Name: Santa Rosa City Council meeting, Jul 28, 2026
Start: 2026-07-28
Location: City of Santa Rosa

City Council

Tue, July 28, 2026

Agenda PDF Minutes PDF Watch Video

Agenda items

Vote records

Discussion summary

Transcript

Meeting summaryAI-generated

Santa Rosa City Council — July 28, 2026

This was a lengthy regular meeting featuring two major study sessions on transit planning, a public hearing on fire department weed abatement, and a pivotal vote to place a sales tax reauthorization measure on the November 2026 ballot. Councilmember Alvarez was absent throughout; all other members were present.

Study Session: Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy (Item 4.1)

Planning Director Osburn and Transportation Director Hennessy presented the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities policy — a regional framework linking housing density and commercial activity around transit hubs to eligibility for federal/regional grant funding. Compliance is voluntary, but necessary to compete for "One Bay Area Grant" (OBAG) funding. Over the past decade-plus, Santa Rosa has received more than $18 million through this program, funding high-profile projects including the bicycle-pedestrian overcrossing and the Southeast Greenway master planning effort.

Santa Rosa currently has two TOC areas — both centered on SMART rail stations — and must reach 85 out of 100 possible points by July 1, 2027 to qualify for $2–4 million in incentive funding. The city currently falls short by about 3 points. Staff identified three policy options to close the gap:

1. Vehicle Parking Maximums (highest point potential, 1–8 points): Would cap the number of parking spaces developers can build near SMART stations (e.g., 1.5 spaces per residential unit). Staff noted this is a new concept for Santa Rosa — the city currently only uses parking minimums. Concerns raised included impacts on developer financing and feasibility, and the unique challenges of the North Station area, which lacks the downtown's surplus public parking infrastructure.

2. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) (lower point value, but administratively feasible): Would require new developments above a threshold (20+ residential units or 20,000+ sq. ft. commercial) to choose from a menu of options — transit subsidies, unbundled parking, bike infrastructure, childcare — to reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips. Staff indicated this could be implemented relatively easily with existing grant-funded consultant support.

3. Ministerial Housing Ordinance (4 points): Would allow qualifying housing projects (15%+ affordable units) in the two TOC areas to be approved administratively, bypassing public hearings. Staff noted this is a significant community engagement tradeoff but increases processing efficiency. The heavy lift would be updating objective design standards, particularly in downtown historic preservation districts.

Council discussion was substantive. Councilmember Fleming (who was involved in crafting the MTC policy menu) urged the full menu of options be presented to the council rather than staff pre-selecting, and advocated going "all-in" on parking maximums and pursuing ministerial housing as essential for a city of Santa Rosa's size. Councilmember MacDonald expressed caution on parking maximums given community concerns about parking access. Councilmember Rogers similarly preferred a middle ground. Vice Mayor Okrepkie raised concerns about the underserved North Santa Rosa area's limited engagement with local government. Mayor Stapp asked staff to think carefully about unintended consequences, particularly for market-rate for-sale housing.

Council reached consensus direction (unanimously) to expand TDM to all Priority Development Areas citywide — beyond the minimum TOC compliance boundary — as well as support for a middle-ground approach on parking maximums (partial consistency), and to defer the ministerial housing ordinance to a future study session.

Public comment: Abby Arnold (Santa Rosa YIMBY) supported parking maximums, noting that each surface parking space costs ~$52,000 to build and that caps would reduce housing costs. Dwayne DeWitt called for pursuing a South Santa Rosa SMART station and advocated for a 25% inclusionary housing requirement. A third speaker supported the ministerial ordinance as a fair housing tool.

Vote: Study session only — no binding vote taken.

Study Session: CityBus Short-Range Transit Plan Update (Item 4.2)

Transportation Director Hennessy and Deputy Director Rachel (transit) presented a candid overview of the financial and operational challenges facing Santa Rosa CityBus.

Key operational facts: Service hours remain at about 83% of pre-COVID levels. Ridership has recovered to about 80% of pre-COVID levels. On-time performance has dropped to 73%, well below the 90% target — a result of over-tight scheduling adopted during COVID that no longer works as traffic has returned and street speeds have been reduced. Route 1 (Mendocino Avenue) is the busiest route and is at capacity, sometimes leaving riders behind.

Financial picture: The transit fund is approximately 70% dependent on sales tax revenues (primarily state Transportation Development Act funds), which are declining in real purchasing power. Operating costs have risen 22% over three years; a new paratransit contract came in 25% higher than the prior one; and zero-emissions bus transition costs have been higher than projected. The city began drawing on transit reserves in FY2027 for the first time. Projections show reserves could be exhausted by FY2030 if trends continue, with no path to capital replacement funding. Staff compared Santa Rosa's situation to peers statewide — Petaluma Transit is cutting 29% of service in August; Tri Delta Transit is cutting 25%.

Proposed short-term actions (targeting January 2027):

Re-time all routes to reflect current traffic, adding cycle time where needed

Reinvest in Route 1 (restore frequency, address overcrowding)

Develop a strategic interline plan connecting routes across town through the SMART stations, improving connectivity to regional transit

Routes flagged for potential restructuring: Route 10 (North City Connector — low ridership on its southern segment between downtown and Coffey Park/Cotton Lane), Route 16 (Oakmont deviated fixed-route, ridership down 74%, and the Oakmont Association has expressed interest in alternative service models), and Route 18 (Southeast Circulator, chronically low ridership across most stops).

Longer-range plan (2027): Will include a scenario planning for up to 10% service cuts in FY2028 if revenues do not improve.

Council discussion focused on equity concerns for transit-dependent riders, the connection between parking policy and transit investment, and the need to think about the system holistically rather than route by route. Director Hennessy asked council to support a systemic approach rather than defending individual routes by district. Councilmember MacDonald suggested exploring reduced-frequency service to Oakmont rather than elimination. Councilmember Bañuelos noted route alignment with climate and equity goals.

Public comment: Fred (longtime transit observer) noted the historic difficulty of transit in sprawling Western cities. Abby Arnold emphasized that 30% of the population cannot drive and urged equity-centered decision-making. Dwayne DeWitt called for community-based planning and pursuing federal Title VI equity funding. Gregory Ferrand suggested linking parking fees to transit subsidies.

Vote: Study session only — no binding vote taken; staff to return in early fall with specific service recommendations after community outreach.

Public Hearing: Fire Department Annual Weed Abatement Program (Item 16.1)

Fire Department staff presented the annual report on weed abatement inspections, noting approximately 9,000 inspections conducted citywide during fire season under City Ordinance 3681. Properties found out of compliance after multiple inspections are abated by a contractor at the owner's expense, recoverable by the city. Staff noted the program is working — recent fires were kept small specifically because of weed abatement activities. The council was asked to confirm the itemized cost report and authorize the placement of tax liens where appropriate.

Dwayne DeWitt asked the city to more proactively abate fire hazards on city-owned land at Roseland Creek, noting transients start fires near the creek. Staff noted the city already goes well above the required 30-foot perimeter break at the 5-acre Roseland Creek Park, using grazing and active management.

Vote: Moved by Councilmember MacDonald, seconded by Vice Mayor Okrepkie. Passed 6–0 (Alvarez absent).

Transaction and Use Tax Ballot Measure (Item 15.1)

This was the meeting's central action item. CFO Scott Wagner and Communications Officer Misty Wood presented the case for placing a sales tax reauthorization on the November 3, 2026 ballot.

Background: Voters approved Measure Q (a half-cent local sales tax) in 2020, expiring in 2031. The city faces a structural general fund deficit of approximately $14 million annually in out-years — rising to $23 million when Measure Q expires. Over three years, the city has cut approximately 80 positions (now at the same staffing level as the bottom of the Great Recession), eliminated entire departments, accelerated CalPERS unfunded liability paydown (saving $28 million over five years and retiring the debt six years early), increased business license and transient occupancy taxes, and had an external financial review confirm no further efficiencies remain. Despite this, core services including neighborhood street maintenance remain unfunded.

The proposed measure would replace the existing half-cent Measure Q with a one-cent general transaction and use tax, with no expiration date (until ended by voters). It would generate approximately $46 million annually — $23 million more than the current measure. A simple majority (50%+1) is required. All funds would stay in Santa Rosa. The measure includes independent audits and public disclosure requirements.

Community engagement: Staff conducted extensive outreach including a January residents' survey, the bilingual "Let's Talk Santa Rosa" campaign (2,400+ respondents), 14 presentations to community groups, and a June follow-up survey. Results showed 55% of respondents would "definitely" or "probably" vote yes, rising to 62% including those leaning yes. Top service priorities identified were fire/EMS response, police response to violent crime, and street maintenance.

Without the measure: Staff projected that summer 2027 would require approximately 42 additional position cuts, potentially including fire station closures, elimination of police violent crimes teams, reduced street and park maintenance, and elimination of recreation programs.

Public comment was unanimously supportive. Abby Arnold and Santa Rosa YIMBY formally endorsed the measure. Bob Campbell, representing the city's Community Budget Advisory Committee (which included experienced public finance professionals), stated the committee "strongly supports" the measure and called it "one of the most foundational" solutions to the city's fiscal crisis. Representatives from Operating Engineers Local 3, Teamsters 856, and Santa Rosa Firefighters Local 1401 all pledged active campaign support. Dwayne DeWitt raised concerns about the regressive impact of sales taxes on low-income residents and noted that only about 1.5% of residents participated in the engagement surveys.

Vote on ordinance: Moved by Councilmember Rogers, seconded by Councilmember MacDonald. Passed 6–0 (Alvarez absent).

Vote on resolution (ordering submission to voters at November 3, 2026 election): Moved by Councilmember Rogers, seconded by Councilmember MacDonald. Passed 6–0 (Alvarez absent).

Consent Calendar (Items 13.1–13.6)

All six items passed unanimously (6–0, Alvarez absent) on a single motion by Vice Mayor Okrepkie, seconded by Councilmember Rogers. Items included:

13.1: Agreement with West Publishing for legal research services

13.2: Three-year blanket purchase order for Big Belly (smart waste receptacles)

13.3: Contract award for Santa Rosa Avenue intersection improvements

13.4: Acceptance of a $750,000 Sonoma Land Trust donation for the Southeast Greenway master planning effort — Director Hennessy confirmed this was entirely from private philanthropic donors through the Land Trust

13.5: Appropriation of state drinking water grant funding for the Robin Way Water project

13.6: Authorization to apply for up to $30 million in state Homekey Plus funds, co-applying with Burbank Housing for Caritas Homes Phase II — 64 units of permanent supportive housing including 10 veteran units, with Catholic Charities as service provider and county behavioral health coordination

Representatives from Burbank Housing and Sonoma Land Trust volunteers were present and thanked by the council.

Other Business

City Attorney Report (Item 9.1): City Attorney reported on one finalized litigation matter — *Johnson v. City of Santa Rosa* — a federal civil rights case related to a 2022 arrest. A jury cleared one officer entirely and found partial liability but no intentional or malicious conduct by the second officer, awarding plaintiff $10,000 in general damages and no punitive damages. The court subsequently reduced plaintiff's attorney fee request from approximately $357,000 to approximately $113,000. Active caseload stands at 34 matters; 5 cases are on appeal following trial court rulings in the city's favor.

Design Review and Preservation Board Appointment (Item 11.2.1): Vincenzo (last name unclear in transcript) was appointed to fill a vacancy in the archaeologist/architectural historian/historian position. Moved by Councilmember Bañuelos, seconded by Councilmember Rogers. Passed 6–0.

July 14, 2026 Minutes (Item 12.1): Approved as submitted without discussion.

Council Reports: Councilmember MacDonald attended the annual Chicano Style Motorcycle Club oyster run. Vice Mayor Okrepkie reported on a California League of Cities North Bay Division meeting where CFO Wagner presented the city's CalPERS liability strategy to regional acclaim. Mayor Stapp reported on the Sonoma County Mayors legislative meeting (theme: loss of local control and unfunded mandates), the Zero Waste board, and a Santa Rosa Rural Cemetery cleanup day; he noted the passing of volunteer Jim Butler. Councilmember Rogers reported on a Calpine/geysers tour, a police ride-along, and a park maintenance ride-along where she cleaned bathrooms, scrubbed graffiti, and removed a sectional couch from the Prince Memorial Greenway.

Key Takeaways

Sales tax measure headed to November ballot: Council unanimously voted to ask voters to replace the expiring half-cent Measure Q with a permanent one-cent sales tax, projected to generate $46 million annually. Without voter approval, the city faces another round of major service cuts — potentially including fire station closures — as early as summer 2027.

CityBus faces a fiscal cliff: Transit reserves could be exhausted by FY2030. Staff will return in fall with proposals to restructure or reduce service on at least three underperforming routes, with a longer-range plan including potential 10% service cuts in FY2028 if revenues don't improve.

TOC policy compliance on track: Council gave staff direction to pursue parking maximums (partial/middle-ground approach) and to expand Transportation Demand Management requirements citywide across all Priority Development Areas — positioning the city for $2–4 million in regional grant funding by July 2027. A ministerial housing ordinance will be brought back for further discussion at a future session.

Caritas Homes Phase II moving forward: The city will apply for up to $30 million in state Homekey Plus funding to complete the final 64-unit phase of permanent supportive housing in downtown Santa Rosa, including 10 units for veterans.

Southeast Greenway receives $750,000 private donation: Through the Sonoma Land Trust, private philanthropic donors have contributed $750,000 to fund the Southeast Greenway master planning effort — a major project that would not otherwise have funding from the general fund.

AI-generated summary from voice-to-text transcript. Not the official record. Verify important details with the source documents linked above.

What happened at this meeting

TRANSIT-ORIENTED COMMUNITIES (TOC) POLICY The Planning and Economic Development and Transportation and Public Works Departments recommend that the Council hold a study session to receive information and provide policy direction regarding implementation of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. This item has no fiscal

# Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy Summary

Staff presented Santa Rosa's Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) policy framework, a regional planning initiative developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to increase housing density and commercial activity around transit stations. Director Osborn explained that while TOC compliance is voluntary, it is mandatory for cities seeking competitive regional funding through One Bay Area Grants (OBAG), which could bring Santa Rosa an additional $2-4 million. To meet the minimum 85-point threshold across four scoring categories (residential density, affordable housing, parking management, and station access/circulation), staff recommended three programs: parking maximums to discourage vehicle use, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs requiring developments to reduce single-occupancy trips, and ministerial housing ordinances for affordable housing production. Key implementation challenges included the July 1, 2027 deadline for the North Station Area specific plan update (requiring density increases from 9 to 25 units per acre), balancing ministerial approval efficiency with community engagement, and addressing Council concerns about equitable benefits distribution given Santa Rosa's only two qualifying rail transit stations. The Council ultimately supported applying TDM citywide to Priority Development Areas and directed staff to explore parking maximums and ministerial housing options while weighing tradeoffs between funding opportunities and local implementation constraints.

SANTA ROSA CITYBUS SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN UPDATE The Transportation and Public Works Department recommends that the Council hold a study session for staff to provide an overview of Santa Rosa CityBus system performance and finances and engage the Council in discussion about the goals of the Short Range Transit Plan update, the proposed planning approach, and next steps in the process. Council will take no action, but may discuss and provide direction to staff. This item has no impact on current fiscal year budget.

# Santa Rosa CityBus Short-Range Transit Plan Update Summary

Staff presented the Santa Rosa CityBus Short-Range Transit Plan Update, highlighting significant operational and financial challenges facing the system. Deputy Director Rachel, transit planners Matt Wilcox and Sean Sosa, and other staff explained that on-time performance has declined to 73% due to overly tight scheduling, post-COVID travel pattern shifts, and budget constraints, with the transit fund drawing from reserves for the first time in fiscal year 27 and facing major cost pressures including 22% salary increases and unexpected zero-emissions bus transition costs. Outreach from February through March involving seven focus groups and stakeholders identified concerns about transit frequency, agency coordination, and infrastructure needs. Staff proposed a two-phased approach: an immediate 6-month phase to address current challenges through route re-timing, investment in Route 1, and development of a strategic grid system for crosstown connectivity, followed by longer-range planning in 2027, while acknowledging difficult trade-offs between service coverage and productivity. Multiple council members and public commenters, including Councilmembers Rogers, Fleming, and Donald, emphasized equity concerns for transit-dependent populations and requested county coordination before implementing service reductions, with some suggesting alternative approaches like modified service schedules rather than route eliminations.

REPORT OF SETTLEMENTS AND ACTIVE LITIGATION The City Attorney will report on all settlements authorized by Council in closed session that were finalized in June 2026, which includes but may not be limited to all settlements requiring the City to pay more than

# Summary

The City Manager announced that the Neighborhood Services program's Block Blast event will take place Thursday, July 30th, featuring low-cost and free activities for underserved youth and families in Santa Rosa through a partnership with Recreation and Parks and the Violence Prevention Partnership. The City Attorney reported on settlements and active litigation, noting that in the federal civil rights case John Paul Johnson versus City of Santa Rosa, a jury awarded the plaintiff $10,000 in general damages for an elbow injury sustained during a lawful arrest in March 2022, with no punitive damages assessed. The court awarded approximately $113,000 in attorney fees and costs to the plaintiff—significantly reduced from the plaintiff's request of $357,000—which a public commenter praised as effective negotiation by the City Attorney's legal team. As of July 7th, 2026, the City Attorney reported an active caseload of 34 litigation matters, with approximately 20% of trial court level matters having assigned trial dates and 5 cases currently on appeal.

MAYOR'S/COUNCIL MEMBERS' SUBCOMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS (AND POSSIBLE COUNCIL DIRECTION TO BOARD REPRESENTATIVE ON PENDING ISSUES, IF NEEDED) 11.1.1 Council Subcommittee Reports 11.1.2 Sonoma County Transportation and Climate Authorities (SCTCA) 11.1.3 Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) - Water Advisory Committee 11.1.4 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) 11.1.5 Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District

Council members provided reports on their recent activities and community involvement. Councilmember Donald reported attending the 11th annual Oyster Run event organized by Chicano Style Motorcycle Club with over 300 motorcycles and praised their inclusiveness. Another councilmember reported attending a California League of Cities North Bay Division meeting where CFO Scott Wagner presented on addressing CalPERS unfunded liability, and also attended a Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Association legislative meeting discussing state-level pending legislation with concerns about loss of local control and unfunded mandates. Councilmember Roger provided an extensive report on her community engagement activities including participation in geothermal facility tours, police ride-alongs, and park maintenance work, emphasizing how council members embody their role by both making decisions and doing community work alongside city staff.

July 14, 2026, Regular Meeting Minutes.

The Council reviewed the July 14, 2026 Regular Meeting Minutes. No edits were proposed by Council members, and no public comment was received from either in-chamber or online participants. The minutes were approved as submitted.

Agenda items (23)

Procedural (6)

1ProceduralHTTPS://SANTA-ROSA.LEGISTAR.COM/CALENDAR. CLICK ON THE "IN PROGRESS" LINK TO VIEW;

This is a procedural notice directing residents to the online Legistar calendar system to view meeting details and agendas.

2ProceduralVIA ZOOM WEBINAR BY VISITING

This is a procedural notice explaining how residents can participate in the meeting via Zoom webinar.

3ProceduralCOMCAST CHANNEL 28 OR 26 (ESPAÑOL), AT&T U-VERSE CHANNEL 99; AND

This is a procedural notice providing TV channel options for watching the meeting on Comcast and AT&T U-Verse.

4ProceduralVIA YOUTUBE AT HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/CITYOFSANTAROSA Public Comment may be made live during the meeting In-Person from Council Chamber, via Zoom webinar or dial-in, or submitted in advance via email at cc-comment@srcity.org by 5:00 p.m. the Monday before the City Council Meeting.

Residents can submit public comments in person at Council Chamber, via Zoom, by phone, or by email to cc-comment@srcity.org before 5 p.m. on the Monday before the meeting.

12.1ProceduralJuly 14, 2026, Regular Meeting Minutes.

This is a procedural item to approve the official minutes from the July 14, 2026 City Council meeting.

What happened

21.1ProceduralUPCOMING MEETINGS LIST *Did not appear on the preliminary agenda. **Quasi-judicial or adjudicative action, ex-parte communication disclosure is required.

This is a procedural notice listing upcoming City Council meetings and dates.

General Business

20General BusinessSupport Letter for AB2047 - Firearms: 3-dimensional printing blocking technology - Provided for information.

The Council will consider expressing support for state assembly bill AB2047 regarding technology to prevent illegal three-dimensional printing of firearms.

21General BusinessSupport Letter for SB1153 - Disaster preparedness: urban retail

The Council will consider expressing support for state senate bill SB1153 regarding disaster preparedness for urban retail businesses.

22General BusinessSupport Letter for AB1436 - State Air Resources Board: air pollution regulations: private fleets - Provided for information.

The Council will consider expressing support for state assembly bill AB1436 regarding state air pollution regulations for private vehicle fleets.

4.1General BusinessTRANSIT-ORIENTED COMMUNITIES (TOC) POLICY The Planning and Economic Development and Transportation and Public Works Departments recommend that the Council hold a study session to receive information and provide policy direction regarding implementation of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. This item has no fiscal

The City Council will hold a study session to discuss how to implement the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit-Oriented Communities Policy, which affects development and transportation planning in Santa Rosa.

What happened

4.2General BusinessSANTA ROSA CITYBUS SHORT-RANGE TRANSIT PLAN UPDATE The Transportation and Public Works Department recommends that the Council hold a study session for staff to provide an overview of Santa Rosa CityBus system performance and finances and engage the Council in discussion about the goals of the Short Range Transit Plan update, the proposed planning approach, and next steps in the process. Council will take no action, but may discuss and provide direction to staff. This item has no impact on current fiscal year budget.

Staff will present information about CityBus system performance and finances, and the City Council will discuss goals and next steps for updating the Short Range Transit Plan.

What happened

9.1General BusinessREPORT OF SETTLEMENTS AND ACTIVE LITIGATION The City Attorney will report on all settlements authorized by Council in closed session that were finalized in June 2026, which includes but may not be limited to all settlements requiring the City to pay more than

The City Attorney will report on all legal settlements and cases that were finalized in June 2026.

What happened

11.1General BusinessMAYOR'S/COUNCIL MEMBERS' SUBCOMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS (AND POSSIBLE COUNCIL DIRECTION TO BOARD REPRESENTATIVE ON PENDING ISSUES, IF NEEDED) 11.1.1 Council Subcommittee Reports 11.1.2 Sonoma County Transportation and Climate Authorities (SCTCA) 11.1.3 Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) - Water Advisory Committee 11.1.4 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) 11.1.5 Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District

City Council members will report on their work with various regional boards and committees, including transportation, water, and open space agencies.

What happened

11.2General BusinessBOARD, COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS 11.2.1 APPOINTMENT TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE DESIGN REVIEW

The Council will consider and approve appointments to fill vacancies on local boards, commissions, and committees.

15.1General BusinessREPORT - TRANSACTION AND USE TAX BALLOT MEASURE BACKGROUND: In 2020, Santa Rosa voters approved a one-half cent local transactions and use (sales) tax known as Measure Q. Revenue generated by Measure Q, which expires in 2031, funds core municipal services including public safety, infrastructure maintenance, and other City programs. Consistent with Council direction, this item includes the actions necessary to place before Santa Rosa voters a measure that would reauthorize the current one-half cent tax with a one cent tax. Instead of expiring in 2031, the reauthorized one-cent tax would have a term until ended by voters. If approved by the Council, the proposed ordinance will be submitted to the voters at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. If approved by a majority of voters, the tax would become effective in accordance with applicable provisions of state law. Following a July 14, 2026, Revenue Enhancement Study Session, Council directed staff to return with the actions necessary to place before Santa Rosa voters a measure that would reauthorize the existing Measure Q half-cent tax at a one-cent rate, at a term until ended by the voters. If the measure fails, the current one-half cent tax would remain in place until expiration. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended by the City Manager’s Office

The Council will consider putting a measure on the November 2026 ballot that would increase the current half-cent sales tax to one cent, with the new tax continuing until voters end it, replacing the current Measure Q that expires in 2031.

What happened

# Transaction and Use Tax Ballot Measure Summary

In 2020, Santa Rosa voters approved Measure Q, a sales tax set to expire in 2031, which the city now proposes to reauthorize and increase from 0.5% to 1% to generate an additional $23 million annually. Chief Financial Officer Scott Wagner and Communications Officer Misty Wood presented the measure, explaining that without this revenue, the city faces a structural budget deficit of approximately $14 million currently (growing to $23 million by 2031) and would be forced to make severe service cuts by summer 2027, including fire station closures and elimination of police violent crime teams. Despite exhausting other revenue options and reducing staff by roughly 80 employees since the Great Recession, the city conducted extensive community engagement—including a budget working group, bilingual "Let's Talk Santa Rosa" campaign that garnered over 2,400 responses, and multiple community presentations—which revealed that 55% of respondents supported the tax reauthorization, with 80% ranking financial stability as extremely or very important. While labor organizations and Santa Rosa YIMBY voiced strong support, concerns were raised about the regressive nature of sales taxes on low-income residents and the limited participation (1.5% of residents) in the survey process. The Council voted 6-0 to introduce an ordinance extending the sales tax and 6-0 to place the measure on the November 3rd, 2026 ballot, with Councilmember Rogers emphasizing that emergency services benefit all residents regardless of socioeconomic status.

