, they're going to remember this fabulous piece of art and not just the historic wonderful cars that are exhibited there. Thank you. That completes public comment. What is the will of the council? Oh, yeah. If the apple, if the apple, then we would like an opportunity to make a statement or this is the time. Good evening Councilmember Stephanie DeWolf on behalf of the Russ Nack automotive group. Thank you for taking this issue up tonight. We just want to say we are extremely proud of the partnership with Art Center our College of Design They're here tonight including Isaac one of the students who worked on this and we're also very proud of this This individual art piece that was designed specifically for the site We believe that at 100% meets the guidelines and there's probably nothing more to say staff has done a great job already of giving you all the technical points on. So thank you. We're happy to answer any questions if you have any. I have one question of Mr. Wolf. And the question that I have is very brief. Will there be any QR code or statement that says that this was a partnership with arts center school of design so that anybody walking past or they may look at this property. There will be a plaque which will include the names of the students and the artists, the professional artists and the students that worked on it. And I don't know about QR codes staff might be able to answer that better but we'd be happy to do that if that's part of the current designation. No, I was just asking on behalf of the, well, I was wondering if the rest deck on advertising this is the art piece absolutely and we're and we will be highlighting the role of art center perfect as well that's it thank you thank you that emotion it is in Councilmember Monsudo's district so motion to close the public hearing and then for. Okay. Public hearing is closed and Mr. Mastura's making the motion on the merits. Second and second that by Mr. Hampton. This is the first motion to close the public hearing. Yes. So are there any objections to the motion to close the public hearing? Seeing none, public hearing is closed. And now on the merits, questions, comments. Seeing none, let me just say that this is a beautiful addition to East Pasadena, a beautiful addition to our city. And In a part of the city that is desperate for investment along East Colorado Boulevard. And so I appreciate the work of the artist. I appreciate the investment by the Russ Nick group and thank you to the staff for bringing this project along to this point. Mr. Cole. Thank you. Excuse me. Thank you, Mayor. I think that there are a couple of points that I'd like to make and then we'll take the vote unless there are others. One is the letter that we received from the Russnek dealership. I actually have a fair amount of sympathy for their complaint. I don't think it's accurate to say that there was hostility or insults intended. And I know the staff has strongly worked to make this project the reality. I do think it does say how complicated it is to get things done in our city. And I think that particularly for local businesses, it's important that we streamline the development process and we're clearer about what the rules are and have less subjectivity about whether you can or can't do something. And so I think that this merits more than just this decision. But for us to really look at how we've taken four years to have an upper-down decision on this, I think that's concerning. The second is, it's an irony, a rest neck in its previous incarnation, Peter Satori. They've been operating out of buildings that actually address the streets very successfully for 75 years. And it's really not Russnex fault that Porsche is insisting upon their international design, which would be standard down a out of bond exit in Stuttgart or on a freeway exit in Thousand Oaks. I don't think it belongs on Colorado Boulevard, but I think Resnex hands are tied and so we're stuck with having this work around which is a trellis. And I think that Russ Neck has actually done us a service by engaging art center in trying to make something that that... think that Russ Neck has actually done us a service by engaging art center in trying to make something that is technically in compliance with our laws. And I agree with Jennifer with Director Page that this, that we do encourage a range of different things. But what is art is a little bit up in the air given how broad. Finally though, I will vote no despite my sympathy for the applicant and my respect for my colleagues who support this because I think we need reform and I think that what we end up with is a double standard. We end up with homeowners and small local businesses strangled by sometimes subjective and an onerous interpretation of the rules. And then if you bring in a million dollars worth of sales tax revenue you get a different path. So I really would like to have a single standard where we enforce our rules consistently. And I'm going to go with the arts commissions interpretation of our rules. But I certainly understand why this is an important project. And I certainly again sympathize with the applicant for the struggles that they have had getting through our, I think, overly complicated process. Our zoning code is 288,000 words and for the council. I'm not sure if you can make a vote for the council. I'm not sure if you can make a vote for the council. I'm not sure if you can make a vote for the council. I'm not sure if you can make a vote for the council. And that gentleman that changes vote from the art commission, I really appreciate that because it really takes some thinking about things and to change a vote. So thank you. Thank you for that. Mr. Madison. Thank you, Mary Mary just Concern was raised about reform being needed and I'm not sure is if we sit in Ovo that we can deny an application based on the need to reform the rule book No, it would be based on what the rules currently are And I don't think there's any question, but that this complies with the current rules. That's the finding that you make. Thank you. To clarify, I am basing my vote on the vote of the commission. Okay. Well, the vote of the commission changed tonight. Notice the thing. Let me not be like this. So there's a motion, second roll call. To approve the staff recommendation, Council Member Cole. Yeah. Council Member Hampton. Yes. Council Member Jones is absent due to recusal. Council Member Lyon. Yes. Council Member Madison. Yesor Masson. Councilor Masuda. Yes. Vice Mayor Rebus. Yes. Mayor Gordo. Yes. The motion is approved. Six in favor, one against one absent. Okay. Congratulations. And thank you. Okay. With that, we would jump to item 15 Mayor. This is the Lemanda Park ordinance. Councilmember Jones is recused on this matter as well. So since he's already left the dius to be recused, he's asked that if we could take the subsidies recused on this one. So this is an ordinance of the City of Pasadena, and many various sections of Title 17 zoning code of the City of Pasadena municipal code to implement the Amanda Park specific plan amending the official zoning map established by the zoning code chapter 17.20 section 17.20.0.0 to establish the boundaries of the Amanda Park specific plan and making technical changes to the Lincoln Avenue East Colorado South Fair Oaks and Central District specific plans for internal consistency. And I would add that his basis for recusal is that he owns property within the Central District specific plan area. Okay. So we need somebody to offer. So we need someone to offer the. Yeah. Offered by Councillor Bembern, to conduct first reading. Should I do the roll call? Yep. Councillor Bembern call. Just have a question and staff. I'm sorry. This is about LeManda Park, and then South pharaoh's specific plan is sort of jammed in there. What's happening there? When we're sometimes we'll do cleanup so that all the plans are consistent if we make like a minor change. So whenever we bring the plans forward we do the cleanup at the same time. So I can get, let me ask Lewis to come out. You know Jason what the edits were, the minor edits and the other plans. Can explain this. And as he approaches, I should said also a Amanda Park with Mr. Jones within the LeMand Park. I would have to double check that but usually it's related to a use clarification or there we go. Yes good evening Mayor and members of the City Council. For this cleanup it included clarifying and referencing correct graphics and tables that were misnumbered and then updating the land use table to align with changes for uses that we have been allowing by right. Were the restaurants and clarifying that they're permitted in some of the zoning districts that were previously identified as hitting the CUP. But it's just minor technical changes, I had nothing substantive. Just ask staff to send me a red line of the changes to suffra, suffra, before then we can just be that, we're doing second reading, I take it at some point. Yeah. On May 19th, we'll be second reading. So if you could do that this week, that'd be great. Thank you. And to follow up on Councilman Madison's inquiry, I think that when these type of cleanups are happening, just moving forward, maybe just send an email to the Councilmember or the Council as a whole to say, you know, this is the reason why we're doing this cleanup. Sure. Yeah. Okay. Roll call. Roll call. Council member Cole. Yes. To conduct first reading. Council member Hampton. Yes. Council member Jones is absent due to recusal. Council member Lion. Yes. Council member Madison. Yes. Council member Missuda. Yes. Vice Mayor Gordo. Yes. The ordinance for conduct first reading was successful. Thank you. unanimously. Okay. That moves us to... Do you want to do the item 10? Yeah, I want to go to item 10. This is... Well, or do you want to do the fireworks first? This was fireworks. Okay. Fireworks. Well, do we anticipate this is the extension? This is just the extension. Yeah, it's just to do it for the full dream. We've only do 45 minutes. We've got planning here. So it's just now going to the full two years. That's all. So is this a time extension? Is there somebody want to offer? Well, it's actually just sorry, Mary, it's the adoption of a resolution. It's not an Okay, ordinance. So this is a public hearing so I can open the public hearing. Yeah, let's do this quickly. This is the time and place for the public hearing on adoption of a resolution extending an interim un-codified ordinance that temporarily suspends modified zoning development standards and processes for rebuilding structures damaged due to the eaten fire and temporary extension of certain land use related deadlines for entitlements and permits granted in compliance with Title 17 zoning code, Title 16 subdivisions, and Title buildings in construction. On April 24, 2025, the public hearing notes was published in the past and the press. No correspondence was received by the city clerk's office regarding this item. Offered by Mr. Hampton. Well, it's again, oh, to close the public hearing. Yeah, there are no speaker cards on this item. So's Hampton sorry to close the public hearing yes Seconded Mr. Cole we have a motion to close the public hearing okay any objections See none public hearing is closed Now on the merits on the merits motion on the merits on motion on the merits, motion. Second. Moving seconded, any objections? Seeing none, that matters approved. So let me, that we do have the opening of the public hearing for the operating budget. We were going to do that after that. And we'll do that after fireworks. But if you have, well, let's do fireworks. But I just want to recall that this is the opening of the budget and we set it off to committee for committees for the bulk of the work. So with that, let's go to the. Item 14 is adoption of a resolution of any of the fiscal year 2025 general fee schedule to establish fees related to the violations for the possession and discharge of fireworks. I'll move approval. And again, these penalties are being raised to disincentivize and penalize. I would say much more heavily, people who don't follow the rules, particularly after what we experienced this year in the foothills in Pasadena, and Al-Tedena. Definitely appreciate the staff effort on this and hope we will follow through to prosecute people who are and find the people who are guilty of shooting off illegal fireworks. Since we already have a motion in second, maybe you could just slip to the slide where you could show us where the increases are to the fees. Deputy Chief James is with us. Good evening. Anthony James, Deputy Chief Operations for your Pasadena Fire Department. So, I'll skip to head to slide 11. Oh, a skip to head to slide 11. Okay. Skip to head to slide 11, which shows the proposed fees. So our current fee structures really, it's based on a administration fee. So currently if somebody possesses or discharges a firework, it's basically a property-based code violation. The first offense is $100. Second offense is $200, and then a third and subsequent would be $500. So what we're proposing as a deterrent is two different ones. So possession of a safe and sane, which start at $ in escalate to the second violation of 500 additional would be 750. And then possession of a dangerous, which start at 300 second, 600 and then escalate to a fee of $800. For discharge of a safe and sane, we can see it starts at 500, second 750 up to 1000, and then a discharge of a dangerous firework starts at the higher fee of 650 to 8.50 for a second violation, and then up to $1,000 thereafter. And then the Safe and Sain those are your like sparklers and novelty fireworks anything that doesn't leave the ground in your dangerous or kind of your M80s explosives and the the large projectile fireworks Okay, mr. Lion quick question, which is the the So presumably if you'reging, you're also in possession, and the fine is discharging only. So would someone get both fines in that circumstance? I would have to turn that over to the district, sorry, city attorney's office, maybe they could explain that one, or even PD if How their citations are issued Good evening Tim Wellman chief assistant city prosecutor for the city of Pasadena if someone's both in possession in discharge If say it's the same firework that they were possessing in the discharge We would there'd only be a fine for one of those, which would be the more expensive one, which would be discharged. Okay, thanks. Mr. Madison. Yeah, can I just follow up? So the first second subsequent violation, those are sequential time wise. In other words, not if you have eight packs of fireworks, those are each a separate violation. Right, correct. OK. It seems almost modest than given the risks. So I think the important question is, how are we going to get the word out? You know, are we going to have billboards at bus stops and the likes and those fireworks cost me a thousand bucks or something. Right, and normally at this time of the year, we get together with the PIO office and we start our early messaging campaign. So I think if this was adopted, we would definitely include it. Thank you, James. And I would note that the state government code imposes limits on the amount. So that's why we're at that cap. Mr. Hampton, I just want to make mention there's already a motion and a second on this. So I'm sure the question will be called. But how many citations were issued last year? Sure. And I have a slide on that. So last year, citation were just 13 decrease from 2023 or it was 23. You know, I have Commander Dawkins here, maybe can explain a little bit on there was that decrease. And the citations are typically issued on the 4th of July correct? I mean at least some majority of these were issued on the. The majority but we start patrols at least two weeks ahead of time depending on the amount of calls in the location and we'll go out and if we catch somebody in the act then definitely they can be really at any time of the year. Yeah, Commander Dawkins, good to see you. Good to see you, sir. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council Members, City Staff. Commander Sean Dawkins, I oversee your field operations division which includes all of our patrol operations in our event planning section. I can answer any questions that you may have this evening. So the question that I have is, and this is a question that comes up all the time, and I've actually seen this as well. Last year in the Royal, people were lighting all fireworks. In front of city staff and police officers, I didn't see those, and there were a lot of fireworks being lit off. I mean, as well as in parks in 13, there were a lot of fireworks being lit off. 13 is a very, very low number to actually try to get people into compliance. And I understand that, you know, we don't want to be extremely like, like oh we're gonna give you a thousand dollar fine here and there to everyone but I think if we're not issuing fines then people see this as a joke so I guess in all seriousness is this year our enforcement needs to be significantly more heavy handed than it had been in the past so that we could get some sort of control of the situation. I don't know, we'll ever get full compliance from everyone. I don't know if that's even possible. Given the fact that it's just so easy to get fireworks because not all of the cities in our area ban them. But maybe our joint city groups in the San Gabriel Valley, we should talk about asking all of our other cities to follow our suit in some of our other neighboring cities to ban fireworks and invite them to the Rose Bowl to come and watch our drone show. So I mean just so hopefully this year there is what is the plan to get more people out and this maybe for you and the city manager as well as code enforcement agents what is our plan to actually issue more citations because I literally was watching people light off fireworks. I wasn't doing it though, I just wanted to tell another question. That's good to hear, sir. As you know, I know that you've been out with Captain Swarinson. I don't know if it was on the Fourth of July, but I know you've been out there on the fireworks detail. And I'm sure you understand it. There's a challenge. You see them, you see the fireworks being deployed, you respond out there, and then by the time you get there, sometimes they're getting smarter too. The individual they're using them, they're getting smarter, they run out in the middle of the street in front of their house, they launch them off, and then they run back into the street. So that's part of the reason and explanation for why the seizures decrease because they don't come out in front of their house with their huge pile of fireworks and they're just light. That's part of the reason and explanation for why the seizures decrease because they don't come out in front of their house with their huge pile of fireworks and they're just lighting them off with their friends and family that usually run out and deploy them or sometimes from their backyard. So it isn't a challenge in getting there in time when you see it deploy we respond or when we get the call for service we respond and then sometimes all we have there is the debris in front of the house. So the citations are, we try to issue them as quick as we can and that's part of the administrative citations. The route for the administrative citations we're able to have a good turnover and get put the officers and the firefighters back in service to respond to the additional calls for service so we can respond to them as much as we can. I will say that the numbers are down from last year as far as the calls for service, which is a good sign as well. We're seeing a decrease in calls for service. So that's a plus. Yeah, it is. Well, it sounds like you guys have a plan of action. Are there gonna be more people deployed on the streets for leading up to the Fourth of July? We have a meeting coming up on I believe it's May 14th. Is it the 14th? Correct. I believe so. The 14th it'll be the P.F.D. Representative's from the police department and then the city prosecutor's office as well. So we're working on that plan moving forward. I can tell you that Captain Sorenson has increased his enforcement. He actually deploys out to the state line where we've actually, we've seized, we've had seizures at state line. And those have been some passity in a residence that are coming across the state line where they're making significant seizures there as well. So that definitely has an impact on, on reducing the amount of fireworks we have coming into our community? No, absolutely. I, you know, with, even with my comments, I want to say that. has an impact on reduce the amount of fireworks that we have coming into our community. No, absolutely. I, you know, with, even with my comments, I want to say that I do see a lot of effort from our police department and our fire department. I just think there is only so many people and so many eyes and, you know, I've asked our city managers in past to, you know, deputize or at least, you know, our code enforcement agents when they see this to be able to issue citations as well as our volunteers, because you guys have a lot of volunteer police officers as well, that drive our neighborhoods and just report back. So there may be an opportunity, I don't know this year is the year that that opportunity presents itself, but I'm hoping that in the future years coming years that these opportunities are opportunities that we seize as an opportunity to try to curb a lot of the use of fireworks in our neighborhoods as we've seen. I mean, the devastation of what fire can do in a short period of time. So I thank you guys for the efforts and you know you guys have every year's three, four hundred pounds of fireworks seized by one individual which is great because you know that they're selling it. There's no way that they're going to light off three hundred pounds of fireworks. So that's great that you know we're able to do that. But there are those little things you know in, I mean, these signs that say zero tolerance, it should literally be zero tolerance. So I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. City Manager. Thank you, Mayor. And Council Member Hampton, I can assure you, since I've been here, I've had talks with the Fire Chief every year and we try to get even more aggressive in when we talked about it this year. We say let's get more aggressive of fines as well. But we plan, we do everything we can. It's a difficult challenge. Run it up to it. It's a little easier to enforce. The day of, it can be much more difficult, I think, because the volume, but we're planning around it. we can and we will be as aggressive and enforcement as we are with the fines. And I think that's an indication to the community that we really need to stop the fireworks because of the dangers they pose. Yeah, thank you. Okay, is there a motion? There is a motion in a second. Okay. To approve the staff recommendation. Any objections to the motion? Seeing none, that matters approved. Thank you for bringing this matter forward and we'll monitor it and if we need to get even more aggressive, including maybe even hiring, deputizing and hiring parking enforcement to help with some of the citations. Yeah, so this is an important issue. Okay, thank you. Okay. Now the operating budget, and again this is an opportunity for the city manager to kick off the operating budget process from here, process wise. The budget goes to council committees that have jurisdiction over the various departments. So we will turn it over to you. And this is the time and place for the public hearing on the opening of the public hearing for the fiscal year 2026 city managers recommended operating budget on April 17th, 2025. The public hearing was published in the Pasadena for us. And no correspondence was received by the city clerk's office regarding this item. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks Mayor and this year's budget is, it's very tight. We're living living in uncertain times We're living in a time where sales tax revenue is decreasing where property tax is also in flat and barely growing because of You know lots of challenges in the housing market But we have here a presentation to show where the revenues come where they'll be going will be succinct And we will have lots of opportunity within and council committees to discuss the merits of all of these proposals. So with that, I'll turn it over to Director Finance and Acting Assistant City Manager Matthew Hawksworth. Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. I made a comment the other day that this is the most challenging budget we've had in quite a long time. Candidly recessions are sometimes easier because you see the writing on the wall and you know where it's going. And this one every week, it seems things change. So I start off with this table. The middle column is what I presented to this council just a short time ago. It showed that when we started this budget process, we were looking in the general fund at a little over 5 million short. The budget before you in the book that was provided as part of the agenda packet, proposes an operating income, positive of $1.34 million. And I'm gonna share a little bit about how we got there and then what the city managers proposal is going forward. So what change from the shortfall to the surplus? I think some of you are aware but the plan will be to take the full 12% GFT per the charter requirement that added 10.5 million of the revenue. We're also forecasting an additional 750,000 above normal growth for EMS, which is our advanced life support ambulance service. That would be pending the council's ultimate adoption of the general fee schedule as part of the fees. As the city manager noted a few minutes ago, it also includes a decrease in what our original sales tax estimate of was, so an $850,000 decrease. We build our sales tax estimate originally in January with help of our consultants. And we received an update and had another meeting with them just a couple weeks ago, and the forecast doesn't look as good. Some key expenditure changes. Sourie and pension increases beyond what our original assumptions were of about 2.35 million. A big point of that is we have a lot less vacant positions going into this year and we fully fund vacant positions. We discount the value of vacant positions, assuming they won't be full all year. And so there was a significant increase to that. Our overtime and comp time, that's a lot to be paid off in cash. We're seeing that there's a need at about a million dollars to that budget this year. And then the fleet fund undertook an internal audit review of their operations, their funding schema, and then the Fleet Replacement schema. And that was all presented to the Finance Committee earlier this calendar year. That calls for a total of just about 1.8 million increase to the Fleet Fund from General Funds That's largely police, fire, parks, and then some public works. So of the 1.34 million roughly that we were showing is a surplus building the budget. What's the proposed use of that 1.4 million? And I would note that there was some handouts left on the dius in front of each desk And there's four pages one is general fund personnel one is general fund non personnel and then the next two are non general fund personnel and non personnel cost So you have those itemized with some more details So the fire department has a need to increase both uniform, turnout, personal protective equipment costs, those are replacement costs that are sworn personnel, are owed based on their MOU and contractual obligations. The cost of those keep increasing, so we're proposing money to fund that and those are in line with current expenditure trends. We've known for a while that our port program was funded on some grants and discretionary congressional spending or earmarks. Those are expiring and thus far we haven't been successful in receiving any additional money so 303,000 represents the money needed to continue to fully fund the two port teams for the firefighters. And then the fire department we are proposing the partial year of one new battalion chief and the 167,000 represents the salary and benefits for a partial year. We'll talk a little bit about what the ask was compared to what we're recommending. The public health department they are required to have a health officer. The proposal is this would be a three quarter time person. They're currently not enough grants coming into the public health department to support this. So the request is that the general fund would support this position. Public works have some proposals to add three full time positions. They are funded primarily by other funds, capital improvement, refuse funds. And I just note they include a code compliance officer which does public right of way enforcement. One of the things we've heard a lot of frustration about is about a legal vending, especially illegal street vending, especially around special events. So this person could help with that. Management Analyst 1, reclassing a part time, and then an engineer for Measure R-C-IP projects. And then the second increased 502,000 would provide increased supplies, and we'll say minor equipment like chainsaws or paint spayer heads and things like that. And then personal protective equipment, again like safety equipment related to using the equipment using forestry and graffiti removal. And then the city attorney, we just highlighted this one out for the CPOC. They did award a contract for a new IPA and that increase was $25,000. So that brings the general fund bottom line to a positive $120,700, $50,000, which for all intents and purposes