Apr 23, 2026 Budget & Finance Commission

[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

[00:00:02]

LET'S STAND AND SALUTE THE FLAG. READY? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ITEM D. APPROVING THE ORDER OF AGENDA. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDER OF AGENDA?

[D. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]

BLUE FOLDER ITEMS. THERE WERE NO BLUE FOLDER ITEMS, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.

NO BLUE FOLDER ITEMS THIS TIME. OKAY. AND THE CONSENT CALENDAR?

[F. CONSENT CALENDAR]

MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE. I'LL ABSTAIN SINCE I WASN'T IN HERE. OKAY.

NO EXCLUDED CONSENT ITEMS. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS.

[H. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS]

THERE HAVE BEEN SURVEYS OF NORTH REDONDO RESIDENTS ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT IN THEIR COMMUNITY.

AND YESTERDAY AT THE NRB FARMERS MARKET, EVERYONE GOT TO SEE A LIVE DEMONSTRATION OF WHAT THEY WANT.

AND IT'S NOT ROOFTOP DINING. WHAT THE RESIDENTS OF NORTH REDONDO WANT, APPARENTLY, IS TO GET OUT ON A SUNNY DAY WITH THE SPOUSE.

THE KIDS AND THE DOG MINGLE WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS, MAYBE GET POPCORN, PIZZA OR ICE CREAM, HAVE A PLACE TO SIT AND CHAT OR STROLL AND CHAT SAFE FROM SPEEDING TRAFFIC ON THEIR ELBOW. MAYBE THE RESIDENTS OF NORTH REDONDO WANT MORE BUSINESSES THAT INVOLVE COMMUNITY EVENTS CENTERED ON FAMILIES AND COUPLES.

WHEN I GO TO COMMUNITY MEETINGS, I DON'T SEE THE PEOPLE THAT I SAW YESTERDAY.

I SEE PEOPLE WHO ALWAYS GO TO THOSE MEETINGS, USUALLY OLDER, USUALLY COMPLAINING ABOUT E-BIKES AND HOMELESSNESS.

IT'S LIKE A WHOLE OTHER COMMUNITY. ARE THESE PEOPLE WHO WANT ROOF? ARE THESE THE PEOPLE WHO WANT ROOFTOP DINING? IS THIS WHAT THE COUNCIL PEOPLE ARE LISTENING TO? HAS IT OCCURRED TO THE CITY GOVERNMENT THAT CONCERNING, CONCERNING NORTH REDONDO DEVELOPMENT.

THEY'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE MAJORITY, BUT LISTENING TO A MINORITY.

THIS MAY NOT SOUND LIKE A BUDGET AND FINANCE TOPIC, BUT IT REALLY IS BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE WHO CAN'T FIND WHAT THEY WANT IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE TAKING THEIR MONEY AND THEIR BUSINESS TO MANHATTAN VILLAGE, DEL AMO MALL, HERMOSA, MANHATTAN AND FARTHER.

SOME OF THE RECENT MEASURES, LIKE ELIMINATING PARKING REQUIREMENTS, ARE GOOD.

ASSUMING THE STRATEGIC PLAN DRIVES THE BUDGET, HERE'S WHAT I SEE FOR ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

THE AREA'S CONTRACT IS THE INPUT BASIS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WHAT IS ITS STATUS? IT HAS PROVED APPROVED JANUARY 1ST.

THERE'S BEEN NO PUBLIC UPDATE. WHEN WILL THE FAR VOTE BE TAKEN? WILL THE LEBASSE PLAN, SPECIFIC PROCUREMENT PLAN AND PLACEMENTS MEET THE BUDGET TIMELINE? EXPLAIN HOW ROOFTOP DINING IS CRUCIAL TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

SEEMS LIKE A NICE TO HAVE. NOTHING IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN ABOUT WALKABILITY, REDUCING THE TRAFFIC SPEEDS, PROVIDING REAL PUBLIC SPACES. AACAP HAS BEEN APPROVED SINCE 2019, AND WHAT HAS BEEN DONE? NOTHING ABOUT THE GALLERIA PROPERTY IS IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

IS THERE A BUDGET PROVISION NEEDED TO GET THAT OFF THE GROUND? SO I ASKED THE COMMISSION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY TAKE A LOOK IN THE BUDGET ABOUT WHAT THE PEOPLE OF NORTH REDONDO REALLY WANT.