17.1General BusinessLEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Staff will provide an update on state and federal legislative matters affecting Santa Rosa.

↓ AB1436 - Support Letter

↓ AB2047 - Support Letter

↓ Bill Text - AB1436

↓ Bill Text - AB2047

↓ Bill Text - SB1153

↓ Legislative Update Memo

↓ SB1153 - Support Letter

Consent Calendar

13.1Consent CalendarMOTION - APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH WEST PUBLISHING CORPORATION FOR LEGAL RESEARCH AND COCOUNSEL LEGAL

The Council will approve a contract with West Publishing Corporation for legal research and co-counsel services.

What happened

Items 13.1 through 13.6 were moved as a consent calendar by the Vice Mayor and seconded by Councilmember Rogers. The Mayor checked for online public comment on the consent calendar before proceeding. The motion passed with 6 affirmative votes (Councilmembers Rogers, Macdonald, Fleming, Ben Willows, Vice Mayor Cookie, and Mayor Stapp), with Councilmember Alvarez absent.

13.2Consent CalendarMOTION - WAIVER APPROVAL AND ISSUANCE OF A MASTER BLANKET PURCHASE ORDER FOR 3-YEARS FOR BIG BELLY

The Council will approve a three-year purchase order for Big Belly trash and recycling systems.

13.3Consent CalendarRESOLUTION - CONTRACT AWARD - SANTA ROSA AVENUE AT

The Council will award a contract for street improvements at Santa Rosa Avenue.

What happened

Staff presented a resolution regarding a contract award for Santa Rosa Avenue. During public comment, a community member from Roseland congratulated the city on this project and suggested additional measures to address homelessness, including utilizing a vacant lot at the carriage site for emergency shelter during the anticipated wet winter weather. The commenter emphasized the urgency of providing shelter for unhoused individuals facing heavy rains.

13.4Consent CalendarRESOLUTION - SONOMA LAND TRUST DONATION FOR

The Council will accept a land donation from Sonoma Land Trust.

What happened

# RESOLUTION - SONOMA LAND TRUST DONATION SUMMARY

Council discussed a resolution regarding a Sonoma Land Trust donation for the Southeast Greenway Project. A Council member questioned the land trust's contributions and learned that the organization secured $750,000 from private donors for master planning, provided stewardship support, facilitated land transfer to the city, and has lined up additional donors for future construction—efforts that accelerated the planning process and saved the city time. When another Council member raised concerns about the large amount of money passing through the Sonoma Land Trust's hands, staff explained that funds are generated through successful grant-seeking efforts and that donations are tax-deductible for donors, noting that the land trust previously saved the city significant money acquiring the Green. Public commenters congratulated the city on securing the funds, while a Roseland community member suggested the city reach out to the Sonoma County Foundation and similar organizations to support smaller projects like the Roseland Creek Project. Staff noted that while the Sonoma Land Trust can no longer serve as fiscal agent, they will help the city form its own nonprofit to maximize tax-deductible donations for future park planning and development.

13.5Consent CalendarRESOLUTION - APPROPRIATION OF EXPEDITED DRINKING WATER GRANT FUNDING FROM THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD FOR THE ROBIN WAY WATER

The Council will appropriate state grant funding to upgrade the Robin Way water system.

↓ Attachment 1 - Location Map

↓ Attachment 2 - ORD-2024-011

↓ Attachment 3 - RES-2025-009

↓ Attachment 4 - Funding Agreement D2502054

↓ Attachment 5 - Reimbursement Agreement with SPCSD

↓ Resolution

↓ Staff Report

The City Council is being asked to approve a $4.4 million grant from the State Water Resources Control Board to fund a water system consolidation project that will connect five multi-family residential parcels on Robin Way (serving 20 units) to Santa Rosa's drinking water system, with an additional 24 parcels available to connect as well. This project is required because the Robin Way Water System's groundwater contains nitrate levels 50 percent above state safety limits, and the state has mandated consolidation into the city's system. The grant fully reimburses all water distribution costs with no impact to the city's budget, and a separate agreement will cover sewer system improvements worth $1.6 million through the South Park County Sanitation District.

13.6Consent CalendarRESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT’S HOMEKEY PLUS GRANT PROGRAM WITH BURBANK HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, CARITAS HOMES PHASE II, LLC, AND CARITAS HOMES PHASE II L.P. AS CO-APPLICANTS FOR CARITAS HOMES PHASE II IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $30 MILLION RECOMMENDATION: The Housing and Community Services Department recommends that the Council, by resolution, authorize the submittal of a grant application to the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development’s Homekey Plus grant program with Burbank Housing Development Corporation, Caritas Homes Phase II, LLC, and Caritas Homes Phase II L.P. as co-applicants in an amount not to exceed $30 million for Caritas Homes Phase II and authorize the Mayor or designee to execute the application, Standard Agreement and any Amendments thereto and the Homekey Plus documents. This item has no impact on current fiscal year budget.

The Council will authorize the submission of a grant application to the state for up to $30 million to help build Caritas Homes Phase II, an affordable housing project.

What happened

# Summary

The city is seeking authorization to submit an application to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for up to $30 million in HOME Key Plus funding to complete Care Task Village Phase 2, which will consist of 64 apartment units for people experiencing homelessness. Councilmember Ben Willows sought clarification on the project, and staff confirmed this represents the final development phase and the first major funding infusion expected to attract additional resources. Gregory Ferrand, speaking for the Housing Authority, noted that yesterday's actions authorized extension and subordination of long-term loans to support low-cost housing providers, while emphasizing that the project's success depends on complementary mental health and substance use disorder services from county and state partners, as housing alone is insufficient for individuals experiencing homelessness.

Public Hearing

16.1Public HearingPUBLIC HEARING - SANTA ROSA FIRE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL

The Council will hold a public hearing on the Santa Rosa Fire Department's annual report.

What happened

# PUBLIC HEARING - SANTA ROSA FIRE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL SUMMARY

The Santa Rosa Fire Department presented their annual weed abatement program report, which includes approximately 9,000 inspections conducted annually throughout the city following the declaration of fire season to ensure compliance with ordinance 3681. The program implements a multi-step process of inspections, notices to comply, reinspections, and violation notices, with the city authorized to use approved contractors to abate non-compliant properties and recover costs through tax liens. Public commenter Dwayne Do'it from Roseland requested regular abatement of fire hazards in his area due to transient campers, and staff confirmed the program has been effective in containing fires, with recent arrests made for fires that remained small due to abatement activities. The presentation noted no current fiscal budget impact and referenced work at Roseland Creek Park exceeding the required 30-foot perimeter break. Councilmember McConnell moved for adoption of the resolution, which was seconded by Councilmember Okrepkie and passed 6-0, with Councilmember Alvarez absent.

Additional votes recorded in minutes

Adopt Resolution RES-2026-085 - Weed Abatement Program Report

aye 6 · absent 1

Caroline Bañuelosaye

Dianna MacDonaldaye

Eddie Alvarezabsent

Jeff Okrepkieaye

Mark Stappaye

Natalie Rogersaye

Victoria Flemingaye

Introduce Ordinance - Transaction and Use Tax Amendment (First Reading)

aye 6 · absent 1

Caroline Bañuelosaye

Dianna MacDonaldaye

Eddie Alvarezabsent

Jeff Okrepkieaye

Mark Stappaye

Natalie Rogersaye

Victoria Flemingaye

Adopt Resolution RES-2026-086 - Calling Municipal Election on Sales Tax Measure

aye 6 · absent 1

Caroline Bañuelosaye

Dianna MacDonaldaye

Eddie Alvarezabsent

Jeff Okrepkieaye

Mark Stappaye

Natalie Rogersaye

Victoria Flemingaye

Appoint Vincenzo Signoretti to Design Review and Preservation Board

aye 6 · absent 1

Caroline Bañuelosaye

Dianna MacDonaldaye

Eddie Alvarezabsent

Jeff Okrepkieaye

Mark Stappaye

Natalie Rogersaye

Victoria Flemingaye

Approve Consent Calendar Items 13.1 through 13.6

aye 6 · absent 1

Caroline Bañuelosaye

Dianna MacDonaldaye

Eddie Alvarezabsent

Jeff Okrepkieaye

Mark Stappaye

Natalie Rogersaye

Victoria Flemingaye

Verbatim transcript available

284 transcript segments indexed

>> I'd like to ask interpreter currently on the Spanish Channel to commence interpretation of the meeting for those just joining the meeting, live interpretation and Spanish is available and members of the public or staff wishing to listen in. Spanish can join the Spanish channel by cooking on the interpretation icon. In the zoom toolbar, it looks like a globe. If you're on your cell phone or tablet locate the 3 dots, top them lightly and put a check mark on your preferred language. Click done to activate Amber. Get begin. Interpretation, won't you join the Spanish Channel? We recommend you shut off the main audio. So you only hear the Spanish interpretation. Claudia, will you please restate this in Spanish? >> Witness that they of those but a person s case echo and you need on a home that can

and will sync up with us here in b will in a spying on spontaneous members quickly impact from His son is right. And known put in needed can and just they spawn York. The plaintiff said a single in a condo. Protests you on Quincy in Quentin. I News is typical Monday. Look at q to Susan Quinn threatening to send letters Apple iPad. But in a country, several students put those displaying kind of in the money we people need will not back might. But if teens here, when I say don't get it. But a few 90 sat the that the active coming said linked up with this year. It is too soon can and it's overcome. Most Kaye, cnn in opening set by couple. That's what I mean is quick chat. You imagine that they expect you make the petition which has his customers, Thank you very much. Back to you. >> All right. Welcome everyone. The time is to a

call this meeting to order. MADAM City clerk, would you please call the roll? >> Thank you. Mayor Councilmember Rogers. Councilmember MacDonald here, Councilmember Fleming Councilmember Banuelos here, Councilmember Alvarez, Vice Mayor Okrepkie here, Mayor Stapp. Let the record show that all councilmembers are present with the exceptions of councilmembers, Alvarez and funding. >> Wonderful. All right. Let's get in right into our transit oriented study Sessions. Thank you all for coming we'll start with item. 4.1 transit oriented communities policy MR. Hennessy, Osburn. >> Thank you, Mayor vice mayor and members of the council at and director of planning and economic development. Joining me today is DanHennessy, director of Transportation and Public Works. Amy Nicholson supervising Planning Planner

and Kristen Kinda, Larry, a city planner before hand this over to the team to go through the slides. I like to just provide a very brief overview of today's conversation. The item for the council at this point in time is a study session associated with transit oriented communities policy that is commonly referred to as t o c the See policy is a regional planning framework that was developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission that focuses on increasing housing density and commercial activity around transit hubs. Main goal is to increase ridership and those hubs which then ultimately supports investment and public transportation. The oc policy includes a set of recommended policies, guidelines and procedures that cities can incorporate. It is voluntary. However, if cities wish to be competitive for regional

funding and one of the main funding source is bag com, one Bay Area government or to exceed one Bay Area grants. It becomes mandatory. So that's a critical aspect to opc compliance to ensure that discretionary funding works its way to Santa Rosa. And that is one of the main reasons why we're going to the exercise. We are today to see policy is very complicated. There are quite a few parts and pieces and we have a number of slides. What this really boils down to is there's a number of areas where we are already compliant and there is somewhat of low hanging fruit that's already really been picked, will go through that fairly quickly. There are 3 defined programs that were attempting to explore. That allows us to meet the criteria under to see. And that's really what we're going to focus on. So there's a few points in the

slides were will focus on those 3 areas on the back and we'll circle back to those. And those are the areas we're looking for. Council feedback. So with that, I'll hand the presentation often MISS Nicholson. >> Thank you. And good afternoon, mayor and council members as Director Osborne mentioned the transit-oriented communities policy was adopted by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to help implement the region's long-range plan, which is called planned area 2050. And it provides guidance for jurisdictions to opt in or adopt those policies to further regional housing and transit goals while also helping to reduce impacts on the climate. Much of this work is in alignment with adopted city policy, including the general plan and the active transportation plan that were adopted by this council last

year. But beyond meeting regional and city goals as DR. Osborne mentioned compliance with this policy would position the city to receive and additional 2 to 4 million dollars in the bag funding cycle. Because this incentive money is tied to a funding cycle. The scoring has a set date which means any of the work that needs to be verified or adopted must be done by JULY. One of next year. So that gives us just about 11 months to complete this effort. 2 transit-oriented communities are defined as the one half mile radius around fix railway stations or stops in the case of Santa Rosa. We're looking at the radius around both of our smart stations. The incentive funding is tied to not only the city's population size, but also the number of tlc's. So Santa Rosa qualifies for the lowest tier of incentive funding available based on

those 2 metrics and the >> requirements to actually get points under this policy are sort of scale based on the size of our community and the number of tlc's. This slide graphically depicts the 2 t o c areas. The stars indicate the smart stations. And so for the purposes of this policy, we're looking at just what's within the circle. At a minimum, you'll also see the larger boundary which indicates where we have our adopted stationary, a specific plans for both the North Station and the downtown station areas. So the policy is broken out into 4 main elements are categories, including residential, densities and commercial office in 10 cities, affordable housing and commercial stabilization parking management and station access and circulation. The scoring framework is relatively straightforward.

Being worth a total of 100 points. So each category is a total of 25 points and 85 points must be reached to become eligible for this incentive. Money. And with that, I'll turn it back to director Thank you, Amy. And as I mentioned, there are 3 distinct programs that we're currently exploring. We'll just set the stage on those programs and obviously future slides will dive bit deeper. >> not one of these programs will take us over the scoring special. We will likely need to select 2. So the first is parking maximums. That is a bit unique. Normally zoning regulations deal with parking minimums, which is the minimum amount of parking the to develop and needs to install if that developer has a need to increase that parking based on demand that developers typically free to do so under regulations. So a maximum provides a cap. The developer

can only add so much parking in the sun really intended to discourage the use of vehicles is the major form of transportation in that area. Transportation Demand Management program is really a set of policies and programs that new development types that really meet certain criteria are required to implement and that can take the form of ride sharing car pooling. He can be the inclusion of childcare to reduce trips because the main goal is to reduce the amount of single occupancy trips that moved through the Transportation network. So in coordination with our transportation public Works Department, we have determined that this it can be fairly simple to implement. It has a very low scoring total, but we will be recommending this. And as we see with some of these policies, they are very focused on the station area.

But as we look at exploring these, they MAY make sense to broaden that out to other areas of the city. So for tdm, this is one of the areas we looking for council direction on whether it should just apply to the station areas or whether there's a possibility of expanding it out a little further. The 3rd program is on the Affordable Housing Front. And this is very specific to production. One of the allowances under the tlc policy is to broaden out ministerial or by right housing. The best example I can provide is sb 35, which is state legislation that's at certain criteria that if a development meets it, it is processed minutes to really and what that means is city staff reviews that against objective design standards makes a finding that it meets it and then it's approved for construction. It typically bypasses public hearings and

the typical community engagement review process. So between the 3 we will need just like to I will talk about some of the pros and cons as we go through this. And as I mentioned, the final slide will reinforce this because these are the 3 areas that we're looking for. The input on. So really what we see what the decision framework on this type of policy, it's it's very similar to what we're seeing in the planning universe It typically centers around more regional priorities on this front. Transit or in communities is very for focused with its growth pattern. It is looking at increasing growth around transit areas. So what we've seen from the regional side is it's really focusing on public transportation. And there's also the climate goal aspect to it. So it's very focused and it's also uniform across the state. It doesn't

necessarily take in the uniqueness of Santa Rosa in the specific corridor areas. Very much blanket to the state. So those requirements are either coming through has specific requirements that the city must adhere to or their voluntary. But there are voluntary and they're usually tied to funding opportunities. So because infrastructure is a priority of the council focusing on the policy work that then brings money and becomes critical. And that's really the 2 prongs we have here. It's regional priorities, but it's also getting into funding opportunities bag. Now, the challenge is how does this then fit that this more regional approach to the uniqueness of Santa Rosa? And that gets into really our local focus. When we look at the different station areas, they're very unique from of their existing development

patterns. When we look at a focus on housing, how does that affect economic vitality when really looking at economic development goals? So really, how does it meet the neighborhood context in the business needs in that area? And then of course, everything looks good on paper. But when we actually try to put it in the protection, what is implementation look like? So as we look at increasing densities as we look at potentially parking maximums, those are more requirements. The developments must adhere to so hasn't really worked a market feasibility standpoint. So that's the other lands we look at. So these are all really council priorities. And I think these all blend together in this policy and one of the efforts the team goes through is to make sure we balance out all 4 of these next slide. Please. And at this point, I will have the

presentation that director Hennessy that and he will talk specifically about back funding. Thanks just to put some context on this. We went back through the previous 3 cycles of a back funding just to look at what that >> eligibility and that money has done for us and it's more than just transportation. Public works it in addition to. Streets and signals and pedestrian bicycle improvements in a number of transit improvements that are on there. There are also 3 separate city planning efforts stairs Park money. There is a money for the parking enterprise And I just I do want to highlight a number of high-profile projects on this list who like the bicycle pedestrian overcrossing that's under construction does not get done. The Southeast Greenway master planning effort that we're currently undertaking does not happen

without this money. So this more than 18 million dollars over the last decade. Plus has really meant a lot in terms of moving forward. Some key city initiatives looks like >> the 4 areas that anyone over there, one of them is station at access the circulation. And I just wanted to highlight why we score so well in this category. >> Specific to station access in circulation. We'll talk in just a minute about what we've done around it areas. But what they're looking for us to do is make sure that the public around supports a number of options to move about this area. And that were supporting the people who do live there and and as Dan to fashion as we can, but also with as many different safe possibilities to move around. So a lot of the policy work that this council impasse councils have done that put us in a great position to do that as

evidenced on the next slide where we show the scoring categories and we're already meeting all of them to seize goals for getting the maximum or amount of points. And we cannot do any better based on this scoring rubric little bit about specifics there about why, the most recent active transportation plan that we adopted last summer meets their criteria is for identifying gaps and prioritizing projects. We have currently. >> are continuing to identify a low stress, ice compression, infrastructure the area, not the least of which is again, the bicycle pedestrian overcrossing the Jennings crossings, but also connecting those 2 facilities to the rest of the existing network. And between those 2 new facilities, you all have also adopted as as the city complete streets policy that's been in place for the last

decade and has been guiding a lot of our work. And so again, were in a great position and this is a category that's a strength for us. >> I'm going to go over the next category, which is residential density and office intensity. This focuses on getting a lot of people near transit through increased seeing a lot of our resident allowances and I basically the commercial building heights in the areas. A lot of this is to focus on reducing the vehicle miles traveled by people in their cars and also to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This goes along well with our general plan or get in our greenhouse gas reduction strategy and then moving for this also helps to preserve industrial open space zoning districts to make it also a place for people that want to live in these more dense areas. So for this category, we are actually looking

anticipated total. We are looking at potentially doing some planning processes in the future and starting to go and are going right now which I will go over. So our North Station area is currently not consistent with the tnc policy. We have to hit a average of 25 units, an acre in the north station and it's currently at a 9 units, an acre. Additionally, our commercial building heights have to increase our utilize what's called floor area ratio to meet these requirements. But for our downtown is actually is consistent to see policy and limited to no work needs to be done in this area for this category. As I before, we do have plan and Congress. So we recently started as of JULY 1st to do the stationary, a specific plan update. We received a grant from ntc to do this work and then we have additional funding from our advanced

planning fun. But it's going to help go and cover some of these costs. This plan has to be done within the year time frame that we have by JULY first 2027 we're working with a consultant team and we're hoping complete by the state and also contains a supplicant environmental impact report. Thank Moving on to the affordable housing and commercial stabilization category. >> This set of policies really focuses on ensuring that there is housing available for all income levels and are to seize. >> As well as reducing the risk of displacement for any residents who live within affordable units. The policies also emphasize supporting small businesses. And so there are a number of options to achieve each one of these goals and all talk through quickly how the city is currently in compliance with t

o c policy without doing any additional work and then conclude with a policy option for the council to consider. So in the production policy category, the city scores 4 out of 8. So there is existing program we get credit for in the Preservation policy section. The city gets full points and in the protection policy category, the city receives 4 out of 8 points and then the full point total is received 4 a commercial stabilization policy. So just briefly walk through what the city currently has in place under the production categories of this is really looking at. How do we encourage and incentivize the development of housing units within these areas. The city currently has a development certainty and streamlined entitlement process. So we achieve 4 points here. And then on the next slide, we receive full credit for the

preservation category through 2 means one is the city's existing mobile homes. Closure ordinance. And another is a program that the housing and Community Services Department administers, which is rehabilitation loan program for Income-qualified households. In the production category. The city receives 4 of 8 points for the mobile home Rent Stabilization Ordinance, which was amended by council several years ago. And then finally in the commercial stabilization category, the city receives credit for the business concierge program, which provides assistance to small business is looking to start up or expand. So really the focus of this section is 2. Discussed the ministerial Housing ordinance option that Director Osborne mentioned previously. There are multiple ways for the city to achieve the point threshold that's

required for this incentive funding in the housing category in particular options are quite limited because many of these policies require ongoing funding commitments. So the staff identified option at this point in time would be the development of a ministerial housing ordinance to apply to the 2 t o c areas. Want to highlight. The potential challenge with this is we don't have grant funding. And so this would be fully on planning staff to develop over the next 9 or 10 months in order for the ordinance to be effective by the JULY first deadline. Another consideration with this ordinance is that it would apply to some of our preservation districts within the downtown t o c and that would require some additional work related to our objective design standards to ensure that those new developments proposed within those

preservation districts. More compatible with the existing historic environment. And with that will discuss parking management. I know that my son and your question. But yeah, I do have a question >> just curious if we go back to the housing and then there's actually a lot of housing options. Some require financial commitments. But a fair few we put in there, don't can you talk about how you decided to choose that one over the other ones that do require financial commitments? Maybe say where they are for the council. Sure. Absolutely. And thank you for the question. Councilmember. Staff has been working. >> For I think over a year and a half on. >> This >> policy as it's evolved over time. So it has been updated just as recently FEBRUARY of this year. Really diving into what the policy options what

policy options might be available for us to reach that. 85 point total in the housing category. Many of the policies require ongoing funding commitment or large one-time funds. So for example, to Ed conduct new studies and no grant money was received from mtc in this housing category. We were fortunate to receive money for both land use changes and our parking work. But we did not receive any money for housing policy work so that sort of further limited what could be pursued given the cities finances. >> Guess what I'm wondering is like I think one of the options is coordinating with the county. >> On one of their housing options, I don't know which is one that we put in there intentionally do relieve cities of and the really big burden. I know that rent stabilization was another

option. That doesn't require a financial investment from the city. So as I'm curious, when you say they're limited, it doesn't. I'm just curious how we ruled out those other options as we got here to your recommendation. >> Let me look back at it. So people don't have the answer it always a few of them so that there there are some real options for cities. Sure. I would say that. >> And that there there were numerous different options in each of the 3 categories. >> We I would say the majority of them were ruled out. >> Because of the requirement for funding and the ability for staff to be able to manage the working accomplish and the timeframe that is allocated, which at this point is is less than a year. There were also several options that. Sort of logistically and I'm gonna potentially turn over to director has burnt for that

more discussion on >> We're >> something that staff didn't feel is appropriate to be. Deciding on in vacuum. And so that's the reason for coming before you with like this housing option to consider. I just think that because at mtc I was intimately involved making the menu of these like me and 2 other people were. >> Negotiating this. We put forward a pretty big manual. And I can't say that we ever envisioned not having that. I didn't envision that. We wouldn't be discussing all of the options and having the council make some decisions obviously with stab input. But i think that the council probably doesn't even know all of the options that are available under the policy. And so I just, you know, put a lot of effort into it love it. If we could like go through the options so that the council of the chance to weigh

them out because we there are a few that don't require financial commitments. They're going do. But there are a few that don't. Maybe it's for another point in time. Yes, thank you, councilmember and I I think the core of your question is associated with what were the total number of available options that were presented to staff as part of this. So as we go through this, we can circle back on the back and discuss some of those policies. And programs, as I mentioned her as MISS Nicholson mention one of the main criteria as was meet the deadline. >> And sure that there aren't long-term funding commitments. So there were some criteria that pull that out. But we can talk about those programs. We can talk about why we pull those out go through the really the full menu item in the housing area. Okay. Thank you. Next category, the last

category is parking management. This one has largely actually focusing on increasing biking, walking another active transportation modes by reducing the car trips and car parking necessities in the area. >> And this is to prioritize our shared transportation modes, which includes the smart our city bus. We have various other transportation partners as well as the Sonoma County Transit system. And then this is to reward a management strategies and reduce all of the automobile trips in these to see areas. So for this this one has an anticipated total. We have quite a bit of work going into this category. So as you can see, we're going focus mainly on 3 of these by they want to go over briefly a couple of these. So we are and that meant vehicle parking minimums. This is actually part of state law. We cannot

actually have vehicle parking minimums within a half-mile radius of our smart stations. And so that implemented through our downtown station plan currently. And that will be moving forward with adopting that for the North Station in the future. And then we are also looking through some changes for being a call, sign for bicycle parking minimums and then foreign than shared parking. We do not need to do work in these areas. We are looking for some direction on our vehicle parking maximums for both residential and commercial as well as some parking management strategies that will go into further So for parking and Transportation Demand Management, we have been working with the consultant team with a grant. We got through mtc for $150,000. This was specifically for all of the things that you see before

you. We are looking at vehicle in bicycle parking zoning code requirements. So updates to some of our other various zoning code sections and moving full. And we also previously worked with the consultant team in the downtown area If you can remember that we had a some parking changes in the downtown last year different monetary changes. And then during this process we have been working with the skins on team and we began the outrage portion from FEBRUARY and MARCH. This was focused on gathering some input from various stakeholders in the area. We had 7 focus groups and 5 stakeholder groups. Some of the people that we met with were cutting 10 the children's Museum. The Junior College Center is a high and various other developers and surrounding apartments. Topics discussed transit transportation parking and car

pooling. And we just wanted to provide an update on the existing conditions in the area, facilitate some discussion between some of the participants and provide a project overview about tlc. During this outreach received quite a few impact around positives and areas of for needs of improvements. So wanting to focus. Our and our bias are very important services that we have in the county. And in Santa Rosa. There definitely are improvements that they identify such as frequency and coordination between all the various agencies for transportation methods also focusing needing to increase walking and biking in the area and found that there were some areas need for improvement. And then additionally, large topic of concern was parking and the need for parking in the north stationary, especially around the smart

station car pulling was not. And a thing that we're really came across clearly in this conversation. Previously, we also looked at the can song team, as I mentioned for the downtown in NOVEMBER. This focused on increasing our changes to price parking areas for garages and meters creating and introducing parking validation creation of premium parking zones. Rights and incentivize are active transportation math as our transit systems and other methods of transportation and the removal of certain parking meter areas for free parking to promote our economic development in the city. So one of the first topics that will be going over. It is our vehicle parking maximums. And this is kind of a tool to assist with a lot of our existing programs such as to the general plan, the juicy reduction strategy and are active transportation plan.