is a flat balance budget because in the scope of a $263,000,000 budget, somebody's the last meeting that's a rounding air. So what are opportunities for one-time revenue and uses because we certainly didn't have much in the idea of operating? So as this council knows we we have a light and power fund general fund transfer, and for the current fiscal year 2025, we held that transfer at 18 million. This council is also aware that fiscal year 24 ended positively for the light and power fund. So that presents an opportunity or requirement based on the charter language and how you look at it to take the full 12% of the GFT in the current fiscal year. That would provide $10.6 million additionally this year which could provide for some one-time expenditures. The previously mentioned battalion chief would need a vehicle so the purchase and outfit or upfit of the vehicle is estimated about 200,000. Parks, Recs and community services has quite a number of outdated equipment, lawn mowers, things like that that not only need to be replaced but can be updated to green equipment, so this is electric mowers or things like that. The estimated total cost is about 700,000. We think we've identified about 500,000 to cover most of this, but there's still a need currently of about 200,000. We're continuing to work through that number. It might go down, but that's where we stand today. Housing. Housing had previously budgeted about 228,000 in various line items, and that helped offset or fund mash program. We talked a little earlier, the council mentioned mash. Mash would do work for higher programs for homes that qualified for CDBG, and we're finding that mash isn't able to do that volume of programs. And so we can't charge CDBG for those programs. And so that is about 228,000. And the plan would be that we funded this year with these one-time dollars. And we spend next year figuring out what does that work for higher MASH program look like so that it can be sustainable and productive knowing that we can't use CDBG. And then lastly in housing, we've been funding the Housing Rights Center previously with CDBG, but in this last year we were informed that that program is no longer eligible for CDBG funds. So we're proposing to use $75,000. And one time, General Fund, until we can again evaluate the support of that program and how it's funded. The Public Health Department program, there's a coordinator too that supports the Port and Violence Intervention Programs that was previously grant funded that grant is expiring. So we're proposing that 160,000 of that be allocated one time And then we would spend the next six to nine months evaluating if there are other grants we could pursue, or if there's a better structure and way to operate this program. The Public Health Department in Fund has about $300,000 in overhead needs to support their building services, IT IT charges and watch that their grants can't support. And then they receive the $350,000 grant for a health record system replacement. The total cost is about 500,000 so the 150 represents our portion of that cost. Police Department building services in fleet when they present their budget they'll talk about how they have a planned assign and added. Oh my gosh I just drew a total blank on the name mechanic. Sorry, assign a mechanic full time to the police station to do I was just actually staring off in space right just sign a mechanic full time to the police station to do, I was just actually staring off in space, right? To sign a mechanic, a full time to the police station to do a lot of the normal maintenance on the equipment. So it doesn't have to be taken out of service, being taken down to the yards and whatnot. There's about $72,000 in need for equipment to support that position working at the police station. It's all $135,000 in additional funding for tree planning and watering. I believe our public works director talked a little bit about his idea or his plan for better pot hole repairs last week during the capital budget. A hot asphalt truck is about $280,000. Planning as a need for additional contract services related to the eat and fire. This is only focused on the general fund when they present their department budget. They'll talk about the also the added cost cost to the building fund which are much larger than this. And then economic development has strategic plan implementations working through the 450 North Lake or the former Kaiser property. And so proposal to allocate $200,000 towards that work in economic development. So the strategic plan some of it is marketing, advertising, consultants, and then the North Lake is part of, we don't know yet, depending on how we move through the RFP process and awarding the contract. Most of this money is towards the strategic plan implementation, and they can certainly outline that during their presentation. And then capital. We heard the council and the importance of funding street repair and resurfacing. I will say that when we started this process, this was about $3 million. We have really leaned on departments to scrub their ass, to scrub their needs, to really be critical of what we're asking for. Ask, sorry. There were so many faces around this. We all went ask. I've never had to do this. I look for I look for to that video clip of my retirement ceremony at some point to scrub their submissions to the city manager that they asked for I'm glad I'm glad we could all smile at least So anyway, 4.3 million proposed for street resurfacing added to the existing proposed 5 million in change from gas tax and Senate bill SB1 funds and sewer, I believe. 2.6 million to fund the replacement of the MDTs or mobile digital terminals, which are the computers inside all of the safety vehicles, upgrade and replace those. And then I believe it was mentioned last week also by do it during their capital presentation. There's a need to upgrade and replace the police department 911 dispatch consoles. The end of life for a lot of that equipment and the service to support it is the end of calendar year 26. So while it's not really urgent, it's urgent that we don't wait because we only have about 18 months to get that work done. So all in those proposed one-time expenditures total 10.6 million 200,000. Okay, so quickly what are we not funding? I mentioned earlier we're proposing one partial battalion chief. The fire department had asked for three battalion chiefs, one per shift and two new vehicles. The annual cost of that would have been 1.3 million and a 420,000 one-time cost. They also asked for some contract services for preventative physical therapy and training to sort of prevent injuries. And we're going to look at some of that through our workers' comp and safety programs, but that was 100,000. Police asked for two additional forensic specialists, due to increased work volume and shift needs. Similar theme to fire, but seeking some increased contract services for mental health and counseling. And then adding a critical performance unit support for continuing progression training. Those are all things that we have not been able to fund. Police talked and is still looking at an unmanned drone program. An active intelligence center. I will know that we did submit a discretionary spending request this year that would potentially fund the capital side of that. But we all know that that takes a while, possibly a couple years. HR had sought another HR analyst to assist with labor relations, and they need some new furniture in their department. Public Health had some additional positions, a program coordinator to a customer service rep 3. They had asked to bring the deputy director position back and some additional part-time health inspectors for weekend and after hours enforcement and then public health sought an office assistant for the street maintenance division. And again, all these are outlined on the documents that I left for you before the meeting. Economic development had some other requests related to a management analyst and some additional strategic plan implementation, public information for a paid admin intern, finance a collection system upgrade that we will eventually need to do, the city attorney, additional funds for outside legal, although we do plan to fund a portion of that to the general liability program. And then one thing that the council hasn't taken a position on yet, but as heard, I believe it public safety and that's the homeless court. And then just lastly to touch on a question that came up last week, what other funds are general fund related? And so just a few things, the library fund, the library special tax requires a minimum level of general fund support in order to be able to collect the tax. So, well, we look at as the library fund, most of the library fund is the general fund. A caveat is we are allowed to offset available fund balance in the library fund in any given year if there's surplus fund balance and not make a full general fund transfer. And I note that as of this current year, the library fund has got about 12 million in it, which had been sort of accumulating, estimating that we've got the central library closure and we were trying to set aside as muchating that we've got the central library closure and we were trying to set aside as much money as we could at the time. The fleet replacement fund is largely funded by the general fund because of police, fire, public works, and park that I mentioned earlier. And earlier, I said that we were increasing the funding, so this year's increase is 925,000, which we hope will write size that fun to be able to complete our fleet transition to clean fleet. Same thing with the do it replace equipment replacement, a large amount of that is funded with the general fund. Building Services Fund. This year's budget proposed, including spending on some of the projects such as roof replacements on city buildings, which you heard about during capital, but they still have some fund balance there. The workers compensation fund. I can say that when I started here, the workers compensation fund wasn't in good shape. I'm proud to say that it isn't good shape today and has about 14 million in fund balance reserves. But I note that we have an actuarial study that shows that we have about 44 million potential claims. So while we wouldn't fund the 44, it's certainly prudent to have a good fund balance there. And then as we've mentioned many times before, we have a section 115 trust for both pension and other post employment benefits that was funded with General Fund dollars. And I just note that those as of our last investment statement were 13.75 million and 2.6 million dollars. And so with that, I will conclude the presentation. The next two slides I had on there were ones that you saw last time that we don't need to cover it. And if I may just very quickly, you know, we do look forward to discussing all of this in more detail at the committee meetings. And it's clear that we don't have enough resources to meet the needs that we have. You know, we're not based, we're not funded based on need, we're funded based on formulas. But I do think it's important to baseline and recognize that we're proposing no layoffs, we're proposing no hiring freeze, and in these difficult circumstances that says something about the prudent fiscal management, the council has authorized and the staff has implemented. We have to have bigger discussions about fire and how we become a fire ready Pasadena. And I've asked the fire chief to look at that what is needed to really keep us safe on the fire in streets. I want to clarify, I think there was some, you know, in all the discussions gets complicated, but when I got here in the end of 2022, we made a presentation to the council on April 28, 2023. And at that time, we were only ever putting it or for a long time. I can't say for how long back we were putting in about the 5.9 million EC here. And we had gotten down to PCI, which I think we're all familiar with pavement condition index, I think is what it stands for. At 53, and April 28, 2023 April 28, 2023, when we reported that number, it was 53 in 2022. I never saw a 2023 number, but the number in 2024 is up to 57. So I'm not saying that's terrific, but it is progress. And I think director DeVinc mentioned that he thinks it might be closer to 59 or something like that now. So it's been difficult, but we've added an extra 5 million for the last two years from General Fund dollars. We started when I think I was sick last week still trying to get over my sickness, but we were I think at 3.45 million at that time and over the week the team has been working hard as Mr. Huxworth said and we're up to 4.3 and we're going to keep working at it. I have a goal of trying to find that additional 5 million on top of the 5.9 that's in the capital budget now. And we're getting close and we'll see if we can get there. But I wanted to make that point clear. Last thing I'll say is, even just today, this is the uncertainty, this is the fear I have, frankly. The federal administration came out with this proposed budget and in it, it's eliminating programs including CDBG. It's also proposing, now this is just a proposal that's going to go through Congress, it affects all the states, also proposing to take all the Section 8, all of the different rental assistance programs, push it over to the states and give the states half the amount. So you can imagine what that's gonna, the pressure it's gonna put on us. And so we have to keep a prudent level of reserve, we have to be really cautious in our spending. And I think, again, we look forward to discussing these recommendations with you, but I think this is frankly speaking, all things considered a good place to be in relative at least to others. Thank you Thank you mr. City manager Mr. Cole Yeah, recognizing this is just beginning. I just wanted to make one one comment and that is that The budget that you've handed us is 1.495, I'm sorry, 4.999,1,499,417,75 dollars. It's like $300 short of a billion and a half dollars. And I'm certain based upon what you've already shared, there's some tremendously important needs. By allocating all of this, we are now have $120,000 of who I'm going to use the last of it, which means basically you've pre-programmed 99.99% of our spending. So obviously during this process we'll have a chance to review those things and potentially examine trade-offs. But I do hope in the years to come we will have a clearer opportunity to set our priorities as a council ahead of the preparation of the budget so that the very hard decisions that you and your staff have been forced to make in this type budget are guided more clearly by the priorities set by the council. And so we'll have that discussion as time moves on but you know it's going to be very difficult to assert priorities in the face of such constrained