THANK YOU. OKAY, THANKS.

AND NO ZOOM COMMENTS OR NO ONE ONLINE. OKAY. NO ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS AGENDA. ITEM J. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION.

[J. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION]

[00:05:07]

HOW ARE WE DOING? GOOD. HOW ARE YOU? GOOD. HAPPY TO BE HERE.

MIKE WITZANSKY CITY MANAGER. ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO BE BEFORE YOU.

JUST AS A REMINDER OF SEQUENCING, TONIGHT IS MORE THE LISTENING SESSION SIDE OF THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR ME.

CHANCE FOR YOU ALL TO PROVIDE EARLY INPUT IN THAT BUDGET DOCUMENT AS WE ARE WORKING TO PREPARE IT AND ULTIMATELY DELIVER IT TO COUNCIL HERE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.

BUDGET WILL BE PRESENTED TO THEM THE WEEKEND OF KIND OF MAY 15TH, MAY 16TH, AND THEN THEY WILL RECEIVE A FORMAL RECEIVE AND FILE PRESENTATION ON DOCUMENT AT THEIR MAY 19TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

YOU WILL SEE AND RECEIVE A FORMAL PRESENTATION ON THE BUDGET FROM US AT YOUR LATE MAY MEETING, WHICH I THINK HAS EITHER BEEN SCHEDULED OR WILL BE SCHEDULED LATER THIS EVENING. SO THAT'S THE GENERAL TIME FRAME.

DON'T HAVE MUCH TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY IN THE WAY OF FORMALIZED REVENUE INPUTS OR EXPENDITURE CONCERNS, ETC. I CAN GIVE YOU KIND OF A GENERAL SENSE OF WHERE WE ARE, AND I CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF OUR, OUR BROADER GOALS, BUT THE DEPARTMENT DECISION PACKAGE REQUESTS, THE SORT OF FINAL REVENUE INPUTS ARE, ARE STILL BEING AMASSED AND WILL BE PROBABLY AVAILABLE HERE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO.

AS WE FINALIZE THE DOCUMENT. SO WE'RE IN THE THICK OF IT, BUT WE'RE NOT AT THE TAIL END OF IT YET, SO NOW'S THE CHANCE, AS I SAID, REALLY TO HEAR FROM YOU THINGS TO FOR THIS COMMISSION TO PUT TOP OF MIND ON STAFF SIDE AND HELP INFORM THAT PROCESS AND THAT BUDGET DEVELOPMENT. AND THE BOOK ITSELF.

SO ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE ME TO SHARE I'M HAPPY TO SHARE.

ANY GENERAL TOPICS YOU WANT TO COVER I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE Q&A ON.

IT'S REALLY FREE FOR ALL AT YOUR DISCRETION TO THE, TO THE POINT OF REVENUE AND EXPENSE.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR COMMENT THAT THAT'S STILL BEING DEVELOPED.

WHAT'S THE OBSERVATION SO FAR AS FAR AS REVENUE? AND DO YOU HAVE ANY MAJOR EXPENSE ITEMS THAT WOULD BE UNUSUAL OR IN SIZE OR SCOPE? GOOD QUESTION. I'D SAY MY GENERAL TAKEAWAY NOW AS WE AWAIT FINAL NUMBERS IS WE ARE PLANNING FOR ANOTHER SOFT YEAR IN THE TOT AREA FROM A REVENUE STANDPOINT. SO OUR TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE, WHICH WE HAVE BEEN HOPING NOW FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS TO SEE A SIGNIFICANT REBOUND I THINK LOOKS TO BE SOFT AGAIN, IT'LL BE BETTER THAN LAST YEAR.

I MEAN, AND WHEN I SAY LAST YEAR, THE 26-27 REVENUE ESTIMATE WILL BE HIGHER THAN THE 25-26 FISCAL YEAR NUMBERS WE ARE EXPERIENCING TODAY.

SO IT'S POSITIVE IN THAT SENSE, BUT IT'S NOT THAT TWO AND A HALF, $3 MILLION SNAPBACK STRUCTURALLY THAT WE WERE HOPING TO SEE.