This something the city does not have it. It's not something that we are all very aware about the time parking maximums. It would be asking us to do 1.5 spaces per residential unit or force bases per 1000 square feet of nonresidential space for the city. This and for the area. This is a to z objective and city would be in a city initiative to reduce vehicle miles traveled and our greenhouse gas emissions also promoting all of these methods of transportation. There are some challenges related to vehicle parking maximums, including developer, financing and feasibility. There are some issues that have come up that we learned through our engagement strategy is related to how commercial real estate leases are structured around parking space requirements and how financing can impact the ability to build some of these developments with reduced

parking and then we are also aware of how some businesses require some type of review of average daily vehicle trips and how reduction in vehicle trips could impact the project and businesses that we could have in the area. So the first decision point would be for a vehicle parking maximums and the residential area. There are 4 different category of options here. So one is slow consistency at 4 points that is labeled in the Green Circle, partial consistency at 2 points, which is 2 parking spaces per residential unit. That's the organs. And then the pink is any type of parking maximum that we would like to create an area. And then the other option is no parking maximum. So providers for you. Our 4 of 4 different projects that have occurred in the city and seeing how they align with these different scenarios. If we were to implement parking maximums far

one of our projects under construction, not as last drive housing and then our station area. It's pretty much across the street from the North station. If you were to do full consistency, it would be difficult for them to move forward before, but would be difficult for them really if they were a new project coming in, they would have difficulty moving forward with that. But if it was for the 2 parking spaces that would be feasible for As for a tiara, that actually one of our other north station projects to the south of the station that would be able to have the ability to do in any scenario here and in and out a similar to lands try and then downtown, we have these 2 are cannery apartments. They also have the ability to do it and any scenario, however, we wanted to provide additional information that the city does provide. 39 spaces, their

parking permit program that also helps offset some of the issues related to parking for them. On. The next point will be going over as well as for vehicle parking maximums, far commercial sites. Same similar breakdown for color is the first example that we have here for you is Lance try once again. They do have a retail phase and it is showing you that they would be able to do full consistency or partial consistency. But if we did create some form of limited, that would be a possibility. And then for Covington we display the parking categories for target, Dick's Sporting Goods and Covington as a whole. It shows that they all park within the force bases per 1000 square feet. And during our feedback sessions with some of the people that it is pretty normal for leases to have the force bases per 1000 square feet and that land strive has opted to increase

the amount of parking that they to have for the people that together. Also it's good to know that Cunnington is providing additional spaces as well to surrounding residential uses so that they have an excess of parking that they're utilizing to support the uses. And then our station surrounding to provide some further context on how parking is impacting at least in the downtown. The city does provide 1480 parking spaces in our garage and are lots. This is for both businesses and residents. Many of these bases provided mainly due to development need lot of these developments as they're moving forward found that they needed more parking for the residents, either through financial reasons for business loans are the residents were demanding more parking spaces. So they have worked with the residents have been working with our parking team to get

some parking permits in these areas to reduce some of those issues. Currently, we do have the parking infrastructure to absorb the demand. We've been chasing around the area downtown, but we do have a bit of a limited supply and future developments are already speaking with our teams to see any options in the garages and lots to help with offsetting some of the reduced parking that they want. However, across the city, we have been seeing quite a bit of parking overflow, not just in the downtown. We've seen that across all of our areas in the city has led to a lot of issues with street illegal parking and has faced a lot of difficulty to a lot of our staff members. The next thing that we want to go over is our transportation demand management. And this is a another category under the parking section. This is focusing on providing flexible

options for our people in the city of for a transit carpooling, biking and walking to provide more flexible and safer ways to go around the city as travelers begin to use other methods of transportation does does help reduce vehicles. Miles traveled and single occupancy vehicle uses and reduces congestion and the areas it's also good to know that he's tdm is actually something that enhances up see provisions overall enhances the vision by promoting transit and ridership for smart and buses requiring developments to provide more infrastructure for walking biking and other methods of transportation and not just for parking for cars. So far. A transportation demand management. We have been working with the consultant team and have a draft of what this could look like for the city. This would be for a new development

coming and to planning there would be a threshold for this program. So if it is a residential project would be 20 residential units as the minimum on 20,000 square feet for a non residential project. These to programs have owned by white crowd, a gory of options and developer would need to choose a variety of these options of to damages to reach, but is threshold 20 points to be approved as a projects and these points to contribute to what is considered vehicle miles traveled reduction for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. So this would be helping reduce some of our increasing our environmental efforts around the city. So the categories that we have here before you are for a development that includes affordable housing healthy food, retail, an onsite childcare And then there's also our transit

categories. So maybe the developer team of 9 to increase transit services to their sites. Maybe they want to write a transit. 70 subsidy to their employees provide limited ride program and combination of what our existing city programs for unlimited ridership, as well as providing bus staff improvements. Some other categories are for a bike and ped improvements for vehicle parking and an Mundell parking insured parking and then another category related to education and programming for Transportation. Demand Management and things that are available for residents and for employees at project site. So there are some case studies of how transportation Demand Management works as a program across county also across the state. So first, Summit County, transportation and climate authorities they've created and what is regional

resource and also a bit of a technical assistance and tool kits. That was a reference with the consultant team and staff as we prepared this program so that we can align with the county on this effort. We also wanted to provide a large examples similar to the program that we might be proposing in the future if agreed by council is that with San Francisco, they utilize a plant based system some way to getting the 20 points here. They have a live wire. It of menu, atm options for new development to consider. There would be a lot of ongoing monitoring with staff as part of those projects and then also focuses mainly on produce reducing vehicle miles trips and shifting people to different modes of transportation. Some really to how we are proposing. For a small cities in there is San Carlos and San Mateo County. They have a

smaller population but they do still do this type of program. They do what is kind of like a tdm checklist a lot more streamlined for their type of city needs and they threshhold of 10 units and 10,000 Square feet somewhat similar to what was proposed before and also focuses on reducing the same type of vehicle miles traveled by 20%. So for this decision point before you, we have a mainly wanting to see the wide areas of the city would want this to connect to. So the first thing want go over is how it connects to what are called our priority development areas. These are actually areas established by mtc to help with promoting outman increasing resident's increasing residency transit you said a lot of jobs in the area for school shopping and for services. I'm so by proposing this plan for our priority development this would really help with

implementing greenhouse gas reduction strategy and our general plan. Both of these plans really focus on tdm plan across the city. And so I mention this program, at least to our prior to mountain areas, but help with moving forward with an adopt a document that we have seen that we want to move forward. This is actually something that is beyond that. Here's the requirements and would be something council would need to consider and moving far as more of a leader in the North Bay and promoting this type of program to the entire part of them in areas. Another option for applicability of for areas as for the north station and for the downtown station area. This would be supporting our smart stations and our transit mom, but would not be providing the same benefits to the rest of the city as would be for the property development areas. A lot of

these areas would benefit from a lot of the improvements to sidewalks to other transportation methods, to promoting different types of transit to their employees and residents. Any type of benefits that they could offer to their employees. And then the last time of the public ability would be just high to North station only of this. With me, not difficult on staff to do by is not exactly fully putting forward with what we think the city could offer. And then the last one would maybe going for but not atm program. But that lose out on a point and also something that really, really benefit the community as part of this program. It does have about staff time about 3 to 5 monitoring with the developer so has ongoing and one-time cost for developers, one for the city and staff side. This would be kind of a program that would be had between Tw

and for putting economic development. Staff teams do. Our 2 teams do review projects together and this would be another component that could be implemented at the same time and would not be a difficult lift for our teams. There are a variety of 2 measures that are in place across the city. They are not formulated into a program like this. There are a lot of programs across the county and also not formulated together like this type of program. I'm not being able to formulate a as well type of thing together doesn't get easier for all the departments and does make a lot more visible for the community and for environmental groups to be aware of. Wanted to provide you some additional information on how to works. And the city currently and for actually a brand new project, many of us are aware of Casa Roseland. So here are some of

the ways they're able to achieve an even go above and beyond the 20 points. So they are in the Rosen priority Development area. So there's a new one of pga's that this could be applicable to. They are 75 unit and 100% affordable housing program under the tdm program. This above and beyond that requirement and then they do have 324 share parking spaces. But the entire 5 parcels here, the Roses Project, but also provides them a lot of points towards reaching their 20 point score. And then additionally, they do provide 33 spaces. I'm gonna bundled parking to their residence. So PRESIDENT Decides they do not want a parking space. They do not have to pay for one. This increases their score for the tdm program and then additionally, if there's onsite childcare, that also increases their score and they provide for young children and

teens. Additionally, they also provide a kind of rainy, private by classical parking spaces to the residence. And then for other areas in the city that we showcase potential projects in the future. If we win Florida with this, if you're looking at the Mendocino Avenue Corridor to the North, maybe we could Percy foresee a mixed use project. That is a 50,000 square feet of office in 100 unison multi-family for them to achieve what they want to do. They could do our bicycle parking requirement. They could do pedestrian access upgrades they can do unbundled parking and price workplace parking for their employees. This does put them about the 20 point threshold and easily gets them to where they want to be without having to do too much effort and mixed use projects to have easier time of reaching the tdm program requirements just for being on

the same site makes it a lot more feasible for another type of project. If we are looking at the center as avenue corridor to the south of us here for office project. They able to do this through a bicycle parking, more pressing access upgrades if they want to do a car pulled program for their employees as well as an employee park talking cash program if their to park on site. This type of project could be easily be able to hit the 20 point threshold that we discussed before. And for non-residential projects. They do have a variety of ways they can achieve to help these planes so they could had some some heavy planes cited after its or they can go for a lot of single value measures depending on what they want to go for. And then the last type of hypothetical project we could look at is a have possible road corridor. This could be 100 little 100 units

have multifamily unit project, the bicycle parking transit pass as affordable housing, federal housing transportation methods, real-time displays, and that easily get into the 20 points as well. And these are not difficult programs for them to achieve. It just does have one time an ongoing cost for as they move forward. That concludes the last category and we're going to move back to the hole to see framework and how well are scoring. Looks like as the city. >> So moving on to the city's path to see eligibility can see on the slide here that a total of 3 points is needed to hit that minimum eligibility threshold. You've heard that the city is while position with work that has already been adopted and some work that's underway. But we need to find those 3 points through additional options. Should wish to be eligible for that incentive funding? So the 3

items that we've emphasized are shown on the lower portion of the slide to going back to the parking maximums. This one has sort of the biggest range of points that are available depending on how broadly it's applied. So that as few as one point could be achieved through that or as many as 8 and. That >> can be >> Differentiated based on new residential commercial development or the number of parking maximums spaces that are established. So that one certainly has the most flexibility and the most number of points available. Transportation demand management, as you just heard, is not worth a lot of points, but it does for other much of what the city has already committed to through the general plan in greenhouse gas reduction strategy. And we do have staff available who have expertise in this area and can

help administer the program in review new developments as they come through the process. Just to reiterate both of those topics parking maximums and tdm do have consultant support through an empty see grant and then the ministerial housing ordinance would be drafted by staff. It is worth a total of 4 points and it would apply at a minimum to projects that include 15% or more units as affordable, although that. That percentage could be changed depending on councils direction as well. And so we are happy to answer any questions. And I can get back to a discussion about housing policy and just a moment. But >> It would be. >> Great to hear from the council on those 3 different policy options presented on this slide and any additional feedback they have generally. >> Thank a really nice summary of some complicated issues and

we have some fascinating policy tradeoffs So thank you for bringing us to our attention. I'm sure we have some some questions from council looking at looking at my colleagues. We are formulating the questions in her Who wants wants to start Donald? >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for the presentation today. This is not an area that I find that I'm an expert in at all say pre she ate and how much she dove into each of sections and it seems to me that the amount of money that we're getting in grants for it's worth did. It's worth it to do the policy work to get the correct amount of points is what I'm hearing from director hadn't seen as well as all of you today. So I look at it as a little bit of a tiered approach. And I'm wondering you walk me through this a little bit. The first one seems that there's some

kind of low hanging fruit things that you can do in-house with staff to be able to update the policies to get us to the minimum amount of points required. Is that so? Yes, councilmember, I think that would be a fair assessment. There are certain things as mentioned that are as >> MR. Hennessy mention that there are certain policies in place that we already have that are getting us points. So that's fairly easy. Then really the staff focused on is of the available options. Of those options. How many of those can we do within the required timeframe, which is fairly aggressive. So when we talked about the North Station plan, we know we need to change the densities that some modest. We put that on the track to move it forward. Now as we go through that process, there are certain things we can do in that area which are

essentially add-ons to that. But then we got into the 3 that have some pros and cons to them to really understand where the council falls. But then I think too councilmembers Fleming's point. There are a lot of items in there that Steph has reduced simply because we need to meet that time frame. So as the niece of all, there can be more of a conversation about those other topics from a policy standpoint and whether the council has a desire to incorporate those incorporate those. Obviously they become a bit of a priority setting. But really the main focus was to hit the deadline to ensure that the city is competitive in those dollars and really balancing out to the best of our abilities. So, yes, it is a mixed bag of things that are already done. It's a mixed bag things that we know we can do within the time frame and then there are certain areas. It's

more of a policy decision where we can go a few different directions and knowing some of the concerns in the community about housing. We want to have a conversation from the council about that and then parking makin maximums really a unique sort of topic that the city has unexplored in the past. So having that really sort of come out and be the case. That was our focus area. But we're happy to really discuss any of those points that were made. But your assessment is correct. >> That's that's kind of where I'm heading. Is if we're able to accomplish these, you know, certain ones fairly easy from here to JULY. First, 2027 to me. That makes sense to focus on those ones that you feel like you could do in-house or with the consultants that we already. So it's not really reaching too far into the financial commitments and all

those other things. Question is, if we're able to do that and then we actually want to take it a step further for the competitive grant after that. And we want to die even further to some policy or or looking at if we are committing to something financially. But the grant that we might receive for that is, you know, a lot more then that I would want to look at some of those fiscal component. So we have an understanding, you know, yeah, you might have to ante up some money, but the money you're going to get is is well worth it. So but I don't want to like deter from meeting the deadline for the JULY first 2027 or deter staff from other work in their work plan that I know you have. So Ford for them. So so what I'm seeing is what's the easiest way to make the points right now to get the work done right now. So we are competitive. And then what

can we show and to see bag or whoever the group is that we're applying for the grants what could we do to show that we're making those efforts that we might need a little more time than the strict deadline. I'm sure Councilmember Fleming has a long list of things that she feels we can knock out. But without that list, I also feel that there's a level of staff knows what is on their work plan for the next 12 months. And so I'm hesitant to say, do this. Instead without Hugh vetting that process a little bit director Oscar and so I think those are some of my question just for clarification before we give our final direction to staff. Thank you all the questions morning. >> Yeah, I'm one of the questions that I have is and I think goes councilmember MacDonald's point is that there are tears for funding

based on how many to seize a jurisdiction has the thing that PRESIDENT City of Santa Rosa has 3 to get to the next tier. >> We need would have to have one more, which is for. >> wondering if any of these options would best get us to seas and a way that sufficient with staff time and maximize our return on our staff time investment. Thank you for the Councilmember. Thank you for the question. Councilmember. >> So Santa Rosa currently 2 season. Both of our smart stations and so mtc has set up criteria for that incentive funding, as you mentioned. So we're in the 2 to 4 million dollar. >> Category along with many other Bay area jurisdictions in order to move up to that next threshold, which is 46 million dollars. We would need 2 additional season that those would need to be planned or existing before this JULY

one deadline of next year or the population would have to increase over 200,000. And so we we did have a conversation with mtc staff just to see if there was way or what the process would be to qualify for additional incentive money. And it's time to those those 2 criteria. One of things that I was thinking when I was looking at this originally is like a city like Petaluma, which has you know what 3rd of our population size has. >> 2, 2, 2, o c's because they have to train stations. >> And that that it's hard for me to imagine that there's not a way that we could maximize. Then cities are potential zoning, densities around a couple of other locations in the city that would would help us maybe not in this round, but pretty soon. And so that's what I'd be looking bored specially we're at with our parking where we can. I think

that's that that seems to me. Guess I'm looking for you to tell me if I'm wrong that the parking was the one that might accelerate us Morant and housing near transit. >> That parking establishing the parking maximums of give us the most points was that year. >> So there's points. But there's also just the fact of having to season. One is that the North Station one is that the downtown station. I was wondering if you had evaluated other sites to try to qualify them as to seize because it's it's just kind of mind boggling that would be in the same class. A city a 3rd are Well, if we'd had a good census, we be close to 200,000. >> We have regular relationships with the staff at Smart who have not expressed any desire too, have additional stations with in Santa Rosa. And so our

understanding from mtc staff is that it has to be a fix railway station or stop to qualify as a t o c Art Transit Mall doesn't won't count toward that category. Based on those discussions. >> And Councilmember Franken had to MISS Nicholson's comments. We did go through that journey to see if there's any way we could expand that out. Much of it is really grounded in empty seats criteria for what is considered a So, you know, looking at transit or other forms that aren't rail was the start of that journey to understand if we could somehow maximize that to get to for because of that is the funding threshold. I think it's important to note we will continue. The conversation is this journey involves to see if we can free up that criteria. But the feedback that we've received thus far from mtc Israeli ground in

that criteria that was identifying the slides. And that's really what they're falling back on at this point, which does the 2 rail stations or the population. But I think it's important to note that as we go through what will continue this, it's all really fairly new. Things MAY change in the future. And I think it really a high level looking at a jurisdiction of center is complexity to other jurisdictions that are much smaller it to rail stations doesn't necessarily seem to be the most equitable distribution, but we're really managing that process. And we will continue that conversation with ntc. >> Yeah, because that, you know, I do understand the piece about I mean, does it make more sense? This is lead at more rail stations. But we do have other transit hubs in the city that are larger than a lot of. Transit hubs across

the Bay area. >> Thank you. On the stimulus. Thank you for the presentation at I'm not an expert in this area either, but I love all these topics. >> I just wondered, going back. >> Question, the direction that you're looking for kind of along the lines of Councilmember MacDonald >> looking at your the JULY. 22 27, which I know seems so year from now, but it It will come very quickly. I know that. So I'm wondering when I look at your 3 areas of the parking, the Transportation Demand Management and the housing. >> What you all feel you have. For him for lack of a better word capacity to do in terms of looking for direction from us. So thank you, councilmember for that question. I would say that the parking maximums, the transportation demand Demand

Management parking maximums are fairly easy to incorporate. It's really just understanding how that intersects with the code. >> Director Hennessy is willing to partner on the tv m's so that actually brings more resources to the table. Those 2, I think could easily be done within the timeframe. Looking at the ministerial housing that that is a bit of a push there likely is a significant amount of community engagement we would go through through the process because it does change development types and neighborhood compatibility issues noticing and all those things that people can get concerned about. So would likely be repaired is ation. So if we were to rank those those to become as far as the simple pass to get to that deadline a bit easier to do than the ministerial housing. But if the council elects to

bring housing forward is the recommendation the staff can adjust. It's just a little difficult at this point to understand what that would do to additional resources or excuse me, additional projects that we have in the queue right now. It likely will delay. We'd have to come back and analyze that little further. We would try to manage all of that. But that one and it's it's a bit more susceptible knocking other priorities off because of the level of staff hours that go into something like that. Thank you. Vice Mayor. Thank My colleagues have already played one side of the coin. So play devil's advocate on this just says, you know, try to help me. >> Get an opinion further for me that my opinion. So parking maximums, you Wood said I'm sort of a new subject or topic, though, for the city of Santa Rosa based on feedback

of your to your department on changes in the past with parking minimums, how do you feel parking maximums would be received by surrounding communities? That's right. A concerning neighborhoods some of these developments. >> It's a bit difficult to say at this point what we have seen in the downtown where parking minimums were very favorable because of the cost of developing parking and incorporating that into the development. That was very popular addition to the code and number of developments took advantage of that. But developments also took advantage of the surplus parking that exist in downtown. So there was surplus that they could still meet the demand of the residents that wanted parking through that avenue. When we get into the north station. That doesn't really exist. So the developments in the event that

that parking needs to be maintained on site could run into an issue and usually happens on the lending side that if the the appropriate resources do not exist to justify the rent, you can be a bit difficult for the flow of money. We have heard of that now. I think what we ship so to the presentation is that when we look at those maximums, there's only us a smaller number of the the projects that went through, that it will actually affect. So with that being the case, I would say that there is limited impact because naturally the market is responding in a way that still flies under the radar of that maximum. But these are areas where we do worry about the marketability of of planning exercises, having more flexibility allows us to meet the current demands. And when we bring these in this when we talk about pros and cons, that

that really becomes condor, the parking maximum. We will continue conversations with the development community of this is the direction of the council's better stand before you move that forward with adoption. But at this time, it's a bit difficult to say it MAY have no impact or depending on how the market responds to the needs for parking and they have a big impact. >> And then my final question again, playing devil's advocate. Is from the developer side or the investor us. I know you're you're not banking institution to you can't get financial projections. But the appetite or desire ability to build projects with some of these imposed on With that. Under appetite for developers to come in and do it if they can't. To your point earlier, like there's only so many parking spaces allowed for.

Certain amount of units in your experience, is there a argument to be made by some of these developers that like, hey, I will be able to to southeast because it would be deemed uncomfortable for potential residents. >> It's possible. You know, it's difficult to say as the generation changes the desire to own a car and driving a car ride. Lot of the planning exercises that were doing or for many years out and for people that aren't many of these tables right now. So understanding the dynamics and the desire for public transportation at all factors and moving towards something that doesn't focus on parking as much incur provides. Those are the resources that are more walkable. And I think that's really what to use these attempt to do. They put things next to rail. They provide connectivity to more regional locations. And then

they also encourage other amenities around that housing. And it's very much how we envision the downtown. So I think when you create that environment, the parking becomes less valuable and it's it's played out that way in many jurisdictions as they really created those walkable communities and developments can get away with not installing the parking. I think Senator in a unique growth pattern where it still falls back on the desire to do parking, especially when you're doing flat development. The challenge with going up is structured. Parking is very expensive. And if it isn't providing a return on the rants, then it becomes challenging from a penciling standpoint to really understand the financials for the development and the market is very odd right now and how it's responding to that. So I think really the challenges is

that we see the future going the direction the season. We want to see with our downtown on that. But to realize is that it's likely less of an issue. But it's very difficult to gauge. We have not heard any direct feedback on this that this would be detrimental to those plans. I think when we look at the North station, we're adding more density. We're bringing other things that MAY help to offset that. So developers often look at the totality of the package and it isn't necessarily one piece to understand how the regulations affect development moving forward or not. I appreciate Those are my question will to say that I I don't look at station area. Plans is as twins. I think it's I think you look at him as sisters. >> They're related, but they're very different. My biggest concern is for North West Santa Rosa, which I share

part of that station area plan in my district was one of my colleagues and it is notorious for 2 things being underserved and being a. We'll call engaged with local government. And that is my biggest concern is if we were to put something like parking maximums forward, how that area would be impacted because that area of our city does not communicate with government. Effectively on a regular basis. Thank you. My thank you to my colleagues. They've covered most the ground clarify a few points or just get them clear. My head. >> So we're talking about chance to potentially secure extra 2 to 4 million dollars in grant funding. Is that Frost, funding cycles roughly annual. >> Now as funding cycles or every 3 to 5 or 6 years. So the first one started in 2012 mtc in coordination with regional agencies puts together a list of funding.