situations. Mr. Madison? Well and I know tonight's not the night to have the full blown discussion I just want to say for the record I disagree with my member Cole, that the budget does not. I don't know who pre-programmed it if some alien or third party did that. But having sat on the council, I think the budget does reflect the decisions and the priorities that the council's made over the years. But there's always room for improvement. And I too have expressed frustration over the years at how, when it comes down to it, we don't have the flexibility to be able to redeploy dollars. So, you know, I certainly would welcome many, any new way of doing business that would allow us that opportunity. So we're clear the city manager and the staff, the city manager, is charged with presenting a recommended budget and that's what this is. It's not a pre-programming, it's a charter requirement that a budget be prepared to the full City Council for its consideration. Okay, be prepared by the City Manager. Public comment? So you burn? I just a point of order, Mayor, it's after APM. And I think we've made a resolution procedureally that we wouldn't start anything new after 8 p.m. so is that... Listen. And I think we made a resolution procedurally that we wouldn't start anything new after 8 p.m. So is that, we're not, yeah. Yeah, let's let Ms. Bern speak and then we'll take that matter up. How many cars do we have? Just one. Okay. Ms. Bern? Yes,. I have two minutes, please. Yes. Good evening. The operating budget approval process being followed again this year is seriously flawed. By assigning deeper dive budget discussions to different communities, you will be tempted to rubber stamp budgets that were presented at meetings you did not attend. Are each of you committed to carefully reviewing the video recordings of all budget meetings and having thoughtful discussions on all proposed department budgets? This is critical because the housing department's proposed budget is deeply flawed and half of you will not be hearing the deep dive on that budget. It's the same failed plan presented year after year with one critical caveat. The Housing Department mentions that it will monitor future federal grant fund for negative impacts. Many expect severe cuts in such funding by the Trump administration, yet an astounding 76% of the housing department's 49 million in appropriations are proposed to come from the federal government. Only 2.4% from the city's general fund. In contrast, 92% of the police department's appropriations come from the city's general fund. The housing department's same old motel voucher plan for which a chosen few is indefensible. Where is any city accountability? How many new units or beds for our unhoused residents are anticipated in fiscal year 2026? Sadly, there are only two sentences addressing 2026 goals related homelessness, including a reference to the continuum of CARES plan, which is not even a city approved document. The city will have a $16 million general fund operating reserve in fiscal year 2026. A large chunk of that should be spent actually trying to get our most vulnerable residents off the street and into safe housing. Further, opportunities to partner with the county for Motel Masterlees projects in Pasadena must be pursued. And I just have a rhetorical question given the slide on what we are not funding. Why was nothing mentioned about meaningful interim housing for our unhoused, our unsheltered living on the street? Not a mention. Thank you. Thank you. That can please public comment on this item. I just want to address the, because it is an important question that I have that Ms. Burton raises and that's, you know, whether we have the right process in place with the committees or whether we should go back to the, and I asked the council at the beginning of this process to think about this issue, the issue of process and having an opportunity before the budget process to weigh in as a council. But also once we get into the budget, whether we have the, you know, it's a balance, whether we have the correct process in place. So again, I would ask my colleagues as we experience this budget to think about that question. In the past, we would have the full budget come to the city council. Every department would present, but then you get, you know, every department having five, 10 minutes. That was the drawback. Maybe we just need to expand the budget hearings. We would start at 2 p.m. in order to try and get through the process. And often go late into the night. And that was somewhat unfair to members of the public. And so somewhere in there there's got to be a way we can address both the concern raises by Ms. Burnt and our need to get through a budget process. So I ask all of you to, as we experience this budget, think about that question. And look forward to any recommendations you may have or the staff I would ask the staff to do the same as well. Okay. Any other questions or comments? Otherwise we need a motion to continue the public hearing to May 19, 25 at 6 p.m. There will be some movement and seconded. Are there any objections? Seeing none, it's approved. It's just to continue to each regular meeting until adoption. That's right. OK. And next week's meeting is the meeting with PUSD. Yeah. We're onto item number 12, which is the continued public hearing for the CIP. Thank you, Mr. Hawksworth, for the entertainment as well. Everybody should get a null. well. Okay. Next. The CIP. The CIP. So mayor I think you and vice mayor. Ms. Rebus did you have. Yes. believe we're recusing on the same item. Yeah doing the CID. Yes. But I believe we're recusing on the same item. Yeah, so you want to. Right. So do you want me to state my recusal now? Yes. Okay. I'm going to recuse from the item on the mountain undergrounding because I own property over 500 feet, but under a thousand feet. So in an abundance of cautional recuse on that one item. Yeah. And it's just so the public understands that we're taking up the capital improvement program budget but Ms. Revis and I soon will recuse ourselves and ask that the council first take up the item of undergrounding and then we can come back in and consider the remainder of the budget. And so I too, as has been my practice, will recuse myself on the matter of the rain and undergrounding because like Mr. Wasiah and property in here. So Mr. and Mr. Oh, and the last time this happened where the mayor and vice mayor recuse themselves I chose the most senior member of the council to ask the most senior member of the council to take the chair and so that now I'll move to the second most senior member of the council Mr. Moussouda and that way everyone will get an opportunity. Okay. Thank you mayor. Mayor just point of order, then you did mention that we wouldn't be taking anything new, substantively after 8 p.m. are we going to handle the matter after this tonight? That's, I did inform members of the council that, and members of the public, that if we got got to the next if we didn't take up the next matter before 8 p.m. that I would ask us to consider putting it off in fairness but that's a question for all of us. It's an important matter we can be honest. and- And you're referring to item 13? Yes. Optimize strategic plan. The OSP. I think we could, at least in my opinion, I think we could take it up. I don't think it should take too long. We had a good healthy discussion at MSC. I know this is not the item, but we had a good healthy discussion at MSC on it And why don't we do this? Let's see how long it takes all of you to handle the CIP and then I'll come back to make that decision. The end of round. We're just doing that. Yeah. Well no, I'm talking about the matter after that. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay, With that I will step out Mr. Moussoudo. Thank you, Mayor. City Clerk, do you have anything to say first? Just to report out that since the last, since the CIP was opened on April 14th, the City Clerk's Office received two letters in opposition to approving the FY26 CIP budget without revisions that clearly state the goals to reach resolution 99-77, which I believe is the carbon-free by 2030 resolution and provided comments on that matter. And that correspondence was posted online, distributed to the Council as part of the record for the CIP. Thank you. City manager, do you have a staff presentation on the underground? On the underground utilities program only. I don't believe we have a specific presentation, but let me first of all congratulate, and I'm sorry the mayor and the vice mayor aren't here, but no longer interim general manager, but general manager David Reyes. And congratulate him on his appointment today, today's his first day getting rid of that word interim. And with that, I'll turn it over for quite boards on underground. Thank you and thank you for the opportunity City Manager Marquez and to the rest of the City Council and my colleagues I look forward to this new chapter in my career at the City. So there are two projects in the CIP that are identified for underground and that's the Raymond and Washington projects. Those are projects that we've brought to the public. We've had lots of conversations about them with the fire and so that's the CIP in terms of undergrounding district projects. We have a couple of other projects, Canyon Close and Flores Cedacanian that are not districts but we're looking to do some undergrounding as a result of really looking at how to harden our infrastructure as a result of the fire and what we can do to prevent and try to mitigate future fire damages. And so those high voltage lines would be underground and those are also included in the CIP. While not included in the CIP staff is currently looking at ways to address all of what we call our tier two areas in terms of the high voltage lines and we do have some tier two areas that are in a council district six that are identified on the wildfire mitigation plan that will have some discussion at MSC next Tuesday on. We don't have any information to share with the council tonight other than to say we are looking at expanding ways to do undergrounding different than the district and I don't want to get too far afield of what's in front of us this evening which is the adoption of the CIP plan and the projects that are underground identified as underground projects within the project, CIP, the capital project, but I don't know if any of the council members have any specific questions about those projects that we can answer. We do have staff here that can answer specific questions and we would have a further discussion at MSC regarding future undergrounding. I think Mr. Hampton's in the queue and then Mr. McEw. Mr. Hampton, you have comment. Thank you and congratulations David on the new position. Very briefly, the fire maps have changed for the state. And I was just wondering if our plan of action for under-grounding is coincided with the new changes from Cal fire. Yes, and that will be presented next week at MSC. Perfect, thank you. Those were my questions and whenever available, I'd like to move approval of the underground. I'm Madison. Thank you. Second senior member, Miss Suda. Thank you, David, for the reporting. Congratulations on the new position. Very, very well deserved. So we've heard a couple of different terms and I wonder if you just walked us through those, sort of tier one, two, tier three, and then help us understand the timing. Sure. First of all, I'm going to take a step back and as it relates to the undergrounding districts, that takes a little bit more of a process that involves the residents and or property owners within the district. It also involves undergrounding all utilities, including communications. And so while partially aesthetic, done for aesthetic reasons, there is a safety element to that. What we're talking about here for the tiers, our wildfire mitigation plan, which is required by the state to be done and approved and updated each year, we follow the Cal Fire map and we have identified areas which are the very, the extreme zones, which are tier three, then we have the high fire, which is tier two and everything else is kind of considered tier 1. And we also have an ability where it's not on the state fire map but based on local knowledge, we can voluntarily add projects to tier 2 or properties. And that's what we've done in some areas on the west side and the hills and actually specifically in District 6 that are we've voluntarily added based on what we know in terms of the train, in terms of the potential winds and in basically the topography of that area. And so what we're talking about is identifying as opposed to going through the district process which does take some time and includes just a lot more process. We're gonna think about presenting to MSC an idea where we can just underground the high voltage lines. Basically the electricity keep the other utilities up there. And so the polls would remain, so it would be less aesthetic but much safer. So quicker, safer and doesn't require the special district and that's what we're looking to do. The long-term plan would still be aspirationally, at least to underground all of the overhead wires. And then it sounds like these tiers are the high voltage lines only basically that that's the emphasis. That's exactly right. Councillor on the board. Okay, and I think you're aware that my office is working with public works and parks and recreation and obviously the city manager and assistant city managers to address other issues in the lower row, including some that we discussed earlier, like mitigation of brush clearance, trail improvement and restoration for ingress and egress. So we really appreciate your efforts. The final question I would have then is that anticipated to be something that could impact this year's and by this year I mean fiscal year 26 budget or might spread out over additional budget years or do we not know yet depending on the amendments? We don't know just yet, but if it were to impact this year's we would come back as an amendment to the CIP this year. Great, that mid-year. Thank you. Council Member Leyen. Thank you. One very quick question, which is that the item they were cures done is the mountain street undergrounding, but is there from the I apologize I said I said Washington I misstated but it's not in spoke it's mountain so is there a change to the to the city managers proposed budget because it's a zero and twenty six so I just want to make sure no we don't plan on we we're going to do Raymond first okay but it this is a five year, but we're not proposing to do any work on the five year plan. Thank you sir. Next year is a zero proposal. Thanks. Thank you. Mr. Monsieur, I second the motion. And also it might be good to just clarify that the mayor and vice-miers recusal is based on the ownership not of their own