TOO MUCH UNCERTAINTY IN THE INTERNATIONAL VISITOR MARKET.

TOO MANY CHALLENGES, I THINK JUST IN HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND LOCAL SPENDING OFFSET, I WILL SAY WITH ONE BRIGHT SPOT THE WORLD CUP ACTIVITIES THAT ARE OCCURRING IN THE REGION HERE IN JUNE SHOULD HELP PROVIDE SOME SPIKE, BUT THAT WILL LARGELY BE, I THINK, FOR THE 25-26 RETURNS RATHER THAN THE 26-27.

SO WE ARE, WE CONTINUE TO BE I WOULD SAY BEARISH IN THAT PARTICULAR CATEGORY, WHICH IS A DISAPPOINTMENT BECAUSE WE WERE HOPEFUL THAT THAT WOULD COME BACK AND WE WOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO REALLY SEE THAT STRUCTURAL RETURN THAT WILL FORCE US, I THINK, TO HAVE TO MAKE SOME TOUGH DECISIONS IN THE BUDGET.

I DON'T NECESSARILY EXPECT US TO NEED TO MAKE CUTS, BUT IT WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME IF I NEED TO RECOMMEND A FLEXIBLE HIRING FREEZE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF VACANCIES IN THE ORGANIZATION AND TO RELY, TO SOME DEGREE, ON THOSE SAVINGS TO STAY BALANCED THIS YEAR.

I AM COMMITTING. COMMITTED TO DOING OUR DARNDEST TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T DRAW FROM THE RESERVE ACCOUNT AGAIN THIS YEAR TO BALANCE THAT, WE'RE GOING INTO THIS TRYING TO PROVIDE A BALANCED BUDGET BY RELYING ON FUND BALANCE SAVINGS THAT WE SQUIRRELED AWAY A LITTLE BIT DURING THE MIDYEAR PROCESS, AND THEN BEING CREATIVE WITH SOME OF OUR SAVINGS STRATEGIES.

SO THAT'S OUR, OUR CURRENT APPROACH. I DO NOT WANT TO, IF WE CAN HELP IT DRAW AGAIN FROM THAT RESERVE.

RESERVE ACCOUNT THAT WE USED LAST YEAR. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THE CALPERS RESERVE ACCOUNT. YEAH. WE STILL HAVE $4.5 MILLION IN THERE.

I'M HOPING TO LEAVE $4.5 MILLION IN THERE THIS YEAR.

IN TERMS OF UNUSUAL EXPENDITURES, WE'RE SEEING SOME RELIEF ON OUR UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY PAYMENT STRUCTURE.

WE'VE KNOWN THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE ROUGHLY 4 PLUS MILLION DOLLAR PAYMENT THIS FISCAL YEAR.

AND I KNOW THIS COMMISSION HAS RECEIVED SOME PRESENTATION FROM OUR PERS REP ON THIS.

THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR SOME RELIEF ON THE IMMEDIATE HORIZON, PARTICULARLY IN THE MISCELLANEOUS CATEGORY OF OUR PERS COSTS.

[00:10:02]

BUT A LOT OF THAT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON HOW STRONG THIS THE MARKET FINISHES IN THE 25-26 FISCAL YEAR.

IF IT FINISHES STRONG. WE ACTUALLY MIGHT BE IN A REALLY GOOD PLACE ON A UAL BASIS IN THE VERY NEAR TERM.

IF IT, YOU KNOW, IF SOMETHING OCCURS NATIONALLY AND WE SEE IT WEAKEN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD SEE A, YOU KNOW, SOME RECOVERY NEEDED THERE. SO WE'RE, WE'RE CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC ON THAT FRONT.

BUT WE ARE LOOKING NOW AT THE UAL AS BEING SOMETHING WE'RE PLANNING FOR ON MORE OF A NEAR-TERM MID-TERM HORIZON THAN, SAY, BUILDING INTO OUR STRUCTURAL BUDGET, BECAUSE IT DOES APPEAR THAT IT'S GOING TO EBB FAIRLY SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS.

SO I THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE CONSTANTLY MONITORING, BUT I LOOK AT THAT, AS I WOULD CALL IT MORE.