Combines a bunch of programs and the program that is the one Bay Area Grant. And then that gets amended. >> Every quarter for the next. How are many in the first 2012 adoption is still being amended as we speak. It's now 200 page document. So depends funding availability. It's funnels through federal and state sources and distributes them to member agencies. That's helpful. So we're talking about roughly on average a million or so dollars per year to the >> I think that slide showed 18 million dollars over 14 years. Something like that. I'm sure that's light. Thanks for the clarification. And in terms of state in terms of staff costs to elevate us in that in that grand competition, clearly there's a there's a lot of time involved actually some other other funding as well. Do we have rough estimate into what it

cost the city, what it would cost the city to pursue any or or all of these options make ourselves more competitive. >> Yet it's difficult to come up with a specific dollar amount. What I can say is that a lot of the work was back stopped by consultants and a grant. And that's a lot of what mtc and other organizations recognized as they put forward these policies that they have to provide technical assistance and city meeting those now with that said, Ms Nicholson and Christian have spent a significant amount of time managing this through the process. So typically a planner will manage the advanced planning initiatives to the tune of 4 to 5 on their plate one time. So when you're talking about potentially a quarter of an fte to get these things through, that often really what that looks like. But then there's costs on

implementing some of the programs that moves forward. And as we explored a little more in-depth, we start determining the direction we're going to go. So, for example, of ministerial housing is the council's desire. And then we can piece together we would typically go through the exercise of piecing together what it would look like from a staffing standpoint, priorities. It doesn't incur additional costs because this is not backstop by additional consultants that are not already supported by grants. So from a general fund standpoint, it's an existing investment that the general fund is making an advanced planning. It's simply a re prioritization, but it does mean other things will get put on a different path and most lower and we're happy to come back and do an analysis and better understand what that would look like. It's very

dynamic because things are moving on different tracks and we try to get things done quicker. But the minute one thing delays for whatever reason, then all of a sudden it was time lines off. So so that's that's typically the world. I don't have a daughter map. We're happy to come back with more of a detailed financial analysis of that would be all for that. What you know, you just summarized this helpful. Thank you very And then the slides that showed the hypothetical projects and the costs on per and the impacts developers. Those are helpful. >> Are there some very rough and this time I'm asking for back of the envelope on estimates of the cost for developers. I mean, some of I mean, obviously when entering pedestrian access upgrades were talking sidewalk, sidewalk work, Whiting are the kind of electrical those costs

can add up to even have a rough sense of what this would cost developers projects are in those areas. Yeah, I wanted to say that we do have the kind one of the consultants here to a London convey. I was hoping Sarah, do you have any of these numbers with you? >> I did have One of the examples. It was roughly between 6 to 8,000. I was a mixture of one time overtime costs. So depending on what they pick, the one-time cost could be larger in the beginning and their overtime costs will trail down to much significantly lower number or they can flip on their decision. And the one-time cost is a lot smaller in the beginning and then it goes up and increases. It can help out a area over time. >> pair, if I can add to having both written and tm programs for cities and helped developers develop programs. A lot of this is giving people

credit for things that they're already doing. And or helping them work through the options that make the most sense for their specific developments. The vast majority of the time that I did this with developers, these numbers were rounding errors or making sure that they got appropriate credit for things that were already in their best interests. That's what I want to hear. Thank you very much for that. >> And when you can hear poking around at a little bit, here comes my backyard is a grant writer and often tempted to become very, very focused on a painting. The grant will forgetting what what ancillary costs are either for us as a city or for the developer. But it sounds like the benefits clearly outweigh the great way cost in this instance. And that's what that's what I was trying to clarify. Let's just a couple more questions here.

>> think can. You go back to the ministerial possibility. I can't tell if or if if your're, if staff is in favor of that or not, it's a bit of a mystery. We don't want the impacts are. But is there is there a desire to explore given the resources or is that something put on the backburner? >> Yeah, thank you, mayor. That's a very interesting topic right now. So from a transparency, predictability staff hours in the processing of applications standpoint, ministerial goes fairly quick and it is easy to manage. So it much more of a streamlined development proposal and we can get it through quicker. So typically what it means is that we bolster up our objective design standards. So there's an exercise of overhauling those those deal with height, the placement of that housing and deal with a variety of different things.

But they basically are the governing documents that control how the development moves forward. So that's really where the heavy lift is. And then when it moves forward, typically the development community as we are currently seeing because there's a number of ministerial allowances that came through under state code. They're all trying to utilize the oaks because it just basically takes what would have been a year process and and oftentimes shrinks it down to 6 months. And now the downside is to it is that it is by right? So where members of the community have often had the opportunity to participate in public meetings to talk through it to better understand the project. Very much feels like it is happening behind the scenes because it doesn't have the same level of engagement. So really the trick with

ministerial is to balance out, understand where it really works. Well, is there more community concerning the downtown or some of the other districts on the outlining areas and going through engagement process is going through education. There's a lot of time and just getting people comfortable with that concept. But overall, it does actually when we have requirements that are increasing as far as everything we need to do, one of the most effective efficiency measures is to shrink down the amount of time and what staff needs to do as part of the review process and managing public meetings is very expensive and for conducting a public meeting, its roughly around $10,000 in costs to the city. That's that's really what it takes in the preparation of the meeting, the preparation of the document. So just to give

you a rough number. So there's cost savings along with that. So overall, we supported from efficiency standpoint, but we do understand that it needs to have the proper amount of engagement with the community so they feel comfortable with a neighborhood compatibility and community engagement standpoint. >> Thank All right. And my final question, this goes back to the slide. We're talking a downtown parking and there was a note there. If I remember kind of diplomatic note that parking infrastructure can absorb current amendment as a limited supply. Given the interest in city parking from downtown development. Are we? Are we starting to shift from years old feeling that we had a surplus of parking downtown, more parking and we can use to now looking at the demand from incoming developments. We're a little bit more concerned about a long-term parking

supply from that from from city-owned spaces. >> Yes, that's always been an interesting conversation. I think a perfect world you're using your existing parking to create an equitable balance between housing and between people coming pressing economic vitality in the downtown. And that's really what the parking was intended to do. The economic vitality. So when we're making these parking agreements with housing, which is great because it's supporting that, I think when the concept first came forward, it was always that the first few and the discussion of that, there was a knowledge at some point that we can't continue giving housing permits because it takes away from the economic vitality because we have seen more of an increase of population downtown because we're seeing housing units downtown. It is the time to

analyze that and determine whether or not we need to start holding some of those spaces for just the general need to encourage people to come downtown because the city has a number of really significant and valuable assets and parking in the downtown core that is not really shared with other jurisdictions. So and we just need to make sure we're utilizing a properly. So that would be a correct statement. We are to the point where we're heavily analyzing that to make sure that we're not giving up too much. So it hurts our economic development goals that we hope to achieve here. And here in the future. >> All right. Thank you. I just want make sure I was reading through the lines correctly. That's it for my questions. Anything else from council? Don't open up to public comment. Let's start Abby. Center as n b.

>> Who Mayor Stapp and council members. I'm Abby Arnold representing Santa Rosa Yimby today on this issue. I just wanted to make a couple quick comments. One is I wanted to commend commend staff for being proactive in getting the pieces together so that you're in compliance and can qualify for this important funding for our future here. And in Santa Rosa, I wanted to make a comment about the issue of parking maximums the staff report talked about the utility of those in reducing auto use. But I also wanted to I lied that parking maximums can decrease the cost of building the housing in particular, I think most of us pretty much all of us want to make housing more affordable to people who want to live here in Santa Rosa. A recent study by ucla show that a surface parking spot one spot costs $52,000 and an underground spot is $73,000.

And that does not include that cut the cost of the land d create actually putting a cap on parking will make potential new homes for people more affordable. And think that is something that's compelling as you're looking at the somewhat and the courageous position of putting a maximum number of parking spots on too developments in these areas. Thank you. Thank you, Dwayne. >> Hello, Sir. I'd like to traditional 3 minutes. We'll paired 4. Have you word or 2 minutes a day doing okay. My name is doing to it. From Roseland decades ago I began attending the mtc meetings in Oakland is the time. >> Specifically asking for priority development areas. I haven't been down to the San Francisco office and sometimes but my Roseland was chosen to be priority development area. If you want to go after extra funding, go for a South Santa Rosa Station. At park and his

unity park you could do is slide. Stop there right next to the park. You can have that go on you could get it going in the South. Santa Rosa specific plan start making that plan for smart to get into this smart treats us like second-class citizens. This is where your developments going in your plowing and thousands of housing units in South Santa Rosa. So get that station be more proactive. Don't be bashful. This is taxpayers money they're using for the smart. So go for it. And then this idea about worrying about the ministerial housing ordinance go for 25% inclusionary housing, affordable housing, West has been able to do some of those good things and we could absorb more affordable housing. County housing advocacy group came forward years ago, decades ago and said let's get at least 20% inclusionary affordable

housing and then also stop the conversion of the existing housing units in commercial units. Hundreds of Santa Rosa's houses have been converted to use by business insurance agents, dentists attorneys, cetera. If you want your downtown to be more active, keep the housing downtown. That's already there as housing. Thank you. Thank you to Wayne, Members of the city Council. I would like to support ministerial ordinance. I think that that would help the city. >> Aline and comply with a 4, a friendly, furthering fair housing law. >> And 2, it better integrating the city because it would have it would help take away some of the nimby pressure that's kept Santa Rosa neighborhood segregated as they are. And I agree 2025% inclusion is doable. Sonoma has a 25% inclusion and that has not deterred 2 big

developers from proposing fairly large projects there. So that's something to consider >> something that MAY not exactly apply to this item today but could apply to this house in a row. Specific plan is the mobile home park portion of the discussion tonight. And the city has got 81 mobile home parks, thousands of space is 18% of the South. Santa Rosa specific plan is with mobile home parks and the city has a nanny displacement strategy to help keep people in their homes as the level they can force a mobile home parks are have been a part of this presentation is helping the city score to qualify for this grant. But the closure in conversion ordinance is likely mostly aligned with general state law be 27. 82 Lau cities. Discretion modify update and strengthen the closure in conversion

ordinance. And so this can take away loopholes and prepare and protect mobile home park residents as is stated in the cities and displacement strategy. So like the council to consider that for the South Santa Rosa speak plan and also, as said in my written comments that the scoring for full compatibility with the preservation on that think is completely strong tea. But it works for the grant and maybe take some of that grant money and work on the closure and conversion ordinance. Thank you. >> Thank you, Fred. Are there any other people in council chambers who wish to speak on item? Seeing none go to our online commenters should done this at the beginning. But participants on zoom, can you to raise your hand or Dial star 9 by phone to indicate you would like to speak on this item. And I will ask our zoom host whether anybody is

raising their hand or dialing star 9. >> That the negative mayor. >> All right. So we have no members of public on zoom wishing to comment. We will close public comment and I will bring it back to to council for any final comments and direction to staff. Like began this Thank you, mayor. >> So tell me if I'm on the right track. >> With my notes and I'm giving you what it is that you are requesting. So for tdm, I would like to see all priority development areas. >> If we can do that, I would be more comfortable with that for parking maximums. >> I put a collar the orange category, partial consistency or a limited. >> Consistency. >> I find it very difficult for residents, especially when they're unable to find parking and how that MAY be impacts other residential areas when

they don't have parking at the complex and then I'm ok with holding off for ministerial housing ordinance. But I think that it probably is something that when we do when time permits in staffing permits that we can start to look into so we can increase our points moving in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Other comments. >> Yeah. Wouldn't be possible to put the slide up with the choices. >> can see there. >> So I want to just like stub out and say, like it was sort of noted as a side note, the thing about. Climate change, the whole to see policy was developed in order to be compliant with state requirements around climate change in order to reduce, you know, miles traveled and to reduce parking in car infrastructure in order for it to better the challenge of the moment around climate and

while parking maximums might seem. To be burdensome for folks, the ideas, then we could be investing in bike and pedestrian and transit infrastructure to relieve the need for people to have cars. So because that's the spirit of the The Matrix. I think we should go all-in on parking maximums. I think that couple of commenters talked about having high levels of inclusionary housing, affordable housing and want to know that oftentimes when it gets up and those percentages that we find that developers find ways to get around actually building the housing into the offset. So I want to be mindful of that. I'll leave it to your discretion, I think center as it does a great job of building affordable housing where we can. Think that the tdm is is a reasonable strategy moving forward. And I think that for a city of our size that the degree to which

we can move forward and a ministerial fashion around housing is essential. It reduce reduces the burden on staff and it also make center is a poise to get to the c's that to really meet infrastructure demands for the city of our size. So as far as I'm concerned, whatever efforts you all feel are and your capacity, both with staff and with outside funding to pursue these ideas. I'm fine with the doing whatever menu of them is feasible. Thank you, MR. Donald. Thank you. Mayor. >> I'm an alignment with Councilmember Rogers on that parking maximums just because maybe I'm just part of that old school that I can't imagine. So living in Santa Rosa without a vehicle. >> Traveling from the east side to downtown corridor and where I would park if I was using transportation. So I'm not gonna be able to ride a

bicycle with my high heels on to get downtown to catch a bus. I just didn't. I don't see myself. I think I'm too old for that. But also as part of the Santa Rosa where public transportation was not really part of the culture of year. And I feel like we have a little bit more time to invest in showing people the great public transportation that we have available and how connect. Well, and I know there's a vast amount of work that goes into that. But I would have concerns too, going stree all and and know that Councilmember Fleming, you know, so much more about this subject, doesn't have those same fears as I do. But but I would have that and I've heard the same feedback from people who are trying to get housing the downtown area and don't have a place. You can park one car and their family and for so we've seen some of that feedback. So I would be

cautious around that one. And as far as the Transportation demand management, I'm signed to do that when it sounds like you guys are already moving forward with Ed and rose and of the other areas that you're meeting that demand. So that's one point. Some trying to get to 3, which is our minimum. And I think fairly easy for staff to accomplish in the one-year time frame. If I'm hearing you correctly and then 4 then ministerial housing ordinance. I have mixed feeling about this. I'm all for looking at it and actually moving forward to accomplish some of the things that we want to do around affordable housing and incentivizing to ensure that those things can happen in a timely fashion. But I'm I am concerned a little bit about the lack of community engagement and what we've seen by some of the things that were state ordained where they said

you're just moving forward you don't have to go through this process of outreach and community communicating too community and community members. I also want to look at our open government task force and what that would actually mean if we have these things that we've told the community, we're going to reach out. We're going to transparent. And we're gonna tell you was going on. And then we pass an ordinance that actually reduces some of that open government and transparency. So those would be some of the things I would want to look at. But I would still be open to looking at that. So if it's going to take us more time, we might not make this cycle, but we be prepared for the next cycle of funding and letting mtc. Know that we're moving forward in that direction. I think that can also help you. You're looking at competitive grants.

Thank you. MISS Been winless. Thank you, Mayor >> see, that. I would say and with respect to parking, you know, I know especially when I first got elected, I was hearing a lot about like. >> For example, the Pullman project and the other one on College Avenue, a camera, the name of it right now over by Manhattan and Safe Way, ok? So that was those were really for me. Really good examples of folks trying to adjust to the parking minimums and really having a hard time. However, I will say lately and I you know, I knock on. >> Whatever this haven't got any complaints because initially got lots of complaints. So I'm thinking you know, with the and I'm just kind of putting this together with the ridership with smart going increasing. >> I know in a few in a little bit, we're going to be looking at our bus system, bicycles,

available everywhere. I just feel like listening to Councilmember Fleming. I remember too, when this started and it was all about climate change trying to get people out of their cars. And I think we still need to move in that direction. So with that thinking with that, I think we should. I dare I say, go all out for the parking maximums. If we can. That's what I would suggest. The transportation demand Management at, you know, it's one point we have the capacity for that, that would be great. And then finally with the ministerial Housing ordinance, I personally would like to see more affordable housing. Well, what I'm seeing and I hear what Councilmember Fleming is saying. We had We really have a hard time getting developers to invest in. Anything but Mark But the flip side of that, when I look at the most most us, you know, how many

got for the al affordable? They got thousands of applications is what supervisor course. He told me. So looking at that and then seeing how the market rate housing is not filling up quickly because it's so expensive in this. Economy. So I know that's going to happen. I'm thinking that's not gonna happen forever. Bit. I personally would like to see more affordable housing. I think if developers and this is my message to developers, not you you know, think about, you know, volume versus minimum. If you have volume, you're going to you know, make money in the long run. And that's my message to them. They say it doesn't pencil out, but that's what I would like to see because I know what people can afford. I I'm working class and my district is working class. So I know what what folks can afford. But with that, I'm just saying

that if we can pursue them in Estero housing ordinance, even at left Seymour bench, even 15%. I would love to see that as well. Thank you. Vice Mayor. It with my colleagues on the tdm. I think that's a fairly straight forward. I'm not all in on parking maximums just because of some of the current concerns are brought up before of. >> The out of a parking that we have versus the demand and in our downtown station and then also my concerns. I said before of that. The areas Northwest Santa Rosa being more residential than they are commercial and how that could negatively affect the residents. There. My. There's definitely need to be some outreach some some. Some more deliberate outreach than we're typically used to in order to make those individuals comfortable with going forward. Pack parking maximums when development comes

forward. And then I would So that's what the difference and say. That's the 4 points. And at the All right. Very good for using. So that's 5 point seconds over the threshold. And then I had I'd be ok with the ministerial at 15% coming back at some point on Never further discussion. This is a lot of things to discuss at one time this is this is a big lift all of us to to to shift between the strategy. So I would prioritize those 2 and then come back with a ministerial control or ministerial ordinance at a later time to further deep dive into it to see what it would mean to our our city. >> Thank you. I don't know that I have anything new to add to. My colleagues just said again that the policy seems like a like a no-brainer given given the feedback that we got with the parking maximums, my concern there is only that then that staff who

are the experts here in a better sense for the impact on the housing market and the development community has the time to think through the unintended consequences. We want all kinds of housing here. And as one example of where theoretically you could have an impact, you know, we've long talked about wanting to have market rate condominium, housing, housing for purchase for young professionals. That's probably consumer segment is going to want de Semana parking or lease the option to buy a parking spot. So to make sure that our policy as we look ahead because it's not a not not a pressing concern right now as we look ahead to make sure that whatever pausing put in parking maximums. >> There's not a fact that or other kinds of building in the future in a negative way. I'd encourage staff to take all the time you need to to think

through those unintended consequences. Likewise, with the ministerial Hardy housing ordinance. It sounds like there could be some benefits there, but tradeoffs are best understood by staff right now. I think my ultimate wish is that staff feels like you have the leeway that you need to think through how all of these will piece together and both give us the best shot at bring in additional grant money while not placing on new constraints either on your time. We're on future development the city. I you have clearly showing you have the the expertise in the field for these kinds of policy questions I have, but I'm glad we got the chance to review today. But ultimately I have a lot of faith in you being able to weigh those tradeoffs and bring something back to us in all 3 of these areas there, 2 or 3 of these areas to to complete our package. And with

I'll staff if you've gotten enough feedback today for that and for the decisions that you're thinking through. >> Thank you, mayor. That is incredibly helpful. Just one clarifying point for the td m's. Really 2 options that when we look at exploring tmz could be very specific to the station area or we can expand it out to the priority development areas. So I've I've heard a few touches on that. But if we can get a general sense of the council, do we want to expand that out? But we would like constrain that program to just simply the 2 eyes stationary funding question. >> Can elaborate what that would look >> Yes, absolutely. What we we typically run into is that when we look at the North station planned, for example, it has a defined boundary. It develops policies and procedures. That development

has to adhere to. It only applies to that boundary and that can be very different than the downtown station area plan. So for oc compliance at a minimum, it has to comply to the station areas as defined by to Yossi. So it only applies to the regional boundary around the station from climate action standpoint from basically trying to achieve our greenhouse gas goals. Something like this is potentially suitable for expanding outside of that. So when we looked at the pga's, those are much larger areas where were essentially taking this We're broadening out to other areas in Santa Rosa where we're focusing on development and the new development incorporates this. So we think as MR. Hennessy mentioned that the does not trigger a very high cost to the implementation. Oftentimes it is getting credit for things already done. But it

gives this puts us in a better position to encourage new develop and to incorporate what we think is really good for getting, you know, those single occupancy vehicle trips out of the mix. So going to the pga's would expand it out. It would be naturally done with this process for staff could constrain it into just the North station and the downtown. MR. Donald. To get more points for expanding it out. Just the good part about doing the expansion and it wouldn't be any happier of to do it. >> Dan, you talked earlier about people are already putting in curbs and seen it even some of these small developments around Santa Rosa, putting in curbs are putting in gutters, those types of things to make sure that there's pedestrian walking when they're doing development. Are you saying that they are ready do all of

those things? But if we added to an extended area, they would get more credits by who did they get? The credits from? >> Right now they're doing it because of other standard. So right, like the things you just mentioned are part of our street design guidelines. And so they have to update their frontage is updated. Frontage is very frequently do provide pedestrian bicycle facilities for which they would get credit in a program like this less frequent. The also there sometimes required to update bus shelters and transit stops. Something else that they should get credit for through a program like This is just really an accounting of all of those different methods that are both infrastructure but also operational in terms of. Financial incentives for people to do something other than driving a car. >> I'm seeing a lot of heads

on your side. Not guess that this would be a good thing for us to expand. Just pass the area. The specific plans, the tdm, I think in particular is just easier for us to manage if it's a citywide thing rather just in the development areas. I mean, this would be mostly a transportation public works thing for us to manage. We already do some of this through development review and our. >> In fact, analysis guidelines, this would just be incorporated in there and formalized in a way that complies with the ntc requirements, but also helps with all of our gas emissions and everything. Absolutely consistent with your bag. Only sensible than expanding it out. >> I think it needs some of the other goals that we might not be able to get to is quickly through the parking minimums and maybe because we

have some transition. So hearing him talk today to me that makes more sense, something that you're able to accomplish and how skin. So I'd I'd be comfortable doing that if the rest of my colleagues are. Thank you. MISS Out of the options that were provided. I still agree with a priority development. >> Areas. Thank you. Other thoughts. >> Just a land. Mine would support for that. Notion as well. Thank you for the clarification. Any doing any other direction or feedback from us. >> Mayor, if I MAY just so that she hear from 4 people, i am also in support of that. >> Anyone else want to add their voices support. We have a unanimous vote. I support. There we go. >> Thank you, mayor. Just just to recap, what I'm hearing is general support for a middle ground on parking maximums.