homes, but of other property. I think many of us own our own homes and may or may not be proximate to areas that will be undergrouted at some point. As I understand, that's not a basis for recusal. It's the ownership of the investment property. It's the ownership of property, real property. Including your own home? Yes. Okay. Have you scrubbed these areas then to determine whether council members, other council members have an issue? No. The council member reached out to me and said that. Okay. Because one's on Raymond and he owns the property on Raymond and the other is Mountain Street, Raymond, and just slightly beyond 500 feet. Okay, all right, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And if I can, is the motion for just, it's actually numbered projects 321332, which is on Mountain Street 3214, which is on Raymond and 321210, which is the other. So all of the three projects underneath the tab that's entitled Street Lighting and Electrical Undergrounding. It would be all of them. It would be all of them. It would be those Street Lighting and Electrical Undergrounding program as part of the CIP. That should be the motion. And I didn't catch who made the motion. Sorry. Thank you. So that's what you're, and then Mr. Madison's second. Mark, are there any comments from the members of the public? Not on the CIP or this part of this. One more time. Is there any questions from the council? I'm sorry. Mr. Monsieur, but just on the third project, there's no definition of any geographic scope. It just says everything outside the underground districts. So, what do we take from that? Mr. Reyes. And we're talking there about the Canyon Close Project as well as Forest City Canyon, which are not districts, but we're going to underground the high voltage lines. Okay. Okay. May I have a motion to close the public hearing? And just the public hearing related to the program, street lighting and electrical underground program. Well there was a motion in a second. So that was to prove I didn't hear it was to close the public hearing. Normally we interpret that as a motion to close first and then a motion to approve. Sure, we can do that. Okay. Okay, is there any objections? Huh? Objections? Yes, to close and to close. Let's have a roll call. Okay, to close the public hearing. Council Member Cole. Yes. Council Member Hampton. Yes. Council Member Cole. Yes. Council Member Hampton. Yes. Council Member Jones. Yes. Council Member Lyon. Yes. Council Member Madison. Yes. Council Member Moussouda. Yes. Vice Mayor Revis is absent. Mayor Goroz absent both due to correctusal. The motion is approved unanimously. We might only state the court. I'm being accused of over the motion on the merits. I let every, I let every keeps us moving. So vote on the merits. I'll let everyone keep his moving. So vote on the merits on the underground. Vote it on the merits for the underground. Second. By the merits, we've fallen into this. The merits means the staff recommendation. Right, the staff recommendation of the underground. I second. Do you want another roll call? Another roll call. Councillor McCull. Yes. Councillor Hampton. Yes. Councillor Jones. Yes. Councillor Lian. Yes. Councillor Madison. Yes. Councillor M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. M. motion is unanimously approved, 6-0. So we can now invite the mayor and vice mayor, Revis, back in for the remainder of the CIP. For the CIP, do we have public comment? No, we don't. six zero. So we can now invite the mayor and vice mayor Revis back in for the remainder of the CIP. For the CIP do we have public comment? No we don't. If we don't have public comment for the CIP I'd like to make a motion to close the public hand for the full CIP. Any objections? Well did staff have anything any further? Oh, sure. Thank you. That was second. This is just closing the public hearing, not the... I have no new information from last week. Great. Okay. Public hearing. Maybe no recollection, either, if you're like the rest of us. So been moved and seconded any objections? No? Yeah, closing plug here. I like to make a motion to accept the capital improvement program budget that was presented to us or that's been presented to us today In our stat, I'm sorry in our staff report. I'll second for the purposes discussion. Okay, Mr. Cole seconds for the purpose of discussion It's a call Mr. Cole well before we do that. There's still the open question on the OSP and an important matter. And I mean, I look to my colleagues and to members of the public. Any suggestions? Well, I'm mindful that in addition to the public being here, we have our consultant from E3 who comes down from out of town and my sense because we're moving so quickly on the motions is that we're going to get to it fairly quickly and should be should be able to get it done tonight. Okay Mr. Cool? Yeah I'm going to support the motion which I just seconded I do want without without you know prompting rebuttals based upon a misunderstanding of my comments. I'm I'm I'm I'm not looking at the past. I made that comment at the outset last last time but we have two billion dollars of unfunded needs. They're not all necessary to do ever. They're not all necessary to do in the next five years, but that's a very significant challenge. So what I'd like to say to all of us is let's try to get our arms around setting priorities for how we tackle that before we ask the city manager to propose his budget next year. And I don't need an answer on that, but I am hoping that we will have a serious discussion about the $2 billion of unfunded needs and what kind of plan we want to have to begin to tackle that. That's all. Thank you. In democracy, you don't get to make a statement and then expect no rebuttal, but I'll refrain for the sake of time. I don't think Mr. Madison is going to. Well, no, I'll just say I think we have done that. And Mr. Cole is new to the council and look forward to his participating in that going forward. Yeah. In advance, you know, we do have the guiding principles that the council has adopted in the past and maybe we can make that available to all members of the council. I don't know if he's new but he's been revaptized. There is an opening at the Vatican. If nominated, I won't run. If elected, I won't serve. Okay. with that. actually, could we pull the sewers and storm drains? Because I just noticed there's one item where it has, yeah. Yeah, could we bifurcate it? Yeah. Because it mentions measure W. So I can recuse. Yeah. Just like we did. Well, there's there's it's tab eight for sewers and storm drains. There's there's several projects in there that mentions measure W. So I'll just recuse just from that piece I love abundance of caution because because my employer is is essentially LA is LA County Public Works Which measure W is a contributor to their Fund no revenue in the past We've I mean those are government dollars. I don't know that. But his department actually is the department and there's an attorney general's paying this. Okay. All right. Okay. You want to do so we'll hold that. Okay, we'll do it first. Excuse me, Mara. If I may, there are also three three projects in the a royal section that have some measure W appropriated to them as well. So the councilmember Jones may want to recuse himself from those. So I'll recuse myself from all measure W projects. So the a royal, the projects in the a royal program projects and the projects in the stormwater and sewer or storm drains and sewer. Okay. So we'll hold those or no take those up separately. Yeah. So is this your employer know that we need more measure W money? I'll move approval of those. Okay. Second. Move the seconded. Are there objections? Seeing none, those managers approved. So that was a sewer and storm drains and then the Avroyo projects. Yes. Got it. I think we have a straight hand. Yes. Which is the entirety. Okay. Except the measured W projects. Okay. I would, I'm prepared in the would, I'm prepared to support that. I would ask that there was an issue with some outstanding items brought to us by the staff. I think we should have a list created to be able to look at those during the year, including the issues raised by the police department for 9-1-1 improvements to the 9-1-1 process in call center. And so maybe those, oh did we put those in? Oh, that was probably it. Okay, I missed that. Okay. Okay, thank you. Apologies. So, Mayor, it's an important point if I could, that we have had some experiences in the recent past where there were amendments to the budget at the staff level that did not make their way of this council, And I would expect any material amendment should come back to the council to amend the budget, even situations where it's crystal clear that that's what we have to do. I think as a matter of good hygiene, the council should endorse any material amendments to the budget. Yeah, absolutely. And if in the past there might, you know, every once in a while something slips through because there's so much going through, but we come back and we tell you we accidentally did not include this and now we're trying to clean it up. But the intent certainly is to bring everything of substance to the council. Yeah, my recollection is we typically do a budget cleanup item. Some time later in the year, usually halfway through the fiscal year, which would put us in December January. And maybe at that time we can also take up the question of reviewing guiding principles and council priorities as we enter the budget process. Okay. So there's a motion and a second. Are there any objections? No? Okay. Thank you. Mr. DeVinc. Good job to all of the staff and departments. Thank you. Good job to all of the staff and departments. Thank you. So we're on the item. The last item is item 13. We should announce that the City Clerk's Office received 49 letters in support of the two accelerated local resources. Glen arm as backup scenarios developed by the city consultants advocating for the city council to move forward with the transition to carbon free electricity by 2030 and or providing comments on the matter. Those letters were distributed to the council posted online are part of the record for item 13. We have four speaker cards on this item two there. Okay? Maybe more. So Ray as I wasn't here, but congratulations. Well, well done. Thank you, Mayor. And deserved. Thank you, sir. Thank you. So are we starting the IEDMI apologize? Oh, yeah. So I was just, I was mayor as chair of MSC. I just wanted to, I guess, briefly introduce. Oh, absolutely. Go ahead. You're right. This is an optimized strategic plan to help us achieve our goal for a resolution 9977 to get to carbon free, 100% carbon free by 2030. We've had numerous discussions at MSC back and forth PWP and David Rares on their his leadership. They brought this item to us at least every other month and we've thoroughly discussed it Where we landed at with the OSP at our last meeting was there was I believe seven portfolio scenarios And the recommendation from MSC was to direct or recommend that PWP pursue scenarios 4 through 7 was my recollection and understanding. And I remember, Councilmember Koeh had brought up. He recommended the final plan. So after you investigate all those other, those four scenarios, the final plan would include 100 megawatts of local solar and 500 megawatts of local storage. And so I think that's something that we definitely can discuss at, or not 500, I'm sorry, 50. 50, yeah. Saw a debut race. Yeah, yeah, yeah, a lot of storage. One day, you know but you know we can you can come back at least in our discussion is that PWP would come back to MSC kind of vet out those scenarios presented to us again and then eventually come back to the City Council with a clean proposal on how we're going to achieve this goal. I don't have a report that we're done. Yeah, done. Thank you, Councilmember Jones. And as Chair of MSC, I think you've summarized exactly where we are. Council has given us policy direction to try to be carbon-free by 2030, along with trying to ensure that that optimized plan for carbon- free power be done in consideration of affordability, reliability and rate equity. And we've been working with MSC with the public with our tap. We're very thankful for our tap, which is our advisory body, our technical advisory panel that's made up of members of our community. Both of our local residents as well as our institutions, Caltech, chiefly. And really where we are is that we're at a point in the optimized strategic planning process that we wanted to make sure that we were on track with Council's direction. MSC gave us very good direction, very clear direction, as Councilor Jones outlined to ensure that we are studying all four of those scenarios to understand what the rate impact would be, and to work through MSC and the public in a transparent manner so that we can together stepwise, get to that planning process of 2030, and make sure that we don't get too far ahead of ourselves or the council. And so we wanted to make sure that the MSC's recommendation which staff agrees with 100% staff is on board with the recommendation and we would ask the city council to support that as well that would allow us to continue studying the last four scenarios that we'll describe tonight and ensure that we are talking about the rate impact of each of those scenarios with MSC so that MSC can give us direction so that we can come back to the City Council. And with that, I'll say that we have a very robust discussion that we can present. We can present a more condensed one given, I would say, that staff is right and locked step with MSC in terms of the direction and where we'd like to go. But with that, I'll say that, again, this is what the summary of the recommendation is. agrees with the MSC recommendation and I think that we do have Nick Schlagg from E3. Mr. Reiss, if I may interrupt, is there a slide that maybe you could show the four scenarios and unless my colleagues? I think it's a good approach. This has been the subject of many hearings or meetings in public discourse. It is the beginning of the process. It's really to say to the staff, okay, we've set a goal. Now tell us how that goal is operationalized and what the cost would be. And so this is the beginning of the process that kicks it off, but this is a good way to handle it. Mr. Jones. Thank you. And this is that slide that also includes the scenarios as well as a range. And I understand that the range is rather large in terms of costs. And I'll just focus on the last four, which start with the header of portfolios designed to meet 100% of hourly needs. And then to the right, there's two more portfolios designed to meet 100% of annual needs. And that's the annual power needs of our city, our annual demand. And what you see in terms of a range, this is an annual number. This is an increase of potentially 45 to $85 million on the higher end and then on the lower end potentially 5 million to 15 million. And the reason there's such a wide gap is that there's so much variability in both the development of new projects right now because of some of its regarding federal funding. And then some of it's just the variability of energy costs. And so until we are able to work with MSC and actually start implementing some of these ideas, we wouldn't have a good handle on what the exact number and what the rate impact would be. But this is what we are today. These are the last four scenarios. Again, we do have the two in the middle that are 100% of hourly needs and then we have the 100% of annual needs to the right. Both of them would involve keeping Glen Armed for Reliability for the time being and ensuring that they're running at the minimal amount just as truly a peeker plant and to ensure that there's reliability we would ask that there be availability We have some market purchases. We wouldn't be looking to use market purchases to supplement the demand that we normally would have. We would procure resources, green energy, carbon free resources to do that, but would keep it open as an option. And again, we do have Nick Schlag here that can go over this in more detail, present maybe some science behind some of these numbers, but also take questions as needed. But again, the MSC recommendation was to continue studying these last four. Staff concur with that recommendation and would like to move forward with that plan. Okay. I'd make a motion to on the merits. Second. The staff recommendation. Yeah, staff recommendation. Second. Which is MSC's recommendation. Okay. Mr. Lyons, next in the queue. We have a motion in a second. I have two quick items of gloss, which is that director director, Reyes, was saying, General Manager Reyes, was saying study, which is the right word, but I think it maybe it suggests more talking and thinking at this point, this is where we're really moving into the phase of starting to craft a plan in a portfolio. But this is the direction, and there will be study in that, but there will also ultimately it will come end in the plan for achieving the goal. And then the second point that I want to make for my colleagues, these are, we're from five to 85 million in annual costs. These are big broad numbers that are, in some ways assuming I think the worst case scenarios we've talked about. But also, it's important to recognize These are big broad numbers that are in some ways assuming I think the worst case scenarios we've talked about. But also important to recognize these are system costs. This is what it costs to bring in to meet our solar needs, not necessarily costs to the city because part of what we have to work out in the study is figuring out who we're partnering with and who's doing what. So institutional partners, other bureaucracies may bear part of these costs and the city may bear part of these costs. But that is to be determined. Thanks. Mr. Hampton followed by Mr. Cole. Perfect. I just wanted to clarify that these proposals that we are going to study in MSC and come back to the full City Council will also include the appropriate amount of storage. I think E3's proposal was that we needed 100 megawatts of storage. Is that not? It was over 100. It was 80 to 130. 80 to 130 was for the solar. The storage was a slightly different number. But what I will say is that when we come back to MSC we'll have all those numbers because they all the price and then the impact on the rate payer is different for each one. And we want to make sure that we can reach our target goals of being carbon free at the same time ensuring that we're maintained affordability. I just wanted to ask E3 of what would the storage number be and that's the only question that I have. Okay, it's definitely going to be arranged and I don't sure Nick could have the range from 4 through 7 we can pull that up. Another different free-t one. Yeah, good evening, Marion, council members. It does vary by case, but I think in the lowest end of the range, we have about 100 megawatts of storage within the city. At the higher end of the range, I think it's about 130 megawatts within the city. Okay. In addition to that, in some cases, there's also additional storage outside the city. So I think, you know, as we are looking at this, we should go off of what we need for storage based on the recommendations of yourself and staff. But I'm very supportive of this and I want to thank the community members as well as your team for putting this together. And also our consultant E3. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Cole, followed by Mr. Madison. Three quick points, Mayor and colleagues. One, I was gonna make the same point that Mr. Lion made, which is that the 85 million includes a significant amount of private investment. How much, as he pointed out, remains to be seen. Second, I think this represents a breakthrough, right? This is, we actually, we can see the goal. We can't see for certain that we'll get to 100% every hour of the year 2031. But we can see that that is within range, if we achieve the goals of the portfolio, and the goals of the portfolio are at least 80 and preferably 130 megawatts of local solar, and at least 100 and preferably 125 megawatts of storage. And if we achieve those, we should exceed our need. Because this includes belts and suspenders. It includes if good rich goes down for a day. It includes if there's a blackout. It includes a lot of backup and redundancy for reliability, which is one of the elements of the resolution. So this is a breakthrough. If we follow through and build a portfolio that's recommended in scenarios 4 through 7, at the very minimum, we'll achieve 100% of our annual needs and very likely barring major interruptions of reliability that are beyond our control, we will be able to meet 100% on an hourly basis and we'll only be going to fire up Glenarm or only be going to the spot market if there's an external catastrophe. So I think that's, I want to join those who've said, you know, this is something I'm enthusiastic about an appreciative of the consultant and the staff's work on this. We have much more work to do. And the third point is, there are three different ways to achieve 130 megawatts of solar and 125 megawatts. And we have to pursue all of them. One of them is municipal solar, putting solar on our land. The second is encouraging private investment, not only by homeowners, but by multi-family owners, by institutions, by churches, by businesses. We may have a role in incentivizing that, but that's going to bear the major part of the load because they'll get the major benefit of having their bills offset and having greater reliability. And the third is, I think we need to explore the potential of public solar on our side of the meter for people who cannot afford to that upfront expense. We should consider whether union jobs, the train our local people to install solar, that we own is whether that is a viable option for us to pursue in order for us to get to this goal. So all of those things are now queued up and I enthusiastically support the motion. Mr. Radisson. Thank you, Mayor. And I, I to appreciate the great work that's gone into this. So I'm struggling a little bit with the difference between annual and hourly needs given that the direction is carbon free. So can you help me? Yeah, and the actual language is slightly different in the resolution that it's we would source 100% of our electricity from carbon-free sources, which left us a little bit of a challenge in terms of making sure that we understood what that meant. I think through working with MSC, it seemed at least the MSC members were pretty clear that it meant 100% all the time. And that would be the hourly, which is really challenging when you get into the numbers. But in terms of being a leader for others to follow, I would say just in terms of looking around the state, even meeting 100% on annual needs would be fantastic and I would be really happy for that's where we got. It doesn't mean that's what we're going to aim for, but if that's where we landed I think that would be a really nice place to be as a city. I mean, I can just say my recollection is there was a counter argument that we should strive for carbon neutral, not carbon free. I think the legislative intent was clear carbon free across the board. I don't recall any significant debate going into the use of the word source. It was that when we flip that switch, what's coming out is carbon-free. So there's a, look like a lot of meetings with the technical advisory panel. It's like one, two, three, ten meetings. I don't see an expression of their view. And maybe that just means it's incorporated in these recommendations or was there... We were... Yeah, I think the approach with the technical panel was to meet monthly and whether it was in person or virtual, it depended on the month, but was really to share where we were answer questions in terms of the study methodology and then tried our best to sort of incorporate some of their opinions and views into the study. And I would say that where we are today in terms of the recommendation does clearly reflect the input of the tap. Okay, great. And then you're talking about four alternatives to continue to study going forward. Can we gain a better understanding of whether there are fewer than four that we can study? Sure. And I think if you look, it's interesting. There's not a whole lot of difference between what I'll, they're not number, but I'll say four and five, which are, again, I'm going to discount the first three and we'll start with number four. Four and five, they both have the same similar price tag. They both require the over procurement of, if you look at the various metrics of a lot more energy and resources, which is why they're more expensive because we have to procure more, but they would potentially meet 100% of the hourly needs of the city. And then with the lesser price tag, we know that we know what our demand is as a city. We could meet 100% of our annual demand with carbon-free, 100% carbon-free sources with both of the scenarios at the end, 6 and 7, and those are slightly less. But all four of these involve, again, local solar, local storage, whether we're talking about a range of 80 megawatts of local solar up to 130. But really the difference is you see A in the price and that's why we wanna work through MSC in terms of trying to identify projects and what this looks like for implementation. And ultimately, the other difference, if you see that no market purchases for four and five really would limit the city's ability to respond to a crisis and options six and seven allow again both of them are limited or backup in terms of what Glenn arm how that would operate but the last two options would allow us to do market purchases as needed the idea is that we would have enough energy from carbon free sources where we wouldn't have to use market purchases to offset. But in the event of not having enough power, we would want to use market purchases. And the thinking is that at this rate in time, probably on the conservative side, most of the market purchases would not be carbon-free. I think the further we get into the future, the more that that is not true. But I would say right now, if we were to do market purchases, it probably wouldn't, we couldn't guarantee that it would be carbon-free. And I think that's some of the issues. But again, the idea would be very limited. And those are really the main differences. And I think that what and how this translates to the rate payers in terms of differences and rates, I think is what we really want to have that conversation with MSC, because we want to make sure that we're looking at the carbon-free direction and the goals of the resolution, but also to ensure that we're looking at other aspects, the affordability, the reliability, and the rate equity. And I think that's, I think, going to be really the challenge we're at now. And I think that if we get the direction to move forward with the MSC recommendation, we're really going to be able to have some meaningful dialogue in the very near future with MSC. Well, you know, I do recall vividly that when we adopted the carbon free by 2030, we were told by your predecessor at the time, you know, it's not possible. The sky is falling. You're going to bankrupt the residents and the city. It's not available. The costs are going up. And I think for one, I think the council pretty much disagreed with every single assertion. And here we sit just two years later. And am I correct that we're in the 80s already? Yes, and I do want to acknowledge the hard work of Kelly One and her team to know the questions But that was you know, I say I told you so but prices are coming down now I will concede that the current administration is not being helpful To this effort or to the future of Federal administration. Yeah. Yes. Sorry sorry Mary. Fair point. So you know there's going to be uncertainty and there always will be some uncertainty, right? But you know, a final question is again this is, it can be somewhat bloodless with all of the terms and metrics So what would we be doing at Glen arm with the last two? Yeah, the last Pogize the last two and we've tried out line in our report that we'd really run Glen arm in very limited circumstances One if there was if you think about last summer and the 11 days of over 100 degrees, and we just couldn't meet demand, you know, there would be a situation where we couldn't meet demand where we'd want to run Glen arm. The other scenario would be if for whatever reason we had some power failures, good richer, some other issues with our sub transmission system where we needed to fire up the plant. And then I wasn't. Yeah, I was too. Yeah, sorry. And then we keep it as natural gas power. Natural gas power for now. Okay. Right. I think ultimately we do see the future of Glen Arm being something different than that. Whether it's hydrogen, whether it's some other technology, but for the near future in terms of this 2030, I think the reality is that we've identified some options to convert Glen arm over to your left, and those have hefty price tags, $155 million a year, and that's annually. And I think that not only is there a hefty price tag, but some of the technology may not quite be there and the infrastructure needed to get it done. So the approach is to keep Glenn arm as a backup and that was worked through with MSC. We're very, I don't know, happy is the right word, but I think that we were somewhat relieved to have that direction from MSC because I think it's really the most viable. And again, what you're talking about is some combination of battery and solar absolutely, instead over on the far left. Yeah. Okay. Yes. And hydrogen. Okay. Great. Thank you. Mr. Cole. Again, just briefly, the built into these scenarios constructed by E3 is a very significant level of redundancy and protection for reliability. This is not on a good day of everything went well, we'd be 100%. This is on a bad day, if most everything went down, we'd still be carbon free. And it's only in the relatively rare instances of catastrophic failures that we would turn to Glen Arm or to the spot market. And the goal would be that we would never do that because we would not have catastrophic failures. So the reliability is there for scenarios 6 and 7. But in order to get to 6 and 7, we have to get to 130 megawatts total of solar and 125 of storage. That's an ambitious goal and what we're gonna hear from our staff for the next several months is what does it take to get to 130 and 125 and And we know that if we even just get to 80 and 100 We'll be we'll be fine with options six and seven so goal is options four and five. And six and seven really are the backup. And we're gonna hear how do we get to 130 megawatts and how do we get to 125 of storage. And I think we can get there and I think we can get there in affordable price, but that's what we're going to hear back from our staff. So Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, did you make the motion? That's what I thought. But I think we have to hear public comment first. No, I know, but I was going to just ask a clarifying question. Oh, but in the motion is the MSC recommendation of at least 100 additional megawatts of solar being the goal? Is that still? That could be the goal. Yeah, but I think we can hash that out at MSC. Exactly, I think that was the spirit. I just wanna clarify. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, Mr. Coles, absolutely correct. I think it was somewhere between 2018 and 2019 that the Council made the determination to no longer employ coal, not this coal, to no longer employ coal. And at that point, I think we were already headed to close to 90% in the high 80s is my recollection. And so it's really that last, as Mr. Cold points out, it's that last move to 100% that is the cost driver. But this council's been very, and past councils have been very deliberate about moving in this direction. And it's going to be tough. And I do hear that in Lancaster, a JPA is being formed, joint powers authority by multiple cities, including cities in the San Gabriel Valley, to construct a hydrogen plant. And so I'll be interested to hear as technology shifts and changes what's in the best interest of the city long term. Right now we're focused on solar, let's find, but technologies do change infrastructure, investment is made, and we just need to keep an open mind. I mean the The goal carbon-free. That's the goal. How we get there includes costs and taking into consideration emerging technologies. So any other questions and comments? This is the kickoff and if not, I will turn to members of the public for public comment. Joe, fine, blad, followed by Samford, Krasner, followed by Lauren Quarry, then Cynthia Kennedy, then Sam Burns. Are we doing one minute or two minutes or two minutes? Two minutes and I'll ring a bell when you have 30 seconds left. Go ahead. I'm glad to hear of the emphasis shifting to solar. But with experience with the current programs, I think we really need to put a lot of effort into Now the details of how this would operate and how, you know, what staffing is needed and how you can operate a good system with a lot of producers. And I don't think that's going to be simple, but I think it's very doable. And I think now that we're working, we've worked out goals. We need to not take very much time if possible because time is going very quickly. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fheim, let's. Sanford, Crasner, then Lauren Quarry, then Cynthia Kennedy, then Sam and Linda. Mr. Crasner, welcome. Thank you. I've always heard you shouldn't self-pass the clothes, but I'm really encouraged with all the chaos and the fantasizing that's going on in DC right now. It's encouraging to see California and Pasadena taking reality-based action. That's pretty amazing. As I think you have arrived at, I certainly encourage the council to proceed with the Glen Armies backup option. We've seen this as the most effective way to reach our goal. When I looked at the agenda today, I would like to understand there was a term that referred to a balanced position in the wholesale market. I'm just kind of curious what that means. I understand the implication that if we have to go to the spot market purchases that cannot be guaranteed to be renewable, but as a council has been saying, the objective is to minimize and hopefully eliminate the spot market purchases. I also like to encourage the development of local solar and storage, which I think people are focused on. This should include as much solar as we can get wherever we can get it. Includes parking lot canopies. It includes the parking lots at the Rose Bowl. Includes rooftop solar on the municipal buildings and parking structures, as well as residential solar. I hope we'll be focusing to try to get solar wherever we can within Pasadena. So thank you very much for your efforts. Thank you. Lauren Corey, followed by Cynthia Cantery, then Sam Burnt. Ms. Corey, welcome. Mayagordo and Council. I'm a district, a six resident, and I support the city council directing PWB to move forward with the consultant's modeling of two portfolios for 100% carbon free electric power by 2030. First, I also want to thank PWP for all of the progress it has made getting close to $99.77 making it a reality. Thank you. There has been an incredible volume of time, research, and city resources put towards advancing Pasadena as a city that deeply recognizes the existential climate crisis we face. City staff, PWP, expensive consultants, and city groups, such as Pasadena 100, have allocated unbelievable amounts of time defining viable solutions so that we can reach our goal by 2030. Even if the federal government is foolishly stampeding towards fossil fuels, our city and municipal owned utility must not. I have either attended or watched online all of the 710 AG meetings and past and recent presentations by Perkins Eastman are impressive and always forward thinking. Their awareness of the climate crisis and their sensitivity to the environment are very apparent while designing what will be one of the jewels of our city. Possibilities of rooftop solar both on city and residential buildings as well as smart water usage are mentioned frequently and not as something is a fairytale wish list, also not without cost awareness. City Council please direct PWP to implement the suggested portfolios for 100% carbon free energy by 2030. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Quarrie. Cynthia Kennedy, that's Sam Burnt. That's Kennedy, welcome. Thank you. Mayor, council members, we live in a really exciting time and I feel like we're actually almost at the point right now where we get to start planning for success. I have two thoughts on that. Number one is please, please can we start planning for how we actually increase the local solar? It seems like we've been putting it off for so long. We know that we have to do it. It's going to involve changes in PWP's policies, changes in the way PWP handles things, the way planning handles things. The budget, you know, I look at the budget, there's almost nothing in it about climate, the emergency, the climate emergency. We need to start thinking comprehensively about this topic. So that's one request actually getting to 130 megawatts of solar is completely doable. We already have 30. The naturally, natural progression of things would show that we get even more advanced. We need to be proactive and we need to start right away. We can't just keep talking about this. Thomas Edison said, a strategy without execution is hallucination. Please let's not hallucinate. Let's get started and do this. The other request I have of you is as we go into this next planning phase as we are specific and we really going on to the next level. Please include the community. The whole issue of how we assess cost. This is something that we have from the tap and from our research. We have specific thoughts on we'd like to be able to contribute it. Don't shut us out. Please be transparent. Thank you for your attention and thank you for bringing us to where we are today. Sam Burnt. Mr. Burnt, welcome. I want to first start just by congratulating David Reiss on his new role. So, PWP and E3 has less far done a wonderful job at producing scenarios showing that it is not only possible but plausible to achieve 100% carbon-free electricity by the end of 2030. To think that we'd be standing here three years later, three years ago, seriously, to our community, to PWP, to E3, and to the City Council. Congratulations. This is huge. It is my understanding that PWP is coming here today to request direction. The most plausible scenario, the one where we hedge our bet against getting a rare geothermal contract, includes 130 megawatts total of local solar and 125 megawatts of local storage. This would require 100 additional megawatts of local solar and storage. Please note the difference between this and the standing motion. It is important. I urge you to adjust your motion appropriately so as to provide PWP the clarity that they need to achieve the goal. Additionally, when the resolution 997 was voted on, this council had the choice to have the resolution's goal be carbon neutrality or have it be carbon free. The city council unanimously decided that the goal would be 100% carbon free. To council member Madison's point 100% means 100% and 100% means hourly. Right now you have the moment to reaffirm this decision and direct PWP to take the plausible scenarios E3 was hired to develop and had PWP develop a plan with a timeline in milestones to achieve our collective goal of 100% carbon free electricity by 2030 and to do it on an hourly basis. Thank you. That completes public comment. Okay. And so... and to do it on an hourly basis. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Wren. That completes public comment. Okay and so Mr. Madison is in the queue. So I mean it does the council have an appetite to give and mystery as do you think you have that that direction to pursue the kinds of solar numbers that are being discussed. We can certainly pursue them and share them with MSC and see if we can come up with a plan and what the cost would be. I don't think that we're prepared at this point to say we can absolutely do that. I don't know what the impact would be but we can certainly, and what we're presenting tonight, excuse me in terms of a recommendation for the four scenarios does include those target numbers and Just if you could help me understand Broadbrush How would a city like Pasadena get the 100 megawatts 130 megawatts? Yeah, and and so I'll speak to the solar first I think that that council member Cole actually nailed it. It's gonna be a combination of municipal building buildings, city-owned buildings, city-owned parking structures. And then whether we talk about institutions that would include, if you want to throw multi-family as part of institutions, but we need to think about how to do multi-family. And we don't see that a lot because there's really not an incentive for the landlord to do that. And so we need to think about how to include the rooftop solar on multifamily residential in the city that would also hopefully help alleviate what the renters pay in terms of electric costs. So I think this combination of city-owned property, which includes buildings, rooftops, as well as structures and parking lots, as well as institutional uses, and then single-family homes. And we have quite a bit in the city. The existing incentives that exist today, I think we do need to take a look at and work through some changes with MSC. MSC is already given in staff direction to come back with some changes. And so I think all of those things together will help us reach that number. But I will share with Council, I want to be really open about what that means. We talked about, I think most Council members are familiar with the Sunset Reservoir. We're looking at putting rooftop solar there, as well as on the adjacent parking lot. And that only gets us two megawat megawatts. And so, and we don't know what the price tag is yet. So this is an ambitious, real challenge for us. It doesn't mean that it can't be done, but it means that we're going to need to diversify how we do it, right? It can't all be city owned property. We talk, we heard the resident talk about the Rose Bowl. certainly something that we need to explore as well. But I think a lot of it will be rooftop. And then when we talk about the Rose Bowl that's certainly something that we need to explore as well but I think a lot of it will be rooftop and then when we talk about batteries we're already on our way I think the council has approved a project that would result in 25 megawatts of storage at Glen arm that's which is really really helpful and a great start for us and that's going to be a project that is operated by our own employees. And so they get trained there. And I think that continuing, we have enough space to add a lot more there. One of the challenges I think has been accurately depicted is what the federal government is going to do to ensure that developers can still do these projects. And we want to make sure that whatever we end up doing and how we end up doing that we are being thoughtful about the ultimate costs. But in terms of the storage, certainly some storage would come from the private side as well. We're not sure exactly what that looks like, but there are programs that allow a utility to call on that. We probably need to, again, this all goes hand in hand with our advanced metering infrastructure that's going to allow us to better handle demand and demand response. But in terms of the battery, I think that we've got enough space, it's going to be projects and developers and making sure that what the cost is makes a lot of sense because again what we're looking to do is be carbon free. We don't necessarily and these goals of the solar and the storage make a lot of sense but I don't think that we should at this point in time make decide what exactly the resources are that get us to 100% carbon free because Because I think that again, the goal being 100% carbon free means that we need to explore everything that's out there. And there's another waypoint in 2028 where we're going to update the IRP where we're going to ensure that we're looking at emerging technologies as the mayor has stated. And that may mean that batteries are much cheaper and much better and long duration batteries come into play where now we're talking about 10 hour and even beyond. And so I think it becomes more realistic the further in time we get. Hopefully that answers the problem. Thank you. I appreciate why City Manager Marquess chose you for this job. And it's a tough one because you're basically in the business of selling a product that you want to discourage people from using. So it's a unique position. Do we, when we offer incentives, do we offer incentives on the battery if the consumer, the resident, for example, opts to include battery storage? Yeah. Because it seems like so much of this discussion is about, you know, the rare circumstance where there's more than peak demand and now we're into rolling blackouts. Not currently. Currently, it's for the rooftop solar, which, again, we have a very, I would say, customer-friendly incentive program that exists today, where we allow credits to pay not only for electricity but also the transmission of electricity and in some cases it'll even be cover your water bill and sewer etc. We don't have a program that exists today for batteries but it is something that I think we've been given direction on by MSc to look at. And then I'm attracted to Ms. Kennedy's many of her suggestions, including the one that citizen involvement should be a constant. So what are the staff's thoughts about whether we ask the tap to continue in some form. And I love that MSc spends so many hours on this. And I think that's an example to some of the earlier comments about Mayor, the way that we go about things. The committees really do offer an opportunity to have real working sessions that we probably never would at the council. But how do we also structurally have citizen involvement? Sorry, Mark. The tap is not ending. We're going to keep the tap to help us on technical issues including looking at cost and implementation projects and implementation programming. So we're going to continue working with tap as it relates to the study, which is really sort of it's all coming together for us. There is an engagement plan that involves robust engagement with community into the community to talk about rates and to ensure that folks are informed that there's a transparent process and that everybody has a say. But again, the actions of the council tonight are going to impact rates. And that's what we're going to go study and so that we can work with MSC and have a better handle on that. So that we'll be working with TAAP, we're going to work with the public and we're going to work with MSC and make sure that we don't get too far out of ourselves, make that we're sort of locked up with counsel in terms of identifying projects and implementation plan that doesn't break the bank if you will. Well part of that is that discouragement element of conservation, which is what we do want to promote and the best way to do that is with a financial incentive. So do you need any more direction from the council about continuing the tap as part of tonight's action? No. And I would also urge you to continue to work with the EAC as well. We haven't always had a great relationship between your department and that commission. And I think that's extremely important, because that's really the genesis of the EAC was at the same time that we were entering into the U.N. Accords and the U.S. City's agreement and what have you. So great. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Mr. Lion. Thank you, Mayor. I want to add to it it we're talking about institutional partners. We're also talking about corporate-corporate buildings, those complexes, hospitals, our friends in the school district. We should be they're going to be here next week and we should have this conversation with them. We just you know the voters of Pasadena just voted them a billion dollars dollars to do a lot of upgrades on their campus and this might be a part of that work. So it is going to mean partnering. It also mean really investing in an advertising campaign to promote residential solar. I mean, we're going to have to hit this at every level. I take exception with one thing you said. And I want to tweak our direction to make this clear, which is that you said, and you and I talked about this earlier today too, but you said we don't want to commit to the specific resources at this point or something to that effect. I disagree. We're giving a different direction. We spent $1.3 million to find out which resources would work. And we waited patiently to hear what E3 said. And what E3 said is, solar's the way. So other technologies may come along. Longer batteries may come along. We will tweak as we go. But the direction today is to go for solar at 130 megawatts of solar and 80 to 120 storage. That's the direction. And then we're going to look at that. We're going to look at what it costs and we may end up tweaking that or massaging it. But it, it, that's the recommendation and that's where we're saying to go. Now, we recognize there are a lot of decisions to be made along the way. We may pull back, as I just said, but I want to be clear, we are adopting the proposal they gave to us and those resources are defined in that proposal. If I could and I'm not being argumentative at all, the recommendation of MSC, the continuing to look at I'd scenarios and portfolios, 4 through 7, there's a range from 80 to 100 in terms of the solar. And so we would. And we're in that range. And we're in the picture on the same page. And I think the letter, but the spirit anyway, of the recommendation is to go for four and five. And if we have to pull elements out of six and seven, we can do that. Which may spot buys on the market, or one of those elements we've talked about, but right now we're still full steam ahead in going for the goal. And I don't want to hedge our bats on that. So I see the goal is carbon-free. And if there are other technologies that get us there, For example, the hydrogen, I would like for, I'd like the benefit of understanding where we are with the other technologies. We did have a deep discussion of hydrogen at MSC and it was, as you saw, it was proposal three. Yeah. We, it's our understanding that we just don't have the technology to get it here. It would mean building a pipeline to bring in hydrogen and then converting. But Glenn, obviously this isn't going to happen overnight. So there's a runway, if you will, that's going to take a number of years of investment and planning. And as we go through that as, you know, technology shift, we've got to be open to moving in that direction. Of course, but the goal remains 2030. Oh yeah, of course, as new technology comes along, we'll incorporate it as soon as we can. But we now have a direction that our consultant gave us, and that's the recommendation to announce to go that way. I just want to be clear that the staff has the direction that includes looking at other technologies as we look to set the goal, including hydrogen. Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, I were in cost. I mean, the cost I'm told I learned over the weekend that the cost for installation is $30,000. And, you know, that's, I think about people like my dad and who are retired and unfixed income and how we get him there, not directly, but people like him. And then the system reliability, I have solar. I've had solar for, I think, in 2015 or something. And, you know, recently our system failed and getting someone out to come and service the system took a long time. The better part of a year our system was out of service because Sunpower, the largest provider of solar, at least at the time, went bankrupt. And I know that there were a lot of residents who were in the same situation as I and my family were waiting for that bankruptcy proceedings to be completed and then the successor to come in. And so reliability is important. Fortunately, we hadn't cut ties to DWP, otherwise we would have been in real trouble. So those are costs, reliability, capacity. Those are all important issues that I'm sure the staff will come back and talk to us about. And these proposals do are really geared more to reliability than to the cost element yet because we don't really know what that's. We think we're going to be able to leverage economies of scale which we haven't really looked at yet in here and there's also a big question about whether we're going to use a private suppliers of this stuff or we're going to become a supplier is one of the questions and And so all that is TBD. Yeah. You know, we set important goals in the city, I mean, like, you know, ending homelessness. And, you know, we put time effort and resources into it as we should. And I see this as a goal that is worthy of setting and worthy of pursuing and investing time and energy into it and asking our residents to look at joining us in our business community and that's what I'm seeing in our action today is giving direction to the staff if we could operationalize this goal by 2030. What would it take? What would it cost? And who are the partners? Institutional and residential and what's the impact to them as well? Okay. Oh, Mr. Cole. Yeah, I'm reluctant to prolong this, but I'm also reluctant to give mixed messages. I was going to make the same point that Mr. Lyon made, so I won't make it again. And I respect Mayor that everything you've just laid out is a reality. But what I hope is that based upon this motion and the careful study of E3, that we spent months and more than a million dollars to procure, they've given us a plausible to use the word we heard route to 100% renewable energy by 2030 every hour of the day, barring 30foreseen, really dire threats to our system. And the way we get there is by a significant investment in local solar matched with batteries, because we've got more solar than we need at some hours of the day and not enough when the sun isn't shining. So this is a plausible path. So 100% your concerns, I think, are incorporated. But I hope that this staff, and I hope the council agrees, what we're saying is, give us a roadmap to this. Because if we achieve that roadmap, if we can afford that roadmap, then we're there. And that does not preclude a year from now or six months from now or five years from now having even cheaper or better or more ambitious technology coming online. But this roadmap, which we've been given by E3, gets us there. And that's the direction we're giving our staff tonight, is follow that roadmap. We have a range of possibilities within that roadmap. But that's what we're saying is, within that roadmap, let's go forward. Mr. Hampton. Mr. Madison. Yeah, I just think I really appreciate my colleagues' comments and some history would inform us that there is some mistrust in the community around this topic, right? I mean, when the council passed the resolution, the first thing your predecessor, well, the department did, under your predecessor, was sent out a survey asking if the public agreed with the council's decision. Unprecedented is in my experience and completely improper. then they drag their feet on a geothermal contract that cost our ratepayers, if I'm recalling $70 or $80 million because they delayed the execution of that. And it was hard to not feel like this was just very passive aggressive behavior around these clear policy mandates that the council's given. I know we're beyond all that now, but I really join my colleagues in wanting a clear record here that our intent is it's not a wink and a nod. It's go get it. Tell us how we achieve it and get it. Yeah, I agree. Okay. Call the question. I don't see anyone else in the queue. So there's a motion by the chair of the MSC committee. Yeah. Yeah. And there's a second. Okay. Um, roll call. Council member Cole. Inclusively, yes. Council member Hampton. Yes. Councilmember Jones. Yes. Councilmember Lion. Yes. Councilmember Madison. Yes. Councilmember Moussouda. Yes. Vice Mayor Revis. Yes. Mayor Gordo. Yes. Motionist unanimously approved. Okay. Congratulations. I know that we just wrapped up that item but before we wrap up that item I want to give um you know big thanks to the chairs that have gotten us to this point. Since I've been on the council, Margaret Beg Austin, we've also had Felicia Williams and now we have um just in Jones and I want to thank them for getting us to where we are today. Technology will change as you mentioned mayor about your solar experience. I think that our PWP staff is, we have the most reliable in my opinion, the most reliable power source in the city. I mean, not in the city but in the state and the United States and the universe to you. But prove be different. I would say that I think that if we're really leaning into solar and our power department is looking at changing its business plan, then having our power department being one of the organizations that is doing the solar installations on residential homes is a way to prevent issues that you ran into with your home mayor. And those are real issues that I talk to residents about all the time because a lot of these companies are fly by night and they come and they go. And so those are my comments. I know that we're going to talk a lot about solar in the future of MSC, so I'm looking forward to those discussions. Thank you. Well said, Mr. Hannon. Okay. I'm a junior in memory. And so now we will adjourn. Before we adjourn, I have a, at the end of the agenda says you can bring up things. And so just, yes, very briefly, I would like to bring up, sorry, there was an item that came up in the discussion today about the first source hire. I'd like to make sure that that comes to a committee for economic development. development but also PUSD has dollars and we're going to have our meeting next Monday. I don't know if that is one of the agenda items to talk about the bonds that they passed. So we could ask them to also pitch in and make sure that they're doing it. Is that one of the items at all? No. It is not on. I think there is an update on the plans they're going to take up at Roosevelt to the affordable housing and then you've bond money for that. If they have any idea of what their plans are for local hire I think that would be a great opportunity for them to discuss that here so everybody in the city council gets the opportunity here that those are my comments thank you Mayor. So on the ATTEC one, you'll legitim opportunity to hear that. Those are my comments. Thank you, Mayor. So on the ATEC one, you'll agenda is that as chair? Okay. Yes, plenty of us about to say yes. How did you get that on as my missing something or aren't you the chair of ATEC? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, with that we will adjourn in memory of our friend and former colleague Ann Erdman who took great pleasure maybe even rivaled me in talking about our city and ensuring that employees and residents and businesses know that we are in the great city. And so with that, I would ask that we stand in the journey and memory of our friend Ann Erdly.