I LOOK AT THAT THAT COST MORE HOPEFULLY THIS YEAR THAN I DID LAST YEAR AT THIS TIME.

SO BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, NOTHING SIGNIFICANTLY ATYPICAL.

WE STILL EXPECT STRONG PROPERTY TAX REVENUES.

THOSE HAVE CONTINUED TO HOLD STEADY FOR US. SALES TAX IS GOING TO REMAIN ROUGHLY FLAT AS WE'VE DISCUSSED.

THAT'S A SOFTER CATEGORY AS WELL. FOR US. OUR CHARGES FOR SERVICE ARE DOING QUITE WELL.

WE'VE INCREASED OUR PARKING REVENUE GATE WITH THE CHANGES WE'VE MADE DOWN IN THE WATERFRONT, WITH SOME OF THE INCREASES THAT WE'VE ATTACHED TO OUR METERS.

WE ARE SEEING GOOD RECOVERY THERE. WE'RE SEEING SOME SUCCESS WITH OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE FEE THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED THIS LAST YEAR.

WE'RE STARTING TO SEE THOSE REVENUES ACCRUE AS A NEW AS A NEW REVENUE SOURCE.

AND OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPATION FEES, AS WELL AS OUR SPECIAL EVENT CHARGES FOR DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES ARE ON THE RISE AS WELL.

SO WE'VE HAD SOME, SOME POSITIVE MOMENTUM THERE THAT'S HELPING, BUT IT ISN'T QUITE ENOUGH TO OVERCOME THAT TOT GAP THAT WE'RE STILL EXPERIENCING.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY IF I LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND I SAY, OKAY, WHAT'S OUR BIGGEST HOLE RIGHT NOW? REMAINS THAT TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX PROJECTION.

WHAT WAS OUR HIGH IN TOT CONTRIBUTION? YOU KNOW? HIGH. AND THIS GOES BACK NOW PRE-COVID WAS ALMOST $10 MILLION.

AND WE ARE, WE'RE AT $6,000,000 THIS YEAR? AND WE HOPE TO MAYBE BE SOMEWHERE CLOSE TO $8,000,000 NEXT YEAR MAYBE.

BUT REALISTICALLY, WITH TODAY'S, THE VALUE OF TODAY'S DOLLAR.

THAT NUMBER, IF WE'RE FULLY LOADED, SHOULD BE $11,000,000 OR MAYBE EVEN MORE WITH THE ED COMING ONLINE.

SO THERE'S A $3,000,000 $4,000,000 OR $5 MILLION DELTA.

YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE MISSING RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S REALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US NEEDING TO TAKE KIND OF SAVINGS ACTION VERSUS JUST BEING STRUCTURALLY BALANCED.

SPEAKING OF REVENUE INCREASES, WHERE DO WE STAND? WHERE DOES THE GALLERIA STAND AS FAR AS. ARE THEY STILL TRYING TO GET FINANCING TO? STUCK IN THE MUD. YOU KNOW, THEY WENT OUT TO BID HERE LAST YEAR.

THEY PUT IT ON THE MARKET. THEY WERE CONCLUDING THAT PROCESS INITIALLY IN KIND OF THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, 25 CALENDAR YEAR. WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS THEY WERE UNHAPPY WITH THE BIDS.

THEY'RE REASSESSING. THEY I'VE ALSO BEEN TOLD THEY MAY ACTUALLY CONSIDER TAKING ON A PARTNER IN BUILDING THE PROJECT AS ENTITLED THEMSELVES.

KENNEDY WILSON ISN'T THAT'S. THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY THEIR THOUGHT WHEN THEY STEPPED INTO THE NOTE.

BUT THAT'S WHAT I'VE HEARD. COULD BE THERE CURRENTLY.

I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO STUART IN A LITTLE WHILE ABOUT IT.

SO WE'RE AS EAGER AS ANYBODY TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE SITE.

THERE'S NOT WE HAVE PAVED THE WAY. IT'S A FULLY ENTITLED PROJECT.

WE HAVE NOT JUST THE INITIAL 300 UNITS THAT WERE APPROVED.