Tdm expanding out outside of the areas that that's our minimum compliance for o c and then what the staff will look at. Housing has been brought up as a conversation for many years. Explored topics. It is developing and senator can be used as a tool to encourage affordable housing. So we will look at an opportunity and a future study session to bring the sun is a topic. What? So we have an opportunity to have more of a detailed conversation, explore some framework and understand how that would potentially move forward in the future. Wonderful. Any other thoughts from council. All right. Thank you. Again, this is a huge amount of work, but it is important to city. Let's bring in some extra dollars. Thank you. >> We'll move on and item 4.2 center is a city bus short range transit plan. Update. Missy and assuming the show as

yours, Yemen a just a bit of a preamble that all provide while my colleagues come down be joined by racially the deputy director and transportation public works and the lead of our center as a city bus system with Sean Sosa, wege finance analyst for city bus and Matt Wilcox, who is >> of our to transit planners and is responsible for the service planning. This presentation is more than just a routine update. We are facing some operational challenges. We are facing some financial challenges and we are working to position the system to be. Organized, sustainable and serve as many people as well as we can. You're our board and we need to make sure that you're up to date on the state of the system. Like the General fund and many other transit agencies in the region and the state we're facing budget

challenges. Unlike many of those others, we have limited ways to increase revenues. So we are being very cautious around cost right now and our real mechanism to increase revenues is to provide better service, more reliable service and increase ridership. In the years immediately after covid we started doing aggressive scheduling with our service to provide as much as we could. In part, we were able to do that because traffic dissipated in a way that allowed us to have very predictable travel times throughout the day. Some of that traffic has returned and new patterns. And frankly, we have also made a speeds lower on the streets and that minute or 2 that I'm very happy to take from private drivers is costing these guys a lot and terms of the cascading effects throughout the day and the tightness of the schedule. And that's something that I need

to own and that we need to work But it's having real impacts for a bus that makes dozens of trips every day. We'll show you a slide later about what a typical bus dozen a day and how little wiggle room there isn't affecting that on-time performance and that rip through a liability for riders really does impact the quality of the system. So that's why we're here today. That's why this plan matters. We're going to share just a little bit about how are evaluating what's working, what options we have, how are trying to make? Thoughtful adjustments to that and again, provide as good a service as we can. This also puts us in a position that if our funding challenges get worse, we're operating from a position of strength and stability rather than from the status quo that we had from for 5 years ago. So with that, I'm a pass it over to Rachel to talk through

some of the financial and operational challenges opportunities out of us. Thank you, Dan. And good afternoon. Mayor stepping members of council and regionally deputy director transit. >> I'm joined today by Matt Wilcox, our transit planner and the project manager for the Short Range Transit Plan. Update and also by Sean Sosa, our administrative analyst who is also the grants, finance and manager for the city bus system. So just to go briefly over the agenda for the session, going to be a very brief update or overview of what the shrinks transit plan is. And then we're going to jump right into some context for this update, including some system performance information, financial status, information that really will help to outline build on some of what down brought forward. And then we want to go over with you. Our proposed

approach to how we want to tackle the short range transit plan update and specifically some of the challenges down alluded to as well as some really exciting opportunities. That's both sides and this presentation. And then we'll follow up with next steps. And we're looking forward to receiving your feedback about how we move forward with this process. So quick overview of what a short range transit plan is. It is a 10 year plan for a transit system that covers the service plan, finances, capital program. It is required by mtc and as responsive to mtc guidelines. It's also used to support grant applications and funding requests. And overall, it gives us the policymakers and asked the transit managers a road map for the transit system over a 10 year period. We typically update these every 4 to 5 years because things do change. There's

everything changes within a few years. We can't wait 10 years to do another plan. So we are overdue to do this. You're in transit plan update. We're actually jumping ahead of mtc mtc is process has been delayed until 2027. But we have some issues in the system we need to deal with right away as well as some opportunities. So we're just going to jump in and take a phased approach. So I'll talk about this a little bit more in the presentation. But we're going to really focus on today as the next 6 months, which is a really wanting to get a handle on what we need to do in the system. In the immediate short term to take advantage of his opportunities and deal with some of our challenges and then they'll be a second fees in 2027. Where will build out the longer-range service plan? I'll be up front. That longer in service plan will include a

service cuts scenario just based on our fiscal realities. We don't want to have an emergency. We want to be ready with the plan for fiscal 28 our revenue stay where they are and we do And do you need to city bus service, which again, we hope to avoid at all costs. So this will be a 2 phased So the contents for this update down discuss some of these we we are seeing some real changes in travel patterns. Post-covid as down alluded to, we got away with a really tightly scheduled system during covid in the immediate aftermath. Right now we can no longer sustain that. We need to make some changes to support the reliability of the of the service for riders mascots. Implementation provides us with the huge opportunity. You're all aware that redesign for the regional service went live in APRIL. It's been very successful on the regional and the regional

network, but now is a local operator. We have a lot of opportunities with that rationalize regional network to reorient our system to connecting people better with smart in particular as the primary regional operator serving Sonoma County in Santa Rosa. So that's going to be a big part of what we discussed today. We also are in the middle of a integrated planning effort with Sonoma County Transit and the other transit act greater serving Sonoma County through ctca sink Sonoma, Transit y and z. Say Inc program. And through that, we are really trying to look at our our short range planning from the lens of how can we work with our partner operators to make our collective resources go farther and provide the best and most service for riders. So that's happening all around this process as well. And then finally, as we discussed, our

fiscal cliff is in sight. We've been hearing for the last couple years about the fiscal cliff or inner Bay area operators like art Muni Caltrain. They have it right in front of them. Ours is a little further out, but we can see it. Now. We're going to talk about when that hits and what we can do to get ahead of that. It's not. So not surprisingly from the staff side. Our goals for the short Range Transit Plan. Update our to address the reliability issues really stabilize the city bus system, making sure we're providing a high quality experience for riders. We want to take advantage of mascots and opportunities to better connect with our partner operators. And we want to adopt a service plan that is fiscally sustainable into the future takes into account some of the challenges we have in the transit fund. Alright, so I will jump in with quick

overview of system performance to provide a little bit more context for these topics. So to begin with, you know, how what are we providing now? >> Where are we in terms of service level? So this chart goes back to pre-covid fiscal 19 showing that we were operating about 80,088 1000 hours in the city bus system. That, of course, dropped precipitously during covid. We built back up. But we've really plateaued around 73,000 service hours, which is about 80, 83% of the pre-covid service hours. Initially we hit that plateau because we didn't have enough Raiders. And then we were constrained by our fleet issues in the aftermath of the Tara bankruptcy. And now we're constrained by our fiscal situation. So we are not in a situation fiscally where we can increase those service hours. And so that's just let you know where we are. And

also just acknowledge that we've already taken a 16 and a half percent service cut in the in the city bus system since before covid. We've never gotten back to where we were pre-covid and there's no path at this point fiscally to do that anytime soon. Next slide, please. The good news ridership has tracked very closely with hours. So as we restored hours post covid, every time we added more service back into the system, the ridership responded and that to me says that there is demand there. People need the service when we were able to add service back in our increased frequency again, the ridership came back. So our ridership is currently at about 80% of our pre-covid ridership, which is very similar to the hours. We did see a little decrease in the past year. I think some of that does relate to the reliability issues we're

having in the system. So that's a warning sign that this is important and we need to take action to get the system back on track. Next slide. Please. So in transit. When we talk about system performance, we often focus on the concept of productivity. So you can look at ridership by bus route, but a better indicator of the performance of a route is passengers per revenue. Our so how many people are we actually caring for our of that bus route that we put out on the street? So this is just a quick snapshot of average productivity across the roots in the city bus system. The good news is we have a very productive system. Most of our routes exceed 15 passengers per hour and that doesn't necessarily sound that impressive. But it's important to keep in mind that includes early morning. Let's end of the day. It includes weekend service. We have the routes

that are carrying 50, 60 passengers per hour and the peaks route one in weekday peak. We could be carrying 100 passengers an hour. That happens commonly. So this is definitely an average snapshot. We do have 3 routes you'll see here who are following well below that benchmark. We're going to come back to those roots later in the presentation as areas we might want to focus on in this process in terms of addressing this performance issues and potentially looking for resources to address on time performance issues. So we'll come back to those roots. So this is the biggie on-time performance, as you can see, has continued to decline over the past several years. We have a very high on time performance standard. We want 90% or more of every single major bus stop to have its buses arriving within 5 minutes of the scheduled time.

That's a high standard. But it's one that we think it's important to me to provide a quality service. As you can see over the past few years, that on-time performance has dropped off pretty significantly down to 73%. And it's not showing signs of flattening out. So we got here because of what Dan mentioned during covid in order to keep this much street post-covid period order to keep as much service on the street is possible. We scheduled everything super tight. We wanted to get keep as many hours out there for people in service while we had our constraints around drivers and around fleet that is no longer working. We are having cascading on time performance issues throughout primarily weekday afternoons. But sometimes beyond that as well. So we need to read time and get the system back on track one for the writers. But also

for that, the operators, no operator in the city of a system is ever going to be penalized for running late. It's safety first, but you can imagine how stressful it is. If you have a bus full of people trying to get somewhere to make a transfer and you start your trip 10 minutes behind. You're ending your trip. 10 minutes behind. It's very stressful for them because they do want to provide the best service they possibly can. So it's affecting not only our customers, but also our staff. Okay. So I'm gonna jump into the last bit of context, but very important context for the rest of this presentation. And that's a quick overview of our financial status. Center grab some of the excuses. So we've discussed touched on this in the budget process earlier this year. But I do want to go into a little bit more detail because it is important to

where we go from here. So as we all know, the transit find is an enterprise of the city. We're primarily supported by federal, state and local grants. This pie chart gives us sense of what that makeup looks like for fiscal 27 over half of our budget is Tda Transportation Development Act funds from the state. Those are bet based on a quarter cent statewide sailed sales tax. We have federal formula funds in the operating budget. We have go. Sonoma sales, tax revenues. We also have state transit assistance, which is a sales tax on diesel fuel importantly, in fiscal 27, were pulling about 8% of our budget from our reserves, which is not something that we want to be doing, that this is this is the first year that we really expected dip into our reserves to cover operating costs. And then less than 10% of our revenue actually comes from writer fares. So it's a

very small component of our overall operating budget. And then we do have general fund contribution of $30,000 a year for the Veterans Free Fare program. So as you can see, we are heavily reliant on sales tax base, revenue sources. So there are some parallels here with the general fund around 70% of our operating budget is based on sales tax. So has sales tax revenues decline our plateau. It really puts the squeeze on our budget. And that's something we've been seeing over the past couple of years. And it's projected to continue much as much as we see for the general fund. I am going to focus on the next couple slides on State Transportation Development Act funds because it is such a critical part of our our funding. And it also operates as a reserve. And I do want to talk with you a little bit about what's what's projected to happen with their reserve

funds over the next few years, how our reserve works. And I'll talk a little bit more about a future slide as we do have a balance of tva funds that are held at mtc for us. We have our operating reserve there and it's also our capital fund. So as we bank funds for bus purchases, facility improvements, it lives and that funded at mtc as are Capital Fund and Operating Reserve jointly. So it's a little different than what you would typically see next slide. Please. Want to touch how we got here fiscally and some recent revenue and cost impacts again. I think there's a lot of parallels with the discussions around the general fund here we did receive covid relief funding during the pandemic, which was immensely helpful. We did expand the last of that covid relief in fiscal 24. So what we've been on her own for a couple of years like like the

rest of the city. Most of our expenses are related to salaries and benefits for staff. A mix of about 60 65% of our operating budget. We've seen a 22% increase in those costs over the past 3 years. Also, as you MAY recall, in fiscal 25, we awarded a new pair transit contract as has been seen with operators throughout the Bay area and throughout California. When you've been a new operating contracts, whether it's for paratransit are fixed route service. They're coming in 2025% higher than the previous contract. And we saw similar increasing our paratransit costs and fiscal. 25. Next, the 0 missions bus transition that were mandated to do and that we have moving forward with with council support has been much more expensive than expected. I think entering this process. The thought throughout the state, including with their resources

board and their innovative clean transit rule was that cost will start to come down for vehicles as more agencies adopted this new technology that is not in fact transpired. Costs for vehicles cost for charging infrastructure facilities. Equipment continue to go up. So that is something we are also absorbing not only within our capital fund about also to some extent within our operating budget. And then finally, at the end of the day, the transit operating grants we rely on are just not keeping up with all of these costs. As we know, sales tax revenue heart in general are not keeping up with public agency costs. And in terms of tva specifically, you know, if you look back since 2000 and real terms, there's been a 16% drop in the value of every tv a dollar. So the purchasing power of tva has just gotten less and less over the past.

25 years. So touching on our reserves as the last piece of the puzzle here. As we mentioned, our transit reserves. Dollars held at mtc. We do maintain a 15% off rating reserve. We also have a capital fund that we bank overtime for projects like Best Buy's. If we go out and buy a bus, every bus is about 1.4 million dollars at this point. So it's it takes quite a bit of banking to get to. 46 bust bus purchase. We are experiencing a lot of her pressures on those reserves. Right now. We're beginning to to budget reserves for operations starting in fiscal 27. We're seeing that continuing in future years. If revenue trends do not change and then we are not no longer banking money for that capital starting this year. And to some extent last year. So that is something that that we're going to have to deal with in the future because money is

going to dry up to be able to do the capital projects that we need to do. Next slide. Please. So this chart is an attempt to capture all of this in one place. So what this chart shows is blue line shows our annual expenses actuals up through fiscal 25 and estimates or projections beyond fiscal. 25 through fiscal 31, this is a pretty conservative, but not super conservative estimate of those expenses. The green area represents our current reserve. How many how much money we have in our I reserve at mtc the hatched area represents where our reserves should be in the out years. If we were not drawing down rep of funds for operating and if we are appropriately banking funds for capital purchases. So you'll see starting in fiscal 26 fiscal 27 were beginning to deviate from where our reserve really, truly should be. If we are in

an ideal scenario, a fiscal sustainability. We begin drawing it down. We have a little bit of a bump up in fiscal 27 because we will be returning some capital funds to our mtc funds through rolling process that we use for our capital capital money. But then as we continue to draw down those resources without restoring them by fiscal 30, and if your fiscal 30, we would anticipate running out of reserves. We would still have the funding coming in to operate the system, but we wouldn't have anything left terms of an operating reserve are capital fund. There are a number of things that can alter this trajectory. But this is our best attempt to say based on where revenues are right now and where they're expected to be. And based on where our costs are going, this is a likely scenario for us. So it's something we need to, you

know, address head-on in the next few years. So we don't get to this point. Okay. So with that, moving on to the proposed service planning approach to take all this into account. So shifting gears a bit, want to start at a very high level when we do these planning. Exercise is one of the key tensions we experience and transit planning is the trade-off between focusing on coverage of the transit system for emphasizing productivity of the transit system in terms of getting the most ridership, the most people on the bus for every hour of service. We put out there if we were a completely coverage oriented system, we would have bus routes all over the city, which we do, but a lot of one-way loops to maximize coverage. There would be a distribution of service throughout the city, low frequency, but it'd be easy to get a bus from pretty much

anywhere in the city that's going that's a recipe for very low ridership. But it does provide the highest level of access to what is not that great a transit system. But the access is there. If we were 100% focused on productivity, we would just be focused in the main corridors where we have a lot of trip destinations and a lot of density. We'd be putting all the buses on those corridors. We've had very frequent service. We would get higher ridership on those corridors, but we'd be leaving out a lot of people. So there'd be many people in the city who would not be able to easily get to a bus route to take their trips. So city buses somewhere in the middle of these 2.10 years ago when we did our system redesign, we move from a system that really leans predominantly towards coverage. More towards one that leans a bit more towards

productivity. But we still are trying to balance the 2. I still think that is the right place for the city of a system because we are trying to meet 2 goals. We want to boost ridership. We want to strong ridership in those main corridors. Well, there's we don't want to leave too many people behind. We want to provide at least basic transit access access to as much of the city as we can. But we wanted to put the slide up just to illustrate that when we're in a resource constraints situation like we are now this trade-off from policy standpoint and from what we're going to be looking to as the council for this, this policy trade-off really comes into play. It becomes the central issue. What are we trying to emphasize in the transit system? And it's really going to be at the heart of this current exercise. We're embarking on.

And then just one more slide about transit service design. We haven't talked about this in a long time, but we do have city Council adopted transit service design guidelines. So very quickly, these are guidelines that council adopted several years ago to guide our planning to ensure we're providing the highest quality service we can. And so they are really trying to maintain frequency in the transit system. We all recognize as transit riders are potential transit riders frequency as key to the experience that allows you to make transfers. It allows the bus to a time competitive with the car. It allows for your whole day to work out a lot better. If you're not having to wait for an hour for a bus alignments are important to reduce travel time as is bi-directional service. We try to have as much to a service in our system is possible

because, you know, while a one-way loop allows us to cover a big area, inevitably they're going to be riders all day long for traveling out of their way on that live to get where they want to go. And we want to really provide a system that competitive with the automobile and it's convenient for riders as possible. We design routes around strong anchor points where we see high demand for ridership. It's best for the writers. When we do that and then obviously want to avoid duplication because that's not an efficient use of resources and we want connections to be a seamless as possible. So those are sort of a the guidepost for us as we develop and alter transit service plans looks like place. Ok? So we have 3 opportunities in the short term phase that we're entering. And I want to be clear, you know, it's sort of talked about the service cuts

scenario right now over the next 6 months. We really want to focus on the ship. These 3 short-term opportunities that will stabilize the system position. The city bus system for success into the future. And then we'll come back next year and do that. Longer-range plan. So the short-term opportunities are one significantly improve on-time performance in the system. As Dan mentioned, we really need to read time all our roots to reflect current traffic conditions. We have routes that are can't stay on time and need about 5 extra minutes. We have a couple roads that need like 15 extra minutes to stay on time, especially on weekday afternoons. So there's a lot of investment that needs to be done in this. There's several things we can do. We can potentially adjuster it alignment. Sometimes we can make it with the tweet to a

route that avoids intersection where we get hung up at rush hour. That's one thing we can do. We can connect to routes that are tight with roots that have a little bit of extra time. And that is going to plan to the strategy for sure. Sometimes we can get minutes backed by a door addressing sources of delay. And that's something that will be working with down in team on places Justin bus stop placement. If there's adjustments and single timing where we can grab some minutes back, that can make a big difference. And we do work on that in an ongoing basis. But I think we're going to be doing it a bit more forensically going forward. And then the last option is to add cycle time to routes, which just basically means, you know, a route that could completed a round trip in 45 minutes 5 years ago. Maybe needs a full hour and we MAY need to add that 15 minutes to

keep that route on time, at least at certain times of day. That does come at a cost, which is where we're feeling pinched in this process. Benefits are obvious. This keeps the system reliable for riders and it prevents us from losing ridership because people can't count on us anymore. I think we can all understand that we've all written transit that didn't calm around later. You MR. Connection. And there's only so many times that can happen to you before you look for another option. And then also this would support effective trans a transfer us the regional network. If we're trying to meaningfully connect with Sonoma County Transit or smart, where the Golden Gate commuter trips, our system needs to be on time so that we can get people to those transfers on time. The second major opportunity as we see it is to reinvent reinvest in

route one, which truly is the the backbone of the city bus system. It carries by far the most ridership in the city bus system. We pulled resources out of fruit. One during covid to try to keep other service in play. We could get away with that again because the traffic wasn't there. And we could have, for example, a 45 minute round-trip instead of a 60 minute round trip. We also pulled Abbas out of route one and instead of having 4 buses in the afternoon. So we get a 15 minute service. We pulled one bus out and went to more of 20 minute service. We're busting at the seams on route one at this point. And there are times where we actually have to leave people behind on Mendocino Avenue because the buses are to fall. And that is like a cardinal sin and transit. And so that's something we need to address route. One makes really strong connections to key

destinations. Whether its center is a hide center is a junior college. The county admin Center, Kaiser Hospital and Cotton Town. I think pretty much everyone right on our system is on route one at some point in time. And so we really want to invest in that route. And highlights enters a junior college is being a really, really strong partner. And we have an opportunity here, too. Make the service work better for that partner. The other opportunity here is as we move forward with their integrated planning with Sonoma County Transit. We have brash allies in the route one service and getting it back into a stable state. It provides opportunities for how we integrate with Sonoma County Transit that are potentially pretty exciting. And so this is a first step in that process. Next slide. Please. And then finally getting the system back on

time. Options. One in 2 are opportunities. One in 2 really lead to this 3rd opportunity, which we think is a really exciting. I'm going to show us live next. That shows you how our buses are currently scheduled. Every route connects to every other route in a mishmash, maximize efficiency. That does what that doesn't do is create opportunities for crosstown, connectivity and potential increase connectivity to smart. So we want to develop a plan for a strategic in our lives where we're connecting all day route from the east side of town to the root of the west side of town. So that people can ride through the transit mall into a smart station. For example, and do that with this many routes as we can doing. This will also help us to isolate any sources of delay. Whereas right now there has skating through the system and affecting all sorts

of routes. So the benefits here is that we potentially significantly pivot the city bus system to connect much, much more strongly with smart stations. This will benefit people writing smart, but it will actually provide a lot connectivity benefits to all riders because writers of having to cross town all the time. And if you can just stay on the same bus to get across town as opposed to getting off the bus and the transom all and waiting for your next bus. That's a real time benefit as well as convenience benefit. Next slide. Please. So here's a peek under the under the hood. The so this is a snapshot of our scheduling system. Every line on this represents a buses. Daily work from 06:00am to 09:00pm. As you can see, the way things are scheduled now, which we did for a lot of good reasons. We have a 6 going to a one to a 3 to a 4 between 9. We've

showed as much service and as we possibly can. This is the part that's no longer working. But we're also missing that opportunity to maximize the connectivity for the riders. So next slide map. So just to illustrate an intentional or strategic an airline would work if we were to enter line route one with throughout 2, we would connect Mendocino Avenue to Sebastopol Road. So if you got on at those stats are jc Rose on campus. You could write down Sebastopol Road. Some people might get on at at the smart station bus travel through the downtown Transit mall. You could get off there if you wanted. But if you wanted to go to the jc are up to Kaiser another destination. You just stay on the bus. So for people who are, for example, going to the s rjc from smart instead of taking one bus downtown are walking downtown and getting on a route one. You just get

on the bus at the smart station and you ride through. I think this this benefits a lot customers in our system and provide some connections that we just don't have today that our quality enough for people to use. So this would just be one example, a conceptual example of how this in our program would work. Place. So just a touch on the constraints. We've discussed quite a bit. But can't add any additional buses to the system right now without increasing operating costs. And attempting to be very fiscally proof and cautious about doing anything to increase operating costs. When the look out a few years as pretty dire for that reason. We're not. Pushing expansion geographic expansion of the system or expansion of the span of service of the system much as we'd like to provide longer operating hours. And we know that's needed by riders in order to

improve on-time performance without adding operating cost. We will have 2 real reallocate hours within the system so that while it's not a system-wide service cut, it does mean that some parts of our system would have to be reduced in order to take advantage of these needs and opportunities in other parts of the system. We think the approach we've laid out will benefit all riders because we'll have a system that's working well and is on time. But there will be some people who will have to give up maybe closer access or maybe a trip that they used to rely on. So it's you know, it's not a simple process. I did want to highlight that. There's always interest in alternative service models, whether that be micro transit deviated fixed route throughout this up process. That's all on the table. But it's just not a major cost savings that the

biggest cost of any transit service is that the operators time. And so any mode that has an operator is still going on come a similar costs to a fixed route bus. Next slide. Please. So I wanted to get back to the 3 routes that pointed out in the productivity slide in transit, you know, the best practice when you're in a situation like this, you look at the places in your system that had the lowest productivity and you say how can we improve this productivity or is there a better use for these resources? And so we are not proposing specific changes to any routes today, but we do want to make you aware and make the public aware that there are those 3 routes that we're going to look at. First. MAY not be the only routes we look at, but they are a place we feel responsible for looking to see if there's a better way to allocate

resources. So the first is the Route 10, the North City connector, which travels between the downtown transit on cutting town via Cleveland and then continues on up through Coffey Park across Hopper. And to around barn. The northern part of this route. Excuse me, operates really well as high ridership, relatively high ridership. The southern segment between the downtown and Cotton town has a lot less ridership. And so that's an area we want to look at. Understand of writers have other options because there are other routes that are near that segment of Route 10. But that is an area would like to look at to see if those hours could potentially be reprogrammed to help with some of these other issues in the system. Next slide. Please not. The second round is the Oakmont deviated fixed route service. This one is a little special because it is not a

fixed route service. It is a deviated fixed route. Service for riders can call and have the bus come to their door. The service also provides daily shopping trips out to some of the local shopping centers for Oakmont residents. 2 things are happening. One ridership has really, really declined on the service over the past several years by a pretty by like 74%. It's a pretty significant extent. Are longtime partner and funding the service Knowledge Association has reached out to us and said they are interested in potentially considering other options for their investment. And that could be looking at a different type of transportation service or contracting directly with another service or using those resources for other needs in the community. So we are in a conversation regarding the service and what what could

have in terms of the Oakmont service. Oakmont is served by Sonoma County Transit Route 30, which does deviate through Oakmont between going between Sonoma and downtown Santa Rosa. It's also served by pair of transit and there is also a volunteer driver program. So there are a number of options there. And it seems that potentially the service design is no longer really meeting the needs of the community. So we are in a conversation va around what comes next for this route. And it could look like something different that doesn't involve city bus potentially next slide. And then finally on the other route that we showed on that productivity charges are read 18, circular Circulator. This is a low ridership route overall. But as you can see, it covers a lot of destinations and Southeast Santa Rosa, including the Fairgrounds Farmers Lane Plaza

connecting up to Montgomery Village. This right has always been lower. Ridership continues to be lower ridership. Most of the boardings aside from Montgomery Village in the Transit mall happened right at the area around Farmers. Lane Plaza Bennett Valley Farmers LaMia Thomas area including a handful of folks at the vintage that Bennett Valley, senior housing every day. So there are some ridership and pockets on this route for sure. But there are a lot of stops on this route that got hardly any ridership at all. So this is a real we also want to look at in this process to see what opportunities we have. In terms of next steps where we're looking forward to incorporating your feedback from the study session. Following that, we're going to launch into some public engagement and some really focused targeted outreach, 2

routes that we're looking at for potential changes as well you know, systemwide, we use a variety of public engagement methods for that. Our goal is to return to council in the early fall with some recommendations that are backed up by data and outreach were able to provide. And the postal to you for discussion and consideration. The goal would be then to come back for adoption of the final service plan with the goal making initial service changes in JANUARY because this on-time performance issue is so urgent. We really want to try to solve that problem within the next 6 months. Then we would come back through the mtc process in 2027 and work on that longer range transit service plan and the 10% service cuts scenario that that I've been discussing. If we did have cut service, we would be doing that in fiscal 28. So that's not an immediate

plan for service reductions were really hoping next year when the fund estimates come JANUARY, FEBRUARY. 27 to see something better. But if we don't, we're going to need to move forward with that planning process. So I think that's it. So I got with that. I'd be happy to answer your questions and take any feedback. You man. Thank you very much for that presentation. And of course, for looking ahead to the future with particular reference to budget and back to council questions. >> You seen let's start with us from ing. >> Yeah, I have a question about going back to the idea around thanking funds in order to buy additional buses. Curious, how how much money average year and that is sitting there and what is being done with that? Those funds? Yes. So the goal in order to stay on track with

bus replacement, we should be banking about a million dollars a year. >> That said we do competitive grants. We can make adjustments if we have big awards on the other. On the other hand, when we do get those big rants, we have to have local match. So so to give you a point of reference, the federal grant that we want is about a 10 million dollar grant. We need to bring forward about 2 million dollars in matching funds for that. So that is built into our are are Capital Fund Reserve planning so that we have that match when it's time to buy those buses. I'm not sure if this is answering your question. But I think the question that we have is what what point do we make changes to the capital program in order to avoid impacting operations. I'm not sure if that's what you are interested Aurora. And what I'm trying to

understand is it's a little bit like out it's related to the scope of this. But I think it's really interesting is like what's happening with those funds. >> While we're waiting, I assume they're invested. The managed by our they're just they're not getting van revenue there. They just 73. But you know Inflation? They said it mtc aches. They said it mtc. Don't sit with us. They sit with them. Tc depreciating mtc. That's really did not know that. That's fascinating. What I would have my next question and we had them would have been Transit managers talk about pulling funds like similarly to how we would do parks are our projects to, you know, just get dollars out the door. So that >> there's buses somewhere and, you but that will be a question of last going to see how investing in managing

those funds. So we don't experience too much depreciation. And then I just ask, you know, conversation in my mind seems so relevant to the last one we just had about parking maximums like. I think that it's incumbent upon the council invest both in strategy and finance to make the system work. A bull so that we can then justify our our parking changes going forward and the work that you're doing is is really essential to that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Lewis. Thank you, Mayor, thank you for the presentation. >> But he is. So it seems like you have 2 I know many more, essentially the on time And I understand as we come out of covid and I know I feel it is I drive home from Sonoma How impacted the traffic is? It takes me like. Less than 20 minutes to get to work. And it takes me an hour to get home, no matter which way I go and I

go. >> Every so I know that it's really impacted at those this peak hours as peak business hours. So I'm just wondering. So there's that issue and how that effects. If financial part of the bus system, you know how that connects because if you if you feel like. But I think something that you said about if folks find that this isn't working for them, they're not making their connections or they're not getting to there. Final destination on time. They're gonna look for their alternatives. And so So that interested in that piece and then, you know, I guess specifically. 2 out 10 which part of my district. I just wondered because you had mentioned that you're not gonna make specific changes in routes until 27. 28. >> So we would be looking to make changes in JANUARY 2027. 0, cannot. In order to

reinvest the resources and getting the system back on time. That would be sort of phase one and then phase 2 would be potentially other longer-term changes planning for that, which could include the systemwide service cut. But yet that the opportunities I was discussing today, we're really driving towards JANUARY if possible. Okay. If we need longer, we need longer. But that's the goal. Okay. All right. And I know I realized I meant first of all, let me say I just really appreciate the complexity of designing these routes. Oh, my gosh, it's just special that one that one slide. 22, I'm just like, oh, my GOD, it's overwhelming. So I take my hat off to you and your staff. It's amazing the work that you do. So I'm just wondering if there's probably more than one way on many of these routes to get to cutting town, to get to Kaiser, to get to the around found Grove, so

to speak. At that there. If there's a way to keep and this is just might my own thing cause I didn't even know I'm I'm embarrassed to say that there was a bus on I've looked people have asked me and I didn't even know of us. Went down Cleveland site. I was really happy to hear that all. And because Cleveland. There's a lot of things we can say about Cleveland, particularly between college and Guerneville You how impacted it gets again at those peak hours. You can't even really go down that street. In my opinion, so to know that there's a bus there, I think really I would like to see that we had a route that continue to go down there. But I understand that maybe it needs to be worked into a different route in the future. And I I guess that's for our constituents to think about. So sure. So again, thank you for your work. And just like

to take my head off to for the complexity of it all. And thank you for everything. It's I it's very important. Those of us who use the bus when we need to. And those of us at that use of us all the time. So thank you. Kuzma rent if I can just respond to a portion of that, I think one of the things that we're really hoping for from you as our board is that. >> Rachel did a good job of highlighting the challenge between coverage and productivity and we're really hoping that collectively we can think about this as a system and not a collection of individual routes. >> We >> can't frankly, we can't afford to be overly provincial right now. We can't hold on to the status quo because that's what's easy. We need to make the service productive in order to keep it viable and that that is the challenge

that we face and that will come with change that. Is necessary to get to that level of productivity. So I appreciate the challenge in the fact that all 7 of you represent geographic areas that are going to want something and change might mean losing something for the sake of something else. Rachel and Matt and I are responsible for the system and that puts us in a position of potential conflicts that we're going to have to work through. And just I'm saying that out loud so that we can acknowledge that that. Everybody has different avenues that which they're approaching this conversation. I appreciate that. Thank you, MR. Donald. >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for the presentation. What's interesting is when school bus systems were they continue to serve the outer areas for equity to ensure that children could get to school in time.

And those that were sort of in the center who are able to walk to school or have closer proximity or ride their bike potentially. Those are the ones that they reduce service to. So as I look at some of the routes that you're proposing, it sounds more like some of these outer routes just have low ridership. So I want to be cautious about that because of who it serves sort of in the outskirts of the community in 3 different areas that mention and I'm going to be a little bit selfish here, MR. Hennessey, and talk about Route 16 because it has to do with Oakmont. When Oakland comes in, they go typically to shopping centers. I MISS My understanding and that's where they spend their money. And that's tax dollars that we generate specifically from those riders that are staying right here in the city of Santa Rosa, which I love so much. But I wondered if we

have and maybe you could tell me this, Rachel, on potentially cutting some of the routes. So right now, if you're going out there 7 days a week, you roughly have 6 riders a day. So that's 42 based on a week. But have you looked at we can do this route 2 days a week so that we work va on giving him a schedule so that they know we're coming out every Tuesday and Friday to get into town to do your shopping. So it's more of a scheduled and maybe potentially working with the Montgomery Village area in and out there and having that route so that we are still able to meet the majority of your bus routes to get to these other transit areas. But then also looking at how do we serve the other parts of our community? So that would be one suggestion. I to just take a look at as you look over the next 6 months to see if there's any viability and not

and working ba. I did speak va and they told me all the programs you mentioned they're looking into. There's also one called Go-Go grandparent. That's sort acts like Uber and they are able to contract with the currently contracts with the city and pays a fairly large amount to keep this route. So I'm happy to know that you're working. I talked to Chris Stolle Antone who is executive director. No one will be left behind in Oakmont. Have a great volunteer program. But I I would like us to look at our part to know that the general funds contributing. I think you said about $30,000 a year towards our transit. I would like to know how much would it be to add just a couple routes and would that be something that council should consider as we're talking about the previous item in this item in the necessity to ensure connectivity and equity

amongst most of our community. And I think that that's pretty much my question around. It's mostly comments. I'll be honest but I am wondering if you had anything around looking at routes are cutting some routes so that we can still serve in the area. Yeah. With all of these proposed like that right now, we're just showing you areas that obvious first places to look for resources based on performance. >> In all of these routes, we're looking at options and talk and that'll be part of the public engagement is to understand what are the impacts for different service in areas from, you know, Ruddock, production, elimination, whatever it might be or changing routing. We're going to want to know from the writers how that will affect them and how we can leave the fewest people behind with any changes. We propose certainly

working va and we've talked with them about the idea of shopping trips. It might be cheaper for them to contract directly with a contractor for that cut out the middleman. You know, there's some things. You know, there's some things were discussing where Spring-like village does that the contract directly with the transportation for shopping trips? So not saying that the city is trying to get out of it, but it's possible that it's in their interests financially. And so I think that's that's the conversation we're in. But certainly from the standpoint of understanding what the needs are and how how do we help evolve to a, you know, new service that continues to meet the most important needs. So absolutely will well the to having all those discussions for sure. Thank you so much thank you. Vice Mayor. >> I guess just might make one

quick question is we're not alone in having some of these other municipal buses. Can you can you comment on that a little bit? >> know, for sure. Thank you for that question. Yeah, I think it I meant to put that in context for council. We are not alone and we are in better shape and many of our partner agencies around the Bay area around California Petaluma Transit is cutting 29% of their transit service in AUGUST Tri Delta Transit. Nice pass cutting 25% of their service in AUGUST. Many others are planning service cuts for this coming fiscal year or like us preparing for potential cuts in fiscal 28. If revenues continue to be down, this is really a statewide issue. And so, you know, statewide industry association is spending up a transit funding task force to try to work with the state on some of our state funding look

at other opportunities to provide some relief because throughout the entire state, these are issues I don't think. I've talked to a transit manager recently who isn't looking at reductions within the next couple years. Think in just a couple from me. >> What is the cost of a daily route one or outlines? What's it? What's an estimated cost? >> Well, we estimate our operating costs removing the fixed costs. So just a variable cost, which is, you know, operator, celery fuel maintenance, anything that's variable with service levels to surround it. About $150 an hour and our typical route different one bus on a route all day. That's 14 hours. So I'm not going to do that math in my head because all embarrass myself. But that's about the math that we're working with. Now that said Matt can do the math. If you

want, he's doing the math. >> And that said, some routes have 2 buses on them. You know, if there's 30 minute service on a route takes an hour to complete, that's 2 buses that we need all day long. So you multiply that 150 bucks times, 14 hours times too. >> So the more frequent, the service, obviously, the more buses to more costs. So it really depends on the level of service on that bus route. >> Thank you for And I just wanted do signal. My support for your idea of a shake up the status quo little bit when we when I first opened this item when it when the package came out, I was crossing my fingers. That route 8 wouldn't be on there. And I you know, I I love our route 8. I'm glad staying above. Are. Our goal line. But I I do like your approach to to to maximizing both convenience and accessibility. I and so even

though one of the lines is in is in my district, I wholeheartedly support the idea. We figure out how we can how we can ring a line and will say the rest of my thoughts for my for my comments the questions from council. Funding. >> Yeah, I was just wondering if you could put up this slide that you had one more time that shows the adjustments to the lines. Which one? I'm sorry. I stepped up for a moment just as you were talking about lot adjustments to the lines and I'm wondering if you have that slide or a slide that shows the proposed adjustments. >> Or for not there yet. I think those are that's 2 under discussion. Guard allies want to make sure that it. Correct. >> All right. Thanks. That I think I think we're good. The other. There's more come back in the future. Any other any other questions from council.

>> All right. Let's open up the public comment see if I can do this correctly this time because we're going to do both in-person and zoom comment. So if you are in the council chambers, make your way to make you reach the speaker podium. And if you are online on zoom, raise your hand or down star 9 by phone indicated like you just would like to speak. Going to start with in chamber questions that will go online. Fred, we start with you. Thank >> How many get up here in flat? My joy little bit have only had 2 minutes for 2 and a half hours. >> moved to Tucson when I was 20 years old and my whole life. Bus ridership in service has been an intractable public policy conflict. And so I envy the staff report here because I've seen this same thing for years and years. And so. >> As a kind of a let's make the best of a bad situation.

Department here with what Santa Rosa doing. Its own big, sprawling Western cities with people who are used to having cars, the United States and individual prerogative. When I got to Tucson, I swore I would never take the bus again. It was so bad and I had to wait around. And so but then I moved to Chicago and it was great. And I had a three-year unbroken chain of cta passes. So when you're in a big city and mass transit really works, that's great. But in big, sprawling Western cities, it just doesn't seem to work that well. And so that's unfortunate. And I don't really see a way out of this and intractable public policy conflict. That tides is just going to go on. You guys are on the decision-makers rat wheel of a 50 year problem that I'm aware of. So good luck. >> Thanks for the support, Fred. What a Gregory. And then

the Abbey. This is Mayor stab my name is Gregory Ferrand. >> I want to I want to revive a little of Fleming's comments about parking and transit. >> 42 years ago when I was student body PRESIDENT Of college. I'm Renee asked Peter Bear the senator. >> For this area. If we can try to use parking fees and parking permit costs are revenue to subsidize public transit for students. And he said well, and isn't legal yet, but I'll help you pass a law. I did that. It became law and we had a very good arrangement down in college or in for a few years, which was based on the assumption that everybody who took the bus main space in the parking lots. I think you ought to be having the same sort ability to try to. Imagine that those of us who are taking the those of us who are trying to use or public transit are making space for those who are

driving their cars and need to be your parking lots. And so whether or not it's legal, whether or not it's just to be obvious that the 2 are linked and you need to work as a city to try to make both of them whole. Thank >> Thank you, Gregory Abbey. And then the way. >> hadn't planned on speaking on this issue. But and listening to the discussion, I felt really compelled, particularly contrasting it to the previous discussion which focus so much on parking and cars and traffic for the last 2 years. I have week without driving to try to get a sense of what it's like to have to be dependent on non non car trip. Travel. And one of the things I've learned is that about 30% of the population does not drive. It MAY be because they're too old to drive or they're too young to drive or they don't have the money to by a car and support

the car and buy insurance and all that costs associated with that they MAY have a dui or some other thing that prevented them from driving. They MAY have a disability not being able to see well enough for not having enough limbs to be able to operate a vehicle. So for many, many reasons, 30% of our population and that I would bet it might be higher in Santa Rosa with the number of seniors that we have are unable to drive. So this is bus service is extremely important to many, many people who don't have the privilege of being here. This afternoon at 4 o'clock in the afternoon on a or MAY have shame about the reasons that they're not able to drive. So this is a time where you can really step up with equity and support the staff in making transit accessible to everybody and making all of us able to get to the places that we need to get to Our basic needs for our

medical needs and for entertainment. Thank you. >> Thank you, Abbi. Dwayne. I'm from Roseland. Almost 20 years ago. I was a part of the Roseland community-based transit plan that was funded. And one of the things that happens. You rarely asked the bus riders. Everything that goes down here is pretty much about what staff says and then occasionally someone who rides the bus will get a chance to tell you about. So I write Bush 12 Iribe us one. I definitely want you to keep going. Alright, bust 2 and b to b the whole approach could actually get more federal support by pointing out the title 6 of the federal government acts. Require you to have equity require you to do some positive stuff. This MacDonald's idea about having separate days plot. Cutting back on services in certain places. Were the seniors don't have to. Perhaps use it every

day like a worker, my or a student might. So then the key word. From MR. Hennessey was productive. We have to make this productive. So one of the things to do is constantly look for other people's money. That's what it's about. Get that funding from the state cut that funding from the federal government and find ways to work with homeowners associations guarantee certain routes uncertain times. You can cut the size of the buses. You can use smaller buses on last year's drought. Then you can also do something called wait a minute. And you think what? Wait a minute. We're in a hurry. Well, actually have the drivers at the transit route transfer point such is the West Side and South side actually wait there for a minute to catch all the riders. Thank you to Wayne. >> Is anybody else in council chambers in person speaking? Seeing none. We'll go online.

Lauren, is anybody online have their hand raised? >> No mayor, no brave souls. All right. Then we will close public comment. Bring it back to council for final comments. >> MR. Rogers. Thank you, Mayor. >> I have most confidence in your staff. And what you've done thus far. So I will say that I am okay with productivity. I think that it's very important that when we do something, we try to do it well, instead of doing a lot and not doing it well, but I do realize that people rely on public transportation in right now. That's not necessarily our strong point. So I would like to get it. So it is our strong point. I know that you guys are creative, your innovative. You'll find a way to provide or to give people alternatives for other means of transportation or other ways of getting somewhere. I would just ask

that if we do have to cut lines that we do so in a manner where p we'll have time and the opportunity to find alternative routes to get to where they need to go because MR. Do what is right. Some people use it to go shopping. But there are people that use it to feed their families and to really support themselves to get back and forth to work. So thank you. Thank you. MISS Something. >> And support your approach to this. I think it's really well thought out. And I would just add to that that in this process that if it comes to the unfortunate point of having to cut service that we not just keep in mind, transit dependent folks, but we also try to maintain and upgrade services for choice writers in such a way that preserves interesting confidence in the system. And so that in the long range the council can achieve our goals around

reducing Bill Miles traveled and meeting our climate change goals. I think that bringing in folks who have a choice is really essential. Other has to do with housing or transit or any other kind of shared infrastructure. We need people who who have a choice to want to put their tax dollars behind something as well. And that's central to upgrading and more popularizing the system. Thank you, MR. Donald. >> Thank Thank you again for the presentations. Something I didn't mention, but I know spoke to you about it. Was to work with the county on their bus routes and no route 30, as you suggested, goes into Oakmont. But if that is potentially something that we're looking to either reduced or far reviews that we work with the county on doing MAY be some additional stops in Oakmont. So that they can make sure that they are able to use that to the maximum

reaching out or supervisors to see if they have plans on those outer outer layers to be able to pull them onto their transportation system. Again, I appreciate the work you're doing right now va before there's a cut to make sure Councilmember Fleming and counselor Rogers said that we have a plan in place prior to making any sustained, you know, change is warranted for those. But I still will always make sure and putting in a plug for what it considers of unreal, part of our community that when they do come in and do shopping, it's not just for shoes, but it's for food. And for the essentials of everyday living. And so I want to make sure that that's always considered from all of the members of our community. But thanks for bringing it to really so that there's time to have community discussions. I appreciate that. Thank you. MISTER Thank you. Thank you

for the presentation. >> So I don't think I have to be going out on a limb. When I say if you look at slide, 22 in the behind the curtain, a scheduling that, you know more about this than I do so much like my colleague MISS Rogers. I have full confidence. I actually went on a ride-along with this Rodgers on the bus system not too long ago. I full confidence in your analysis of this. However, I will take my privilege to pitch Route I just want to point out that it's for this North Point is 2 miles away from U.S. Mark Station and we have not a singer single linear foot of smart path in that entire area. No fault of smart and all the issues that have go that have gone on councilor funding is educated on what's going on. But I think it's important note that we can't even take a smart path like a lot of the other areas in the city can to get

smart stations. So that is my that is my pitch. But I I leave it in your very capable hands. Thank you. And already have already made by my position clear here. I thank you for the work you've done. I certainly support looking for ways to adjust our status quo reach more people and do some more efficiently. >> I will. I do you think that as we talk about equity as we talk about climate change and we also just talk about the impacts on city culture, the public transportation has Santa Rosa. It seems to be at this cost where we are suddenly we're finally starting to think of ourselves as a big city. And if you look at bigger cities where people unaware, they almost always have great public transportation systems. I was glad that Fred mentioned Cga. I think I still have my cta card. I took the bus to San Francisco for 10 years. I

stood in the rain is buses. I'm the one California line passed me by time after time. So I'm I'm sympathetic to the folks in Mendocino, but there's something or and live in great public transportation system. In addition to the other great effects has on people's quality of life. And on on economy. So some way somehow we've got to find a way to to grow and improve our public transportation system. What you're proposing here is a good step forward right now, especially in light of the constraints. So thank you very much for all the work and we'll look forward as a council to you. Coming back with more us with more specific future. All right. We've been at it now for 2 hours and 45 minutes. Let's take a 15 minute break and reconvene reconvene and 505. Thank you, everyone. Thank you for your patience, everyone.

The time is 506. And we will reconvene into open session medicine. Kirk, would you please call the roll? >> Yes, mayor, thank you. Councilmember Rogers, Councilmember MacDonald Councilmember Fleming. Councilmember Ben Willows here. Councilmember Office is absent. Vice Cookie here. Mayor, stop Let the record show that all councilmembers are present with the exception of Councilmember Alvarez. >> Thank you very much. All right. We're running a little behind. We are going to catch up and jump around the agenda little bit. We're gonna do our first public comment on non agenda matters. Then we're going to go to our public hearing on vegetation management and then we were to get to our main item for the evening, which is about tax measure. So for those of you are looking to make comments and any one of those items

that we are going to quickly move through them. Let's start with item 14. Our public comment on non agenda matters. This is the chance for the public to make comment on any items not listed on the agenda. We'll start with folks who are here in person. But if you're online, please raise your hand on zoom or press star 9. So we know you wish to make comment and let's kick it off with Fred and then to wane. >> I want to make a general comment apropos of affordable housing, not all previous agenda items in and out from the detailed demographic studies that I've done of Santa Rosa from the the 2023 American Community Survey Senses approximately 40% of Santa Rosa residents qualifies disadvantaged community, which means they make 80% or less of state median household income. And so that's 40 near 40% of Santa Rosa constituents.

>> Are are cost burdened and primarily concerned with the cost of living issues. And so what I would like to see personally from members of the council, it was more attention to that. 40% of the people who live in Santa Rosa, one affordable housing conversations come up because those are the people who really need it. And I would just like to hear interest voice by the council a little bit more. Thank you. Thank you, Fred. I'd like to use the overhead projector. Please. Hello. You're ready. >> My name is Dwayne Do it. I'm from Roseland. I have before you on this overhead. A document from the Urban stormwater Management plan for the city of Santa Rosa. It calls out Roseland Creek. We call it the Roseland neighborhood. If see right here, this is the neighbor. Would these are those nice, beautiful trees. We 5 for 32

years to save. And along with that, this plan shows away that you could perhaps get more money. We know that productivity to you is about more money. We can get it from the State Department of Natural Resources, State Department of Water. We can get from the federal government. It comes down to having a coordinated effort with the community who call this area Park and preserve. Now because they believe in that land acknowledgement and do it in such a way that we bring the funds forward and we work together with the volunteers in the community to get this done. It could happen. And, you know, we've asked a lot of organizations over the years to help out there. People such as Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation. A land trust all kinds of organizations. We've asked, not a one of them has ever stepped up and giving us a

penny. Not one of them is ever helped us. So we're out there looking for ways to bring the money in for you and it could happen. Youve approve Let's get moving forward will make good things happen by working together and we'll get to place renamed to if we do it right within your guidelines. Now, Pall Mall park preserve with the Roseland neighborhood. Nothing but a good time. Thank you to Wayne. Is there anybody else in council chambers who wishes to speak? >> Seeing none. We'll go online. Lauren, there's anybody on zoom. Have their hands raised. >> Alas, no mayor, no speakers. >> All right. I want like the bit. Lauren. We will then close public comment and we will move on to our public hearing. I have 16.1. Our public on the Santa Rosa Fire Department annual weed

abatement program report. Thank you, gentleman. Welcome. >> Good evening, Mayor Vice Mayor Councilmembers, MADAM CHAIRMAN, Daniel. And with the system, farmers with the Sarah's Fire Department. And we're here to give you a kind of a brief annual update on our weed abatement program and present you the the tax lien roles for this year. So to give you a over here, the redevelopment program we every year annually do approximately over 9,000 weed abatement inspections throughout the city. And this is all upon the declaration of our local fire season, which this year, I believe was 7th, if I'm not mistaken and that's to ensure compliance with ordinance. 36 81. And after the compliance is initiated, parcels are inspected by fire Department personnel on a regular basis throughout the whole duration of fire season. If a property is inspected. And out of

compliance and notice to comply will be sent out to the parcel owner advising them that the ordinance and the date for the next reinspection, a second inspection or as we call it a first re inspection is conducted. And if the parcels found to still be out of compliance violation, notice will be sent to the partial owner with a date for the next inspection. If then a property owner remains out of compliance. Following the abatement violation. Notice the we are authorized to use an approved contractor to actually debate the property and then all costs associated with that are recoverable. But the city. So that's kind of a brief overview of how the process works and the amount of inspections we better entailed in our program. And the general recommendation is that the fire department recommends that the council by

resolution confirm to itemize report of the fire Department of the costly Dan Rather should be meant as provided in Section 9 Dash '08 0, 2, 0, and the other Sarah City codes and has no current fiscal budget impact. And if there's any questions or comments were happy to answer. >> Thank you very much. That was incredibly saint the tribe. We appreciate it bring you back to council for questions. Any questions from council MR. Craig so we'd emails about somebody is neighbor's yard to email them to you. Then. >> Yeah, you can yes. Interesting question having the record. Thank you very much. Any other questions for counsel? All right. Let's go to public comment will start in chambers. And but if you are online, please raise your hand on zoom or press star. 9. >> MR. Do what they are doing. A full really open the public

hearing. >> yes, I do. Thank you very much, MADAM City clerk. Alright, redfish the open up a clear Aaron. So we'll start with those here in council chambers MR. De Wit or >> my name is Dwayne Do it. I'm from Roseland. I'd like you to look at that graphic that I just handed out to you. That city property. And there is a neighbor with there and there are many we eat. There are many fire hazards there. We'd like for you to regularly abate the fire hazards. That means getting all the weeds out at the bottom of the trees all the way up to head height because people start fires in there when they do their campaign, they come in there with butane and they make fires to cook their food. Is the camp next to the trees in the meadow and in the neighbor would and next to the creek on the south side of the creek. There's been a lot of campers

that even go down into the creek banks. So this is a land that you own. You can take care of. You can debate the problem. As a volunteer. I do my best. Creek volunteers were there. We're trying to help. But, you know, transit vagrants don't care. I don't look at us as if we're doing something positive. We're just bothering their lifestyle. Someone shows up in a uniform when someone shows up and says, hey, this is the city abating. This problem, then they're paying attention. It works. And recently there are people out there from parks picking up some of the debris that they leave behind. And it's a lot. All right. So we're trying to help you save money and avoid the calls to the Burbank Avenue Fire Station, which they have a number on record for fire. Started in there by transient, vagrants starting fires. This is crux of this whole issue.

Weed abatement is to avoid fires. You folks can do it. You can be the leaders of this whole thing by having those nice fire and police work together come down there and get that never would safe. That's what we're looking for. Thank you. Thank you, MR. It. Before we go on in public Marlow in salt that you want to talk about some of the city's remarkable and very photogenic work with and we debate Mont. >> Thank you. Mayor called on busy far motion with the fire department. So a couple but several elements with the wait a minute. But his management, the work very well for the city. It's important to note that the Roseland Creek Park is actually over 5 acres in size. So technically it's only required to have a 30 foot break around the perimeter of that. But the city has opted to invest a lot of time, energy and money going well

above and beyond the actual requirements for the property which have mitigated a lot of the fire risks and actually help. Our Tripoli are a common enforcement team with their forsman activities and there. But it's also important or highlight that we also grazing that does a lot of work throughout the city and then really more importantly to note is that we've been programmed is working. In fact, a number of the fires that we announce arrests for this lock this last week were actually kept small specifically because of weed abatement activities. Crestor happening, fires are occurring, but they are kept being kept small because the lead abatement program. >> Thank you, frontline that last point. That wasn't good headline today. Thank you all. So Chief Cregan Srpd. Alright, other other people in council chamber who wish to speak as

part of a public hearing Seeing none. Let's go online. Lauren, is there anybody online wishes to speak? >> No hands. Mayor. >> Thank you very much. All right. Real close this public hearing to bring it back to council for a motion. Any final discussion? I think McConnell due the motion on this one. >> Yes, I move the adoption the resolution is presented by staff. We have a motion and we have a second by MISTER Okrepkie, a final discussion. >> MADAM City clerk call the vote. >> Thank you, Mayor Councilmember Rogers. Councilmember MacDonald, I councilmember Fleming councilmember most. Yes, Councilmember Alvarez is absent. Vice cookie. Yes, mayor, stop. Yes. Let the record show this past the 6 affirmative votes. >> All right. Jared Paul,

Adam, thank you very much. All right. Where to go up to item. 15.1 for which many of you have been waiting, which has been frankly a culmination of a three-year journey here on at the city lights item. 51, our report on the transaction and use tax ballot measure. And we have MISTER Wagner and Mistwood who are leading the conversation. Welcome both. Once again. Good evening. Their staff members, the council. Name is Scott Wagner, chief financial officer here at the City, Santa Rosa. >> Along with the here for this presentation is Misty would who's the communications and government relations officer of the city. We're very pleased to present this item, as the mayor mentioned, is a combination, three-year process that will be going into details on that is the transaction and used Halifax to tax ballot measure. Report

for this evening transaction and use tax easy way of saying sales tax. That is just the technical term. So with that, I will next item. Today's presentation is going to give a brief budget overview of how we have come to this point over the last 3 years. We'll get some historical context on actions that the city's taken and overall why we are proposing this next action be taken by council at that point, all turn the presentation over to Missy who will run through the community, robust community engagement that's been occurring with 6 months to a year to get community feedback on really the services and we provide at the city final and on conversation with running over the bout proposed ballot measure language in mechanics that move forward in the process that we're proposing. The council. So we'll start today's conversation around

general fund and what services are covered with in the city's general fund. The city has over 128 funds with the largest one being the general fund. This houses, many of the city's services that are core, including the police Department. Fire Department public works planning and economic Development City manager's office. City attorney's office, the Finance Department parks, Recreation and human resources. It's important to note that at this time the allocation towards our public safety departments, police and fire are at the highest levels that we can see from a historical perspective of the city. This is really the result of the council along with community feedback to focus the allocation of resources to these 2 key areas of the general fund. Overall, though, the city's general fund is at a structural imbalance even after

significant actions that have taken that we've taken over the past 3 years, I would characterize those actions really 2 ways in that the city has tightened its belt and the city has sharpened its pencil. Those are the frequent feedback that we received from members of the community as far as addressing our issues. Specifically when it comes to tightening our belt. We need significant reductions in expenditures over the past 3 years. That really can be illustrated passed with reduction employees. We have over all reduced employees by roughly 80 employees within the general fund. For context, we now sit on an employee level at the same level we did at the bottom of the Great Recession. We are 20% lower on an fte count than we were at the city's high over this same period, though population has grown and there services that we provided to the city have

those expectations and counts have as well. Whether that is calls for service or are needs overall as a community. We've a dish annalee sharpened our pencils. We've taken big swings here at the city to address some of our largest financial issues. One example would be the city's unfunded liability with Calpers, which is a 482 million dollar debt. Throughout the actions of this council. We've been able to take a proactive approach at paying off his liability. Quicker. We will pay off this debt 6 years earlier, given the implementation of the plan that we've done along with saving 28 million dollars over the next 5 years. Again, coming back to the sharpening the pencil and doing things more effective and efficient. We have lost entire departments over the past 2 years. We no longer have a recreation and parks department. We no longer have

a communications and intergovernmental relations Department. Those functions at the city still certainly exist, but they have been incorporated into existing departments elsewhere to gain efficiencies. I will also add on the revenue front front has today's the discussion around sales tax that this is not the first place that we looked for. Revenue as a city. We have successfully brought forward voter approved measures to increase our business license tax. We brought forward measures to increase our transient occupancy tax. Those have overall been very positive for the city, but did not overall feel a very large job that we had within budget is around revenue. Today's discussion around sales taxes. Really that next step looking at our largest sources of revenue, which is sales tax. Before you is the city's five-year

financial forecast. And this is really what we do to gauge how well the city is looking on. A projection be says on the out years of the next 5 years. I will add that the city in an effort of transparency and doing again sharpening our pencil. We've had an outside expert coming to look at our practices and they were deemed best practice. Our forecasts have been extremely accurate over the past 3 years coming out of covid once are numbers started to normalize a little bit better and what we see in these numbers overall are those big red numbers at the bottom. We overall have an ongoing structural deficit. The city at this point of around 14 million dollars on our out years. What you'll note, though, is that in 2031 with the expiration of our current general sales tax measure q it bumps up. So it goes to 23 Million. I think

what's most important to understand this. Slide, though. Is. He's sorry about that. Is that these numbers represent our budget reality of the moment. This represents the budgets that have been passed. But what it also represents, though, is that is lacking and has holes of what the community's expectations are for the services that we deliver. This is not what I would describe as a fully burden budget. There's holes here. There's areas that we are not funding within these numbers. One example would be our neighborhood streets. The city currently has no funding source available to maintain and revive and reconstruct the city's neighborhood streets. That's just one example. There's many other examples of how we could be investing in better tools for our employees to provide better service cetera. This is what I'm what I'm saying is that these

numbers really are are less than they should be. They should be much, much higher. Next slide. I want to take a moment to. Get into slight governmental accounting discussion around how funds are separated at the city. This is a very common misunderstanding that we can get from the community given how complex government funding is here at the city level. We operate in many different types of funds. Like I mentioned earlier in some of those are enterprise funds. And what that means is they live on their own are busy. Biggest example of an enterprise fund is the water Fund. The Water Fund in our rate pairs revenue into that water. Fun can't go to subsidize general fund activities. We cannot take wait dollar that was paid for on a water bill and then fund the police or fire department. There's other enterprise

funds. We had our transit division give a discussion on their financial reality tonight as well. We cannot take bus money and move it into the general fund. These things are legally separated here at the city. There's additional cip funds that are funded through special revenue accounts. The biggest one hears gas tax and while see many projects happening within the city. Some of those around pedestrian efforts and pedestrian projects, bicycles, cetera. I would add that none of those dollars have come from the general fund. Those have related to gas tax primarily. This is important to understand because again, we we are are restricted in many of these areas, specifically gas tax, not on direction of this council that really of the state on how those funds can and should be used overall. That leaves us with the General Fund which

incorporated all those departments that I mentioned earlier, which we can be discretionary on. Ultimately that is that the guidance of council on how you allocate those dollars going forward. Overall, one of the key questions regarding the issue with the structural imbalances, the city why have we gotten here? Why is this happening? And at its core we have a structural issue with the revenue at the city and that has been true for a very long time that we see that structural issue growing over changes in the way that the market is working around our 2 primary revenue source is and I want to add some context around property taxes, sales tax in the next slide. But from a big picture perspective Cent property taxes are ultimately set in stone Proposition 13, which passed in the 1970's locking us into only received 11.7% of every

dollar spent on property taxes in the city of Santa Rosa. That has been constant. But what has not been constant is the volatility around sell stocks. And overall one key statistics that I can share tonight is that in the fiscal year 2025, which is our last audited fiscal year. We collected 2.0 million that 1 million dollars less than we did 3 years earlier. So stocks is our largest revenue source and just like any other industry, our primary revenue source when it's not only growing, but it's either stagnant or decreasing. It's just not keeping up with our controllable expenses that we have here at the city, the city's finances ultimately act a lot like our own personal finances. And as we all know, we've seen our expenses grow significantly over the past 3 to 4 years. This next slide gives a graphic to really show these these these contrasts

and what I will add is, you know, again, as my seat from cfo, the city in a little bit of bias here is that when we talk to the community, frankly, Missy's going to bring up our community engagement the services that they ask for. First are the cities are the services that the city provides police fire at the maintaining of roads, economic development. But what you'll see here is that on a revenue basis for our main revenue source is we get funded last welcomes prior to us is the county in the state. So, for example, and the school districts. So again, coming back to that property tax dollar, we only retain 11.7% of our property taxes here in Santa Rosa. And important understanding the ally. We have the structural problem. Is that not all agencies are at 11.7%. We have agencies within Sonoma County that routine, almost 20%.

These percentages created when Prop 13 past ultimately created winners and losers on where you landed as an agency on your property tax base on wherever it was at the moment where a past at that moment when Prop 13 past Santa Rosa was known as a low property tax district at the council at that time made efforts to keep property taxes low. That was an ability to attract housing road to attract businesses, cetera. But I think the impact of that decision we're feeling here today and the structural problem. Additionally ring up sales tax. This is a common misunderstanding when it is well, the U.S. What is the sales tax for the city of Santa Rosa? The city of Santa Rosa sales taxes. 1.7 5% or 1.7, $0.5 out of the dime worth of sales tax. The rest of it goes to Sonoma County and ultimately the state which routine $0.6 in 2 in quarter cents accordingly. Next slide.

When give a brief overview of of where we sit on the sales tax base pieces throughout the county, what you'll know there is on that very first column to the left is that we have right now. What I would describe as one general services transaction and use tax in the city that is measured q that is that a half percent? All of the jurisdictions above us, including Cloverdale Petaluma Cotati Sonoma and Sebastien people all have at least one percent as their general sales. General services sales tax. So we are behind these other agencies on a funding mix basis towards providing these services to the city. Our overall sales tax rate at the current moment is 10% which races around the middle of the county. I should add that this is a reflection of this moment in time. We will not be the only jurisdiction in this area looking at

increasing these amounts. It is not only Santa Rosa that is facing the stark realities around our revenue mix. It will be other agencies as well. And I expected that Chardon left-hand side is going to look different after NOVEMBER, too. Many of these agencies. And with I will pass it to Missy to go through some community engagement. The city's been involved with. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor. Vice mayor members of the council. And as you know, we've been conducting significant community engagement over the past year surrounding budgeting, education and getting impact input on service priorities. >> This started in AUGUST with formation of the city manager's budget working group who've served as a sounding board and a resource. We have 2 of those members present with us today. Sahana set. He

and Bob Campbell. And we really want to think that entire group for spending their time with us and really being a resource for staff as we're trying to work through our budget crisis. In JANUARY, we conducted an initial residents survey to get an initial sense of what the service priorities are for residents of Santa Rosa. In MARCH, we launched the Let's Talk Center is a campaign and this was a bilingual communication campaign designed to broaden our reach, broaden our feedback and broader education we had over 2400 committee members respond to that survey. These are all people who live in sir at Santa Rosa on businesses in Santa Rosa and or work here in Santa Rosa. We've also completed 14 presentations with community groups and stakeholders and additional outreach is ongoing. We are not done yet. And finally, we

conducted a follow-up survey just last month to determine whether our community service priorities had changed as this. The public has learned more about the city's budget situation. I do want to say before I dive into the how appreciative I am. I know that staff is as well of all of the committee members who participated in the process. We've had people welcomed us into their community groups. We've had very candid, robust conversations. We appreciate everybody's taken time to be part of the process over the last several months. Starting with the JUNE survey, the survey reinforce what we've heard throughout this process, which is that residents place, the highest value on maintaining core city services. This survey showed that residents maintain value maintaining fire and emergency medical response. Police response services,

particularly to violent crime and maintaining streets and public spaces. These results are consistent with what we've heard through the throughout the let's Talk Santa Rosa Initiative and some wind with what we heard during JANUARY survey as well. 2 things to note during the Lets talk Santa Rosa initiatives homelessness in addressing homelessness did rise to the top is kind of a secondary priority. And I did want to call your attention to the last line on this slide, maintaining the city's financial stability ranked higher in JUNE than it did in JANUARY. 80% of the respondents ranked that extremely important or very important in JUNE. That number was 70% 6 months ago. The survey also revealed that 53% of respondents believe the city has a great need for some need for additional funding. 35% believe that the city has

a little need or no real need. And 12% which are shown in gray on this slide are undecided. Residents were asked how likely they are to support a sales tax reauthorization as we're discussing this evening. Over half of the respondents, 55% indicated support for a measure saying that they definitely or probably would vote. Yes. That support increases to 62% when including those leaning towards yes. And these results that you see on your screen have an approximate margin of error of 4.9%. The challenge that we're facing as we are all painfully aware is that our budget reality makes it difficult to meet our public's expectations. We recently reduced budgets for fire and police and other city services. And without action, more cuts are coming in JUNE sorry, summer of 2027, which is about a year into the

future. We're looking at losing approximately 42 more positions. The impact of that loss looks like fire station closures, elimination of police, violent crimes teams reduce maintenance of streets, parks and street lights, elimination of recreation programs and other city services. I want to be really clear. Crystal clear tonight. Without additional revenue, the city will not be able to meet our community's expectations when it comes to services. What we have heard consistently and services and surveys and meetings is that our community values maintaining fired emergency response services maintaining police services, especially response to violent crimes and maintaining our streets and public spaces. So as we talk about revenue generation, as we talk about a ballot measure is not just a conversation about money. It's a comedy.

That's a conversation about how to maintain the city services that our committee members have said are most important to them. With that. I will pass it back to cfo Wagner. Thank you. Misty. >> So for the next few slides, I will go through some mechanics on the proposed sales tax measure >> first, you know, proposed is a reauthorization of the existing voter approved measure q sales tax at a one cent rate until ended by voters. Voter approved reauthorization of Measure q one Cent rate will allow the city to maintain core service. It will address the city's budget deficit mean team. The city services community members have said are important. The most important I will add here that the proposed change in reauthorization of this measure does not provide extra funding. Is that a common way

that it's been framed? It is really to address our existing deficit. Any existing gaps that we know are within their that need funding maintain has been a cause. Key message from the community that staff has very loudly and also shares. We have a need to maintain what we currently have. Excitement. 100% of this sales tax would stay in Santa Rosa would not depend on a county wide allocation or would not tip and on the state granting funds via grant or anywhere else. This would remain within our community for the city use and prioritize as the community expects the majority of the stock to come from brick and mortar sales transactions and the remainder from online cells. We would we estimated this time that the total reauthorization of the measure will generate 46 million dollars annually. That is 23 million additional to what is currently

generating today. A simple majority would be required to pass the measure. This is a general services measure that would be a 50% plus one as we describe it to pass the measure also includes strict accountability provisions and fiscal safeguards requiring independent audits and public disclosure of all spending. Every penny must be used for Santa Rosa. And with that, take pride in not reading slides, but for the sake of public record, I will be reading the next 2. So proposed ballot language is the city of Santa Rosa community safety, financial stability measure shall the measure, maintaining Santa Rosa's quality of life. 9-1-1, emergency medical police response to violent crimes keeping all fire stations open and public spaces. Places safe, clean, fixing streets, repairing potholes, addressing homeless encampments,

maintaining police fire protection, other services by reauthorizing the existing voter approved sales tax, updated one cent rate. Providing approximately 46 million annually until ended by voters requiring audits. Public disclosure, local control be adopted. Next slide. So the recommendation, the city manager's office recommends the city Council one introduce an ordinance amending chapter 3.3, 0 of the city route city of Santa Rosa of the Santa Rosa City code to replace the existing city's existing voter approved one half cent transaction and use sales tax with a one cent tax until ended by voters and adopt a resolution ordering the submission of ballot measure to qualified electors of the city of Santa Rosa at the NOVEMBER. 3rd 2026. General municipal election directing related actions. And with that, we would welcome

any feedback and questions from the council at this time. Thank you both. Excellent looking to council for questions. There's been a long conversation for everyone here in the city, especially at today. So understand that there aren't any, but but are some follow-ups? >> MR. Donald. >> think it's really important. And I know you touched on it tonight. Misty, we've said it over and over and over that this increase is not going to increase a budget to increase services. But to just ensure that the services we have now with the response times, we have now art remain here and I want to make sure that that's not, you know, only clear to the community, but to everyone who works even for the city of Santa Rosa, that to just maintain what we have now is this is critical for us to be able to do that. And I just want make sure that

eyes heard everything correctly and write everything correctly. And that's that's what you're trying to come a test tonight. >> Thank you for your your question. COUNCILMAN Donald and I and I'll share few ways to couple is a carrot rises. And I think the first is most important in that. The where the funny where funds will ultimately have to go is to an existing deficit. The deficit is existing. It is not something that is just in the out years is what we're experiencing now, furthermore, that conversation, these are the valuable moments where we receive a lot of feedback from our community. The community has made it very clear that they expected maintaining services maintaining existing city infrastructure. That's what we have. The ability to accomplish through this proposed tax measure. I will add that this council has had

to make the very difficult budget decisions that have been needed over the past few years. This council has had to become municipal finance experts and they have given the really the accomplishments that have been made, not just cutting staff but doing things better. Setting the city up to be a more successful in better city. I think that both of those areas really put us in a unique position to deliver on this promise to the voters. >> Thank you. Thanks for driving that home. I appreciate it. Thank you, MR. >> So I think it's really important to focus on on what we've done leading up to this point, right? If you're if you're going out to ask for something, we've got to show that we've done our side of it right? And we've made some some significant, significant cuts and >> also done some other things. And so one of the

things that you we you generally hear the council member is, you know, there's too much fat. There needs to >> You you know, trim from the top and you always say there's a budget issue. It. >> You know, we just passed the eff. Could you address some of those concerns that some naysayers MAY have? >> Yeah, I think you yes, this is the feedback that we receive as well. And I think when we've had those conversations and been able to really show the reductions and the most straightforward way to show it again, as I mentioned earlier is the reduction of staff. In that the reduction of Seth has been pointed in the direction of what the community has asked for. Be. But first, it has come from administration. It has come from other areas that are doing much more with us. We are on an bone at this point of the cuts that are

making to quote our fire chief it was at the end of the day. The stark reality is that. We have. The same level of staffing that we did at the bottom of the Great Recession. We've made the cuts. To add. To your to your question, vice mayor, there are agencies that move forward with and action like this prior to making the cuts. And trying to avoid those very difficult cuts that have happened. We have not done that. We have made the cuts first before coming to this action. We have gone out and looked at business license tax. We have gone out and increased it. We have looked dot. We have increased it. We did not come to sales tax first as an action. We need to significant cuts. We did. We enhanced other areas of revenue. We now have ultimately east landed on the end of the runway where this is the next step. It is not the final step. Without this

measure passing ultimately is going to look like the cuts this would mentioned earlier. That is what the community ultimately needs to decide. Not us is the service that we are going provide as a community in the impacts that that is going to have and especially facing all of the positive things that have been happening here in the city over the past. 35 years. And and if I could also chime in a vice mayor. >> The council the council brought to the city for 6 month period and interim city manager with a very strong financial background. And that was the intent of getting her into this role. And as you MAY recall, when she gave her final comments during our budget deliberation, I just want to remind council and the public or comment was I came in thinking I was going to find something productive that you haven't attempted to look

at. You haven't addressed or you haven't done yet. And her statement went further to say I looked at Scott, I went through all of the documents and there was nothing further that I could recommend that was different new or innovative that you haven't already thought about. And really praise to the U.S. chief financial officer of the effort that he and and his predecessor and her predecessor put in place and set in motion to get us to this point. So we had an independent. >> come in and look at this and basically explained that this really we are at this point. We've done everything we possibly can. We've made every effort to try to get across the finish line with other means and methods. And this is this is really the place that we find ourselves in. Thank you. Other questions from council. All right. Well,

before we go to public comment, I just want to emphasize what both missus, Woody, I'm MR. Wagner did. And that is that this is the community's choice. >> And one of the things that the community has done or that the city rather has done really well. Over the past two-plus years, at especially for the last 6 months. We've been out in the community nonstop, whether it's by mainly brochures, whether it's online, whether it is meeting after meeting face to face with with residents of Santa Rosa to make sure that everybody understands the choice it is before us as a community. The community is going to have a choice is going to decide which direction we go. And we just want make sure everyone is informed. So thank you to all of those who came today to make comment here. There are going to be no more

opportunities in the future all the way up through NOVEMBER as we make sure that everybody in this community is informed and leaning in on this particular issue. So with that, let's open up public comment. I'm gonna called names here. Let's use both podiums to be a fish and Abby Arnold Bob handle Bob Campbell rather and Mark Beauchamp. Happy Bob and Mark. Have you have the floor? >> Good Evening Council. I am representing Santa Rosa Yimby. We have over 450 members here in Santa Rosa. >> And we voted at our last meeting to support the Trans a a the transaction and use tax measure during our discussion. We aligned behind the tax measure for 3 reasons. First we want to curtail or prevent any cuts to public health and safety, which would hurt everybody in our community such as having to cut back in close fired fire stations.

Secondly, we are very supportive of the ability of this tax, too deal with some of the deferred maintenance to our streets such street, Major street repair and pedestrian repair that make our streets safe for all of us as we go through our days here in Santa Rosa, particularly in the downtown area, which is where so much of our sales tax revenue is generated. And thirdly, we feel that this can be an interim step saving saving money while we move toward some of the other revenue enhancement, property tax and enhancement opportunities that we MAY have with the steps forward that you all have taken in terms ups owning and allowing accessory dwelling units and other ways of boosting affordability. So that more housing can be created that will generate additional property tax revenue in the future outside of Prop 13. I

am. I remember one Prop 13 was passed and I never thought I would be dealing with it at this point in my life. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Abbi. Thank you. Santa Rosa Yimby. >> my >> name is Bob Gamble am here tonight representing the city's community Budget Advisory Committee. We strongly support moving the sales tax measure before you tonight forward for voter consideration. We reported last year by the city manager to assist in the analysis of budget alternatives, focused on creating fiscal sustainability for the city. Our members have substantial experience in both public and private finance. The city is highly dependent on sales tax. Much more so than other cities of similar size. While important to further diversify the city's revenues in the future. In the short term, it

is essential to maximize sales tax revenues. We have spent the last year working with city staff to get clear understanding of the city's financial position and how that MAY change going forward. It has become clear was that the city's current financial position is extremely difficult and will become more. So unless a number of changes are made quite simply the cost to maintain current levels of service is outstripping growth in revenues without significant change. The city will be forced to make increasingly draconian cuts to services, including police and fire. These cuts will not be small. They will affect the everyday lives of our residents. This problem requires multiple solutions. The approval of the sales tax increase before you tonight as one of the most foundational of the solutions. This measure will provide a

financial bridge until other solutions can be undertaken. Again, we strongly support the measure. We urge the council to moving forward tonight and to support it with enthusiasm as it is considered by the voters. Thank you. Thank you, Bob. >> All right, Mark Roger Roberts, rather and doing to it. >> Hello, everybody. My name is Mark Beauchamp. I am a business agent with the operating engineers. Local 3 also delegate on the North Bay Labor Council. I represent units 3, 13 16 votes that maintenance mechanics and the U.S. Owes. We're here in support of the tax measure. We're going to be all hands on deck. Not saying that generally. I'll be one of the many that will be making the phone calls knocking on doors. We're going to do everything we can to keep this past. I want to show appreciation.

I've represented throughout the Bay area came up to the North Bay and this is one of the first times I've seen we're facing a real issue and labor was brought early on. Not just to be part of consolation, but to be part of the solution. And garnered nothing but respect. We heard we went through all the possible scenarios. I want to thank Scott Jason, Siegel be over there. We MAY not agree on issues from here, you know, time to time. But there's a mutual respect that's been building and mutual trust. We're all hands on deck. And we're gonna do everything we can to support this and get this passed. >> Mark, thank you for that. Sarah Wayne. >> Hi, Sarah Roberts from Teamsters. A 5, 6, former city employee actually Teamsters 8 by 6 supports measure as it supports. Teams are positions that keep the city maintained

safe and enjoyable for its residents. I represent 532 members who are not sworn personnel, but they do fulfill many of the task. The public interfaces with on a daily basis such as permits for building special event planning use of recreation services and calling for street lights being out. Water leaks, water service issues among many others. And I'm here to say that we will support this tax measure and we asked the council to support it and the public to support its own supports our members. Thank you, Sarah. Thank you very much, MR. Do it. >> Like to use the overhead, please. Hello. My name is Dwayne Do with it. I'm from Roseland. This is a current listing of the cities. >> Salaries. >> And with that, I wanted to point out that the city has

currently 80 job categories that started the six-figure number. >> Over $100,000. And there's others who have gone higher. The reason I bring that up is because if you notice in life, sales taxes are regressive. They heard those who are low income, the most. It's basically a situation where the poor they carry more of the bird. The dilemma that you face is you've had knowledge that these problems we're going to occur for many years. And I appreciate all the hard work on these people who've come today and your people who support you. But out of the >> 180,000 residents of the city. 2400. Survey responses that comes to about 1.5% of the residents were able to chime in on that. These different meetings you had. I asked around and no one from the Sonoma County Taxpayers Association. Was invited to anything. No one who could

speak for the poor was invited to anything to look at how they're going to be affected by sales tax. Read the press Democrat letters to the editor. Just don't talk to your Echo chamber, folks. There's a lot of people writing in saying they don't support this situation. I personally have to point out that as a sales tax, it will affect low-income people like me. Thank you to Wayne, MR. Report >> Yeah, thank you, Council. Good evening, Stephen. Santa Rosa Fire fighters local 14 0, felt it was important to come here and publicly support this tax measure. We've had a lot of difficult discussions over the last couple years with everybody from council and staff about. Where the city's But I can confidently say we've made all the cuts we can without drastically impacting the services of the city. Be very. Scared to come back next

fiscal year with the cuts. We have to make the cuts that the chief would have to put on the table and the council would have to decide on which districts aren't worth covering. At that point, we would lose a fire station. We would lose people. And with that already being bare bones as we are, it would. But people at risk. It's very concerning. And that's why we're in full support of this tax measure as well. We'll do everything we can to get it passed will work with the city as much as we can. And like I said, I appreciate the work that's been done so far to get us to this point to make the cut so that we could bring it to the public with in good conscience that we're not asking for something without really needing it. So just want to come up again, like I said, very much support this will do what we can to get behind it and pass it

hopefully we get there. So thank you very much. >> Stephen, thank you. Thank you. Firefighters 14. 0, 1, Our is anybody else here in chamber wishing to make what was comment. Seeing none. I'm going repeat The Imitation Online. If you are on zoom who wish to raise your hand or press star 9 to let us know you wish to make comment online. Please do so. Now and I'll Lauren issue seeing anybody online who wishes to speak. >> That a negative mayor, no hands. >> No hands on line. And we will close public comment and bring it back to the bring back to Council for any final comment. Let's let's let's have a motion, if you would think about their comments. I mean, we have 2 motions. Is that correct? Rogers? Yeah. >> I did want to say really quickly. I understand that this MAY be

>> burden on people that are lower socioeconomic. But I would also like to say >> that I had the opportunity of doing a ride-along. >> With police last week, I believe it was and many of the calls that I received were from low income housing complexes. And so whether you're rich or you're poor. >> When you call 9-1-1, when you need an emergency. When there's an emergency, when you've been violated regardless how you've been violated. If that someone coming in your house uninvited. >> Whether that's by domestic partner, whatever the case. >> You want a response and you want to in a timely manner and you want it taken care of because that helps us to feel safe. >> In the city that we call home and that helps people that come visit us that also bring tax dollars to feel safe

in the city that we call home. I know there's some controversy and I know that we we do pay are and I hope we pay our employees because we want them to stay here because they have expertise because they, in fact, run the city and they do a very, very good job at what they do. So we want them to be here and we want to retain them. We want them to stay here. We don't want this to be a ground for for training. So all of the staff in the audience and for those that are listening, we appreciate you. We want to keep you here. We do want to pay you a living wage because we feel like you should be able to live. You should be able to thrive and you should be able to take a vacation on the days that you get office should not I don't have money to take a vacation. It's a staycation. So those are things that we've all been working on. And if that means

that we need to propose this and bring this to the voters to make the decision and I am supporting it wholeheartedly so we need to do to make Santa Rosa and to keep Santa Rosa where we want it to be. So I'll give up my soap box. But that that kind of read me the wrong way with the. One of the comments that was made. I like to make a motion to introduce an ordinance entitled Ordinance of the City of Santa Rosa. Amending title 3 chapter 3 Dash 30 the Santa Rosa Municipal code to adjust and extend the city's twenty-twenty transactions and use general tax. And we further >> all right. We have a motion to have a second by MISS MacDonald. Any final discussion? MADAM City clerk, if you can call the vote. >> Thank you. Mayor Councilmember Rogers, I Councilmember Macdonald, I councilmember Fleming

Councilmember Ben, most yes, Councilmember Alvarez is absent. Vice Kiki, I mayor Stapp yes. Let the record show this passes. 6 affirmative votes. Thank you. I'd also like to make a motion for a resolution of this. The Council of the City of Santa Rosa calling and municipal election on NOVEMBER. 3rd, 2026 to submit a measure. >> To the registered voters of the city on the reauthorization of a general sales tax and requesting a consolidation of such election with other elections being held on the same date as amended by staff and wait for the ring. Second. >> We have a motion in a second to give MR. Donald. Any final discussion. MADAM City clerk call the vote. >> Thank you, Mayor Councilmember Rogers, I Councilmember Macdonald, I councilmember Fleming Councilmember Ben Willows. Yes,

Councilmember Alvarez is absent. Vice Crappie, mayor staff. Yes. Let the record show this past the 6 affirmative votes. >> Thank you very much. I think us would. MISTER Wagner again, this has been a long journey and it's not over yet. But thank you for getting us to this point. Thank you to all the commuters that came tonight to speak. We really appreciate the fact that we're words to support fact you're leaning in. We're gonna be talking more in the months to come. Please do talk to do do talk to your friends, neighbors and fellow members. And with that will be this item behind. But again, thank you. Thank you for all the work they've done on this. All right, folks, we're going to go back a little bit, too. I believe it is item 9. Kind of anti-climactic at this point. We're gonna go back to our city manager and city

attorneys reports MADAM City manager. I'm Excuse me, Jason, our city manager. I am as as it so happens while we're talking about this item. And as Jason was mentioning, Lori Ann Farrell, our our previous city manager, Lori and texted me, she's hanging out with Karen Bass down and not realizing what we're doing right now. So that's I had Lori on my mind. Jason, please, if you have a report. Hey, thank you, Mayor. I do have fairly brief report. We're excited to share that. The latest block blast from our Neighborhood Services program will be available the afternoon in the afternoon this Thursday, JULY 30th. >> In it, you'll find a variety of low-cost and free activities for underserved youth and families in Santa Rosa, the recreation and parks in the violence Prevention partnership. We offer programs that help strengthen our

community by giving young people safe and fun places to learn, play and grow. If your family qualifies, you can sign up for after-school sports after-school sports and recreation programs and events. These activities are designed to support families to help our kids thrive. Visit our city Dot org forward Slash neighborhood services to learn more and view the block blast. Registration opens at 07:00am on Thursday, JULY 30th for programs in the fall and winter Activity Guide from Santa Rosa Recreation Parks. What do you want to stay active? Learn a new skill. Spend time family or connect with your community. The guide is packed with programs and activities for all ages and is available in English and Spanish. Is that ice? Our city Dot org forward slash register or call 7, 7, 5, 4, 3, 3, 7, 3, 7, The city has released project Maps and daily work

schedules for this year's pavement, preventative maintenance project which will treat approximately 14 miles of streets in the Bennett Valley area of Southeast Santa Rosa. Residents can now view maps find their streets and stand about upcoming work in their neighborhoods. This annual maintenance helps extend the life of our roadways and is one of the most cost effective ways to preserve the condition of our streets for years to come. So see application is expected to take place between AUGUST 24th and SEPTEMBER. The 3rd to few view, the maps and schedules visit sr City Dot org, slash slurry seal. And lastly, construction is scheduled to begin later this week on the full road sewer maintenance replacement project between West 3rd and Santa Rosa Creek. The project will replace approximately 650 feet of aging sewer infrastructure to

improve system, reliability and help protect Santa Rosa Creek from potential impacts associated with deteriorating sewer facilities during construction. One southbound lane of Fulton Road will be closed traffic controls in place. And the work is expected to be completed in DECEMBER of this year for additional information on this critical infrastructure project. Visit sr City dot org. Some forward slash Fulton Road sewer main and mayor, that's all of my reports for today. Thank you very much that city attorney. >> Thank you, Mayor. I have a report on settlements and active litigation I have one case to report which is a federal civil rights matter. That was adjudicated by way of civil judgment and plaintiffs favor. The matter is John Paul Johnson versus City of Santa Rosa, which was filed in MAY 2023 and asserted 6 claims

against the city and for individual srpd officers relating to an elbow injury. Plaintiffs sustained during a lawful arrest in MARCH of 2022. 2 of those officers as well to as well as 2 of the plaintiff's claims were dismissed in their entirety before trial in JANUARY 2026. The case proceeded to trial on the balance of plaintiffs claims at the trial. The plaintiff's out 400,000 to $700,000 in general damages and unspecified amount in punitive damages. The jury returned verdict, clearing one officer as to the other officer. The jury assigned partial liability but found no intentional, reckless or malicious conduct on the part of the officer, the jury awarded plan of $10,000 in general damages and no punitive damages. Following now coming trial, the plaintiff's side attorneys fees and costs totaling

approximately $357,000 on the basis provided by the city's opposition. The court awarded approximately $113,000 in fees and costs. I also have a report on ongoing litigation as of JULY, 7th 2026 are active. Caseload was 34 litigation matters. Trial dates assigned to approximately 20% of the trial court level matters. 5 cases are currently on appeal following rulings in favor of the city at the trial court level. We have the litigation log attached to the agenda materials. And I want to thank my team for all of ongoing and wonderful work and several of them are here this evening. And if you do have any questions of the litigation team as PRESIDENT, thank you. >> Thank you very much. I will open up to public comment. If you're online, please do raise your hand or press star 9. If you're in chamber, make your way to the to the podiums to

wane. The clock. The most important thing. My name is doing to it. I'm from Roseland and I appreciate the 2 reports is given both by the interim city manager and the city attorney. It's always good to hear that we're having pavement preservation program activity. People in Roseland have been concerned about how the 6 million dollars the county directed towards the city for pavement activity. How's that been going? We need to get a final report on that because it's been 9 years since the annexation as we get to 10 years. We'd like to hear what got fixed because I wrote still look pretty bad out there. I really want to thank the city attorney for that nice discussion about the case with John Paul Johnson person. I've never met like to congratulate you for being able to negotiate the legal fees down from what they were

to a 3rd of that and save the city money. There and also point out that it's a good thing. You've got a legal team that's keep being those legal beagles. Keep saving that money. Every chance you can everywhere you can. And you know, if you ever heard of a military thing called the judge advocate general the way they work. It is no matter how few staff they have. They take on what they have to do. It's one of those things where you don't get a replacement. Until somebody farther up. The food chain says, ok, somebody is going to get assigned to that law group. So your law group MAY not be able to grow. Ask them all to just do really well kicking that plaintiffs, but to make sure we don't have to spend extra dough. I really thank you on that. Thank you, MR. Do it. Is there anybody else in chambers wishes to speak? >> Seeing none. MADAM Zuma,

host, anybody online. Lauren, is there other hand raise on zoom? Mayor? Mc no one on zoom with their hands raised, know what do with her hand raised, ok, we'll close public comment. Then and we will move on to item. 10 statements of abstention are accused of what council members, any statements of abstention or recuse of this evening. I suppose that's and that's a good point. Yeah, that was we that ship has sailed. Yeah. Who assume the answers now? Mayor and Councilmembers reports of any reports this evening. All right, MISTER Donald kick us off. >> Yes, it is going to do a brief report. I had the opportunity to go on the 11th annual oyster rent out today. Give a and that was an event that was done by kind of style motorcycle There was over 300 motorcycles that got to participate. We went out to to and the event ended and oil

park and it was a really great family event with barbecue and lots of fun activities for kids and adults to be to participate in. And I just want to say thank you to them for their inclusiveness. And I appreciated the opportunity. We part of such a fun event. So things to the Chicano style motorcycle club for that opportunity. Thank >> MR. Creepy. Do you have anything? >> The only I had I want to report was I was able to attend on the 22nd the North Bay Division. General membership meeting for the California League of Cities PRESIDENT Riders presided over it and we were able to seeing awesome presentation from one of stars of today, our cfo Scott Wagner presented his strategy for how he addressed the Calpers unfunded liability various others responded to the North Bay did a great job in doing so. Thank you. I said

a few quick items. We did have the Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Association legislative meeting a week ago. >> When we went through pursed very pending legislation at the state level, nothing that jumps off the page. The general seem was loss of local control and more unfunded mandates for cities. That is the general update. There's also a 0 waste board meeting and then the the big item there was an update on the hazardous waste facility that's being built built in Windsor. And then I did have a chance to participate in the Santa Rosa Rural Cemetery cleanup day last last Saturday. They have such great volunteers there that keep that said, the muck that cemetery, a remarkable park. We have members of our parks and rec crew here earlier and they being showered with praise by volunteers of the

work of the city is done in the Santa Rosa Rural Cemetery. So thank you to all the team members that participated there and then also the Santa Rosa Rural Cemetery. Volunteers didn't did ask that the city. Remember Jim Butler, who passed away this month, he was part of what's known as the Tombstone Trio, which is a really dedicated a segment volunteers that are just at the park every week. Jim also volunteered at the Prince Memorial Greenway. So it just a regular both at the cemetery and the Greenway sadly passed away in JULY. He is survived by his wife Robin. And on behalf of the city. We thank Jim and Robin for all the work they did at at those parks and for the city in general. Thank you, Jim. Any public comment on any of the reports? Are MISS Roger? Sorry. >> sorry really quick. So I did want to give a shout out to cfo Wagner and thank him

for giving the presentation. I know he just slipped out, but he said, Lynette, we asked him to do it. That that part brought him joy. And so I really wanted to thank him doing that. And 16th that were able to the Tenet who are of the geysers with water staff Calpine staff gave us a tour. So that was really great on the 17th to have the opportunity to do a ride-along with Officer Riley, Howard Srpd. I wanted to thank him for providing an informative, exciting and at times humorous right along and on the 20th, I was able to hang out with part maintenance. I clean town to clean a fountain. I trend in hull broken branches off the Prince Memorial Greenway. I removed a sectional couch off the Greenway. I don't even know how they got it on the Greenway, but probably the same way we removed it off the Greenway >> and what I cleaned up

trash. I got to scrub graffiti. I dislike. >> For graffiti, I use always go. Oh, it's art. I have a very strong dislike for graffiti now that doesn't belong in places and and >> I was so lucky. I got to clean 2 bathrooms. >> So that was great. But it also gave me an appreciation for not only what I do, but for what my fellow council members do, because I know that we're all in different parts maybe we don't all attend the same. >> Events and activities. But people ask us like, what does it mean to be on council? And I think that we are a great example. What it means to be on council and how we stand up here and we make decisions. But we're also in the community and we're doing the hard work. And if we ask our staff to do it, we get out there and we do it, too. So I couldn't sit with a better

council, but thank you to John who is a senior maintenance worker, parts maintenance for allowing me to do the right along. >> With him. >> also since I MISS The gym that day to allow me to do some heavy lifting. So he really did allow me to lift very heavy branches and pulled in down the Greenway. So I am thankful for that. But it was I was very tired when I went home. And thank you to Victor for providing insight about his job why he. Came here from run at Park, which is great why he made the decision to come work for our city. So that definitely warm my heart allowed me to know that we are doing right. And we're headed in the right direction. So that concludes my report. Thank you, Thank you. And thank you for your mom tonight. By the way. >> want read it and skip you. >> Momma, thank you for

sitting during the whole meeting. I thought I was going to have to get to Thank you for sitting >> Welcome. Bringing my mom next week as part of a bring it, bring your bring your parents. The council tradition are starting here. Alright, any now we go to public comment. Any any member of the public wish to comment on any of those reports? Seeing none. We'll close have to go online MADAM Zuma, host has anybody raise their hands on line? If you are online, raise your hand or press star 9. Any online comment. No hands. Mayor Lauren, thank you very much. All right. We're going move on then to our board commission and committee appointments Item 2011.1 are appointment to fill a vacancy on the design review and preservation board. We've received one Vincenzo Cigna. Ready to review for position of archaeologist,

architectural historian or historian. I'm going to call for public comment at this time. Would any members of the public like to comment on this item? And again, if you're on zoom, raise your hand or press star 9. Seeing no members of the public in chambers and wish to comment all go to Lauren. Lauren, is anybody raising their hand online? Still? No mayor. Still no. Still no hands online, ok, we'll close public comment outlook to MISS Been we lows for a motion to appoint MR. Ready to the board. Thank you, Mayor. >> I moved to a point intense auzenne ready to review for >> Archaeologists architectural historian or story in position on the design review in Preservation Board. Second. >> We have a motion. We have a second by MISS Rogers. Any final comment? MADAM City clerk will call the vote.

>> Councilmember Rogers, I Councilmember Macdonald, I councilmember Fleming. Councilmember Ben Willows. Yes, Councilmember Alvarez is absent. Vice Kentucky. Air step yes. Let the record show this passes. 6 affirmative votes. >> Thank you very much. One item, 12.1, our approval of minutes. There any edits to the minutes? Is there any public comment on the minutes either from in chamber or online? Seeing no public comment in Chambers? Lauren, any public comment online now. Hans Mayor? Alright, we'll close public comment and we will prove the minutes as submitted. Which brings us to consent item 13. We have items, 13.1 through 13.6. Are there any questions or an unease items? I'm gonna question one if I MR. Hennessy Storm Ana to bring in. If he's not here, I'm not going to get the deal of this. Thank you.

Dan. If you all all I'm requesting for item 13.1, our resolution for the snow, Woodland Trust donation. Could you just talk again about what the land trust in what private land 3 has done for the city in general and for the Southeast Greenway Project in particular. >> Boy, trying to keep this 2, 60nd have maybe even just the dollar amount. Just this is the scale of the philanthropy. $750,000 contribution through the land trust from private donors to make this master planning effort possible. In addition to all the support that they've given to the stewards of the land, help with the transfer to the city to make this a park and continued commitments. They've got donors lined up and ready when we understand what we want to build to help us do it. So this is going to be a long partnership and we're very grateful for their

efforts. Indeed. How and how much time did this saved the city and the community because of the way because of plan tree. They brought to the table at least a just giving us kick started faster. >> Advancing the entire process more quickly in again, just very appreciative for their efforts and their generosity. >> All right. And revert, are you the only only member tonight? You want to show your t-shirt? There we go. Thank you to all of our Greenway volunteers. Thanks for coming out tonight. That was my only question. Thank Thank you. Thank you to all the volunteers and thank you, Alright, are there any other and any other questions on the on the consent items? Been with us. Since >> Since we are asking questions, I was wondering about 13.6 and I just wondered, do I see I think

Megan is still here and wonder if if if you would mind just talking about it a little bit for really, for the purposes of the public. And anyone else who's involved. Thank you. Good Evening Council and thank you very With me is Rebecca Lane program specialist. And she is handling this application and we'll give you a brief overview. >> Thank you very much, Councilmember, Ben Willows for your question. The Care toss Phase 2, a is the final stage of the entire care task of Village Development, which council is likely familiar with. So the final building is another 64 unit apartment dedicated to people experiencing homelessness. And we are hoping to receive home keep port from that state, home We do have other home key projects here in the city and home key plus is a slightly revised funding source with largely the same target

population. So we'll submitting an application to the state for up to 30 million dollars to support the protest. Phase 2. So this particular project was already slated to happen eventually write anything remember. It was like the next the final phase, like you said. So >> the place the >> application that you're submitting is that's the new part right now is that you're finally moving forward with it. Correct? At and that will be in addition to other funding sources that that will be the first major infusion. If if the application is successful. And should be the catalyst to the final funding as well. I'm sorry. And the clientele that it's going to sir, that was the clientele that was always slated to be served. Is that correct? Correct. There is in the home he press there's a veterans population. So we'll have

planning on putting 10 units for veterans in this part of the project. And if I can just add on to that is that Burbank housing has been pursuing funding opportunities. Census Project was initially approved. >> believe in 2019 or 20. So this is the latest iteration iteration of funding that they are pursuing in order to complete this project. And the Housing Authority has committed several million dollars to help advance this project as well. Great. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Alright, we'll prep to public comment and we bit of a lineup here. I'm Abby Dwayne Gregory. And if other members of the public wish to speak, just make your way to a podium. If you're online, raise your hand online or press star 9. >> Have go at Good evening. Once again, Abbie Arnold representing Santa Rosa Yimby.

Yes, in my backyard. We are very enthusiastic about this project. Very grateful to the city for being a partner with Burbank housing, to bring some of the state money that's been generated back to Santa Rosa and creating homes for some of the most needed needy people in our community moving some of them from homelessness into permanent housing. So thank you for considering this. >> Thank you, Abbi. Dwayne. Clocks, the most important thing in meetings. >> All right. My name is doing to it. I'm from Roseland. Congratulations for the New Street like that will come at 13.3. Also, congratulations for the solicitation of the funds that came for the Sonoma Land Trust donation to the Southeast Greenway. Congratulations for Kara Toss for this project that will be moving forward and will be helping people, especially 10 veterans. I would like to add

a couple of things here right now that you folks could do to be even more helpful to our community. It's been projected that this will be a very wet winter. We MAY have what's called the El Nino. We MAY have even more suffering by the people that are out there. Who need a place to be. And that one vacant lot at the carriage situation. That could be a spot for them to stay in some sort of the shelter that could be tense out there. There could be something to help those people instead of having them play on the cement under the overpasses during the heavy rains that are going to occur. This is really important. Not a laughing matter. It's the kind of thing where actually people are going to be suffering this winter and that land that's vacant at the carriage site could be utilized. Go look at it. It's a nice city block size. It's the kind of thing

that you could solicit them to do more. They don't listen to the homeless that much. They just go and try to get funds to help them. And then on this last one, 13.4, the solicitation of the Sonoma Land Trust. This would be something that could happen in other areas of the city. They basically have some funds. And so there's a Sonoma County Foundation. If you folks would reach out and say, hey, these well to organizations, they could help some of the smaller projects we've been trying for decades to get more help at the Roseland Creek Project. Anybody that we asked for help, they couldn't do it, but they would always come back and ask for us to make a donation to their group. Never helped us a bit but always ask for money from us. So listen them to help Roseland. Thank you. Thank you. To Wayne Gregory. Mayor, Stapp and members of the City Council.

My name is Gregory Ferrand. >> Yesterday my colleagues and I your housing authority authorize the extension and subordination of long-term loans made on your behalf to allow community providers of low-cost housing to continue or transfer program operations for properties in Santa Rosa used to house on us to sick and homeless individuals and families. It was particularly Santa saying to me because I headed the agency's when the loans were first initiated. But much has changed in American. For those of us dedicated to providing low-cost housing, rental prices for nonprofit, housing are dependent on the cost of loans. We need to take to build a housing, the fewer and cheaper are loans. The lower the rents can be in. The more we can put a into maintenance. Yesterday's actions by the Housing Authority insured you'll have 30 more years of

low rents and healthy facilities, housing bill with state grants which don't require repayment as an agenda item. 13.6 allow us to provide homes for even the lowest individuals. But it takes more than a facility to ease someone back inside whose life has been destroyed by the streets. Karen is phase 2 is intended veterans, chronic homeless and those at risk of homelessness and those but no expectation of success can ever be counted on unless the addition of mental health and substance use disorder services are provided over the past 40 years. I can tell you that nothing more has been nothing clear has been made. The application you're considering approving to Nate. He needs more than California home key funding. It needs mental health and substance use disorder from the county and the state to ensure that it will be successful.

>> Thank you, Gregory anybody else in council chambers wishing to speak. Please go ahead. >> Good Evening, Council members. My name is Jocelyn Lynn. I'm the chief real estate development officer for Burbank Housing. And I want to thank you for your support of our care toss phase 2 project. And I want to address an earlier care toss. Phase 2 is the final phase of this care costs. Redevelopment site in downtown Santa Rosa and care toss to phase 2 will be a replica of phase one that was already built and completed in 2023. And as we originally intended, this phase 2 will for permanent supportive housing and the difference here now with the home program is that we will add 10 additional homeless veterans units. So that's the only difference from the prior origination of what we're thinking for this project. And

I do want to say that this project is a collaboration with many partners. So we're obviously partnering with the city for funding. But we're also partnering with the county specifically County behavioral Mel Behavioral health. So we will be coordinating with them and we be looking at possible operating subsidies from them as well as services. The service provider for this project will be Catholic Charities who we partnered with previously in phase one and they will stay as the lead service provider and they will be providing case management to address substance abuse and mental health. So those services will be provided on this project. So I just want thank you again for your support and I'm available to answer any further questions. Thank you. Jocelyn, thanks to both you in Burbank for >> Go back the item about the

Sonoma Land Trust and the missing pressure and that they are will to do organization. There's a lot of money that is passing through their hands. It's true, but it's only because they worked very hard to seek out grant funding and because they're a nonprofit, anyone who's donates to any of their projects. That money is tax deductible in an otherwise would not be. And I can tell you, as you mentioned, they saved the city. A lot of money in the acquisition of the Green which I care very deeply about. That will continue because they're going to continue even though they can't be are. Fiscal agent anymore. They're going to help us form our own nonprofit. So additional monies that are donated for the planning and development of this. Absolutely gorgeous parked. Will be tax deductible to the donors. That's that's going mean a lot more money and

would otherwise be available to us. Thank you very much. >> Who says nothing ever happens during a consent calendar. This was this is a lively discussion. All right. We have items, 13.1 through 13.6 vice Ocean. I'll move items. 13.1 through submitted by staff. Second. All right. We have a motion a second by MISS Rogers, MADAM City clerk, you can call wait before you that. I didn't check for online comment. Please tell me somebody online wanted to make comment on the consent calendar as well. I can't do that. Mayor. No Thank you. Thank you. Alright, MADAM City clerk call about. Thank you, Mayor. >> act Councilmember Rogers, I Councilmember Macdonald, I councilmember Fleming Councilmember Ben Willows. Yes, Councilmember Alvarez is absent. Vice Mayor Cookie. Councilmember Mayor Stapp yes. Let the record show this past

the 6 affirmative votes. >> All right. We're almost on that. We have one more public comment non agenda matters. So if you did not get a chance to speak earlier on any is not listed agenda, this is your time either in person or online, make your way to the podium or raise your hand online. Seeing none in chamber. Lauren, how about online? >> Our street remains mayor. No >> Thank you or on our I we've got a few support letters that are listed. Otherwise we are adjourned. Thank you, everyone.