WE'VE NOW PROVIDED A SECONDARY ENTITLEMENT, INCREASING THAT NUMBER UP TO 650 UNITS.

SO THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR THEM TO BUILD HOUSES ON WHAT WOULD BE THE NORTHEAST CORNER AS WELL AS THE SOUTHWEST CORNER.

THEY HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO COME FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.

BUT TO YOUR POINT IT'S, IT'S THE RIGHT BUILDER AND THE RIGHT FINANCING.

AND THAT THAT CAPITAL MARKET'S BEEN A STRUGGLE FOR THEM.

CONSTRUCTION LENDING IS STILL QUITE HIGH. I'M SORRY.

YOU SAID YOU WENT FROM 300 UNITS TO HOW MANY? 650 TOTAL. THEY'RE ENTITLED FOR 650 RESIDENCES.

I MEAN, THERE IS NOTHING IN THEIR WAY. THE CITY HAS DONE EVERYTHING IT CAN TO INCENTIVIZE REDEVELOPMENT AT THAT SITE.

IT JUST TAKES OWNERSHIP AND CAPITAL. LOVE TO SEE IT.

I MEAN, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANOTHER HOLE IN THE BOAT. AND I THINK I'VE SHARED THIS WITH YOU ALL BEFORE. THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE GALLERIA WAS OUR SINGLE LARGEST SALES TAX DRIVER. IT ACCOUNTED FOR, I THINK, IN ITS PEAK, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 40% AND 60% OF OUR ANNUAL SALES TAX REVENUE.

THEY ARE NOW ACCOUNTING FOR LESS THAN 10% OF OUR SALES TAX REVENUE.

[00:15:03]

AND THE AES SITE IS STILL TIED UP. STILL TIED UP IN BANKRUPTCY AND SOME SOME ITERATION OF LITIGATION.

AND THAT APPEARS TO BE THE CASE FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. THERE WILL HAVE TO BE MOVEMENT HERE AT SOME POINT.

IT CAN'T BE INDEFINITE. MAYBE THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS WE'LL SEE SOMETHING SHAKE, BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S RIGHT WHERE WE LEFT IT.

REFERRING TO MR. MUELLER'S COMMENTS AT THE BEGINNING.

WHAT ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN NORTH REDONDO AND MIDDLE REDONDO? WHAT'S. WHAT ARE WE DOING THERE? YEAH. I MEAN, A LOT OF TIME AND ENERGY BEEN SPENT ON ARTESIA.

I MEAN, JIM MENTIONED THE, THE, AACAP DOCUMENT THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE NOW FOR A FEW YEARS.

WE HAVE TAKEN THE ACTIONS WE CAN TAKE ADMINISTRATIVELY TO MAKE THE CHANGES TO INCENTIVIZE REINVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTIES.

THE CHALLENGE WE FACE THERE IS LARGELY ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP.

A LOT OF OUR PROPERTY OWNERS ARE TRUSTS THAT DON'T LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO WHAT WE'VE HIRED AREAS TO DO, AND THEY'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THIS BECAUSE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BASICALLY DEVELOP THIS LIST, IS TO FIND OUT WHO THE DECISION MAKERS ARE ON EACH OF THESE PROPERTIES, NOT JUST WHO OWNS THE TRUST IN NAME, BUT WHO ULTIMATELY CAN MAKE DECISIONS. REACH OUT TO THEM.

EXPLAIN TO THEM THE NEW DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY THAT EXISTS AND WILL EXIST POTENTIALLY IN FURTHER, WHEN THE FLOOR AREA RATIO CAP DISCUSSION IS PRESENTED TO THE VOTERS, AND THAT WILL LIKELY BE THIS FALL.

IF WE TARGET THAT ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, WE'LL SAVE THE CITY SOME MONEY.

THERE'S A CHANCE WE DO A SPECIAL ELECTION BEFORE THAT.

BUT OUR ANTICIPATION IS THAT THE AACAP DEVELOPMENT INCREASES THAT NEED TO BE APPROVED THROUGH ARTICLE 27 PROCESS WILL HAPPEN IN THE SOMEWHERE IN THE SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER TIME FRAME. AND THAT'S GOING TO BE BIG.

THAT'S A THAT'S A BIG CHANGE. IF WE'RE ABLE TO INCREASE THE FLOOR AREA RATIO CAP FROM WHAT IS CURRENTLY 0.6 TO 1.5 IT WAS MENTIONED THAT WE'VE ELIMINATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S A BIG STEP. THAT'S A VERY BOLD MOVE FOR THE COUNCIL TO TRY TO, AGAIN, INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPMENT, GIVE THE DEVELOPERS FLEXIBILITY TO DO DIFFERENT THINGS ON THEIR PREMISES.

ONE OF THE BIG BARRIERS WE'VE HEARD AT THE COUNTER IS, IS THE IS MEETING THAT OLD PARKING STANDARD, WHICH WAS VERY MUCH MAIN STREET RETAIL ORIENTED, WHERE THE EXPECTATION IS EVERYBODY WOULD DRIVE IN THEIR CAR AND STOP AT THE STORE AND PICK UP THEIR GOOD AND THEN DRIVE HOME. THAT'S JUST NOT THE ENERGY WE WANT THERE.

THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED FEEL, REALLY. YOU DON'T WANT THAT.

YOU WANT PARKING IN THE REAR. YOU WANT STOREFRONTS ON THE FRONT.

YOU WANT TO CREATE VIBRANCY. AND THE FARMERS MARKET YESTERDAY WAS A REALLY GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT.

IT WAS A FABULOUS, FABULOUS DAY OUT THERE. A LOT OF FOLKS ROLLED THROUGH.

I MEAN, A LOT OF REALLY POSITIVE ENERGY. HOPEFULLY WE'LL SEE MORE OF THAT.

ARTESIA HAS GOTTEN MORE ATTENTION, I WOULD SAY FROM, FROM COUNCIL AND STAFF IN THE LAST TWO YEARS AND IT'S EVER HAD BEFORE.

IT'S REALLY A POINT OF FOCUS FOR US. IT JUST TAKES TIME TO BEAR FRUIT BECAUSE YOU NEED THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO COME WITH YOU.

AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE SEEING IT IN SOME SPOTS. YOU KNOW, WE ENTITLED THE GRUBHAUS PROJECT A YEAR AGO.

WE FAST TRACKED PERMITTING MONTHS AGO. IT'S BEEN FULLY PERMITTED.

IT'S READY TO BUILD. CAPITAL MARKET. I DON'T KNOW THE OWNERSHIP THAT STALLED.

A LOT IS HAPPENING IN THE, ON THE PRIVATE SIDE OF THE LEDGER THAT IS NOT BRINGING THESE THINGS FORWARD.

I, YOU KNOW, HISTORICALLY, I WOULD SAY WE WERE THE BARRIER FROM A REGULATORY STANDPOINT, THAT'S NOT THE CASE RIGHT NOW.

AND WE, I SHOULD, I HOPE TO SEE SOMETHING FROM AREAS HERE IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

I MEAN, I KNOW THEY'RE WORKING ON IT. WE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF AN UPDATE ABOUT A MONTH AGO.

IT'S STILL AN INCOMPLETE DRAFT. BUT THEY ARE THEY ARE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO IDENTIFY THE OWNERS, AND THEY'RE TRYING TO PAIR THEM WITH PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPERS WHO WOULD HAVE CONCEPTS THAT WOULD WORK ON THE BOULEVARD.

THAT'S KIND OF PART OF THEIR CHARGE IS TO CREATE THE INVENTORY AND THEN WITH THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE OF THE MARKET, TRY TO CREATE PARTNERSHIP. SO THE ISSUE THERE IS THAT THERE ARE PROPERTIES OWNED, ABSENTEE OWNERS WHO JUST AREN'T RESPONDING TO ANY ECONOMIC INCENTIVE TO, TO DEVELOP OR REDEVELOP.

THEY WOULD RATHER JUST COLLECT THE RENT CHECK FROM A KIND OF A LOW RENT OPERATOR AND NOT DEAL WITH THE TAX IMPLICATIONS OF REINVESTMENT OR SALE.

YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'VE GOT TRUST THAT RELEASE THE PROPERTY, SUDDENLY THEY'VE GOT CAP GAINS RESPONSIBILITIES.

YOU KNOW, THEY MAY NOT BE SUPER SAVVY IN THE DEVELOPMENT AREA.

SO THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE CAPITAL RESOURCE TO INVEST THEMSELVES. BUT IF THEY LET GO OF THE PROPERTY, THEY'VE LOST A SOURCE OF INCOME OR,

[00:20:04]

SO THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS WHERE, YOU KNOW, PROP 13 CAN KIND OF STYMIE REINVESTMENT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S JUST CHEAPER AND EASIER TO SIT ON A PROPERTY THAT'S IN A TIRED STATE THAN IT IS TO SEE IT SOLD AND REINVESTED IN.

SO WE'VE GOT A LOT OF TRUSTS THAT ARE IN PLAY ON ARTESIA.

YOU'VE GOT SECOND THIRD GENERATION OWNERSHIP UP THERE IN MANY AREAS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT? YES, SIR. WHERE ARE WE ON THE POLICE HEADQUARTERS AND FIRE STATIONS? THE BOND ISSUE. GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

IN FACT, WE SHORTLISTED OUR. WE'VE GOT IT IN TWO BUCKETS.

WE'VE GOT POLICE STATION REBUILD, ANNEX RENOVATION IN ONE CATEGORY.

WE'VE GOT FIRE STATION 1 AND 2, RECONSTRUCTION IN ANOTHER.

WE'VE SOLICITED PROPOSALS FROM PROSPECTIVE PROGRESSIVE DESIGN BUILDING CONTRACTOR FIRMS. WE HAD GREAT RESPONSE FOR BOTH. WE SHORTLISTED IT TO FOUR PROSPECTIVE PBDERS ON EACH SIDE OF THE EQUATION.

INTERVIEWS FOR THE POLICE GROUP OCCURRED TUESDAY.

INTERVIEWS FOR THE FIRE GROUP OCCURRED TODAY.

OUR TEAM, OUR EVALUATION TEAM WILL SHORTLIST THAT FURTHER START THE DUE DILIGENCE REFERENCE CHECK PROCESS.

AND WE HOPE TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL ON THE SELECTION OF THOSE CONTRACTING, DESIGN CONTRACTING FIRMS HERE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS.

SO WHAT'S THE LATEST PROJECTION FOR THE TOTAL COST? IT'S LOOKING WHAT WE'RE HEARING AT THE TABLE FROM THE FOLKS.

AND WE'LL, YOU KNOW, IT'S A TWO STEP PROCESS.

SO WE BRING THEM ON. THEY GIVE US A GENERAL ESTIMATE.

NOW WHEN WE GET TO, I FORGET IF IT'S 60 OR 70% DESIGN, THEN WE DO A FINAL NEGOTIATED PRICE.

AND BUT WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING AT THE TABLE NOW GIVEN THE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE AND THAT WE HAVE IS THAT WE ARE ABLE TO ABLE TO DELIVER ON BUDGET, THAT'S THE FEEDBACK WE'RE GETTING FROM THE FIRMS THAT ARE BIDDING.

SO, SO FAR, SO GOOD. FINGERS ARE CROSSED. IT'S PROGRESSING ON SCHEDULE, ON TIME AND LOOKING PRETTY GOOD.

WE'LL PROBABLY ISSUE THE BONDS LATER THIS FALL.

IF I HAD TO GUESS, THAT'S THE KIND OF GENERAL TIME FRAME, BECAUSE WE WILL BE SPENDING SIGNIFICANT MONEY.

WE'VE BEEN FLOATING OUR PRE CONCEPT COST WORK THUS FAR.

WE'LL BE SPENDING SIGNIFICANT MONEY IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR I BELIEVE, IF THINGS REMAIN ON SCHEDULE.

YES, SIR. MIKE JUST HAVE A QUICK ONE HERE ON THE CONFIGURATION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUILDINGS, DOES THAT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PARAMEDIC MAY DO A CARRY, NOT JUST A PARAMEDIC MEDICAL TREATMENT. MEANING A TRANSPORT IF WE WERE TO BRING ON TRANSPORT AS WELL.

IT WOULD SEEM TO RECONFIGURE FROM AN OLDER LAYOUT TO SOMETHING THAT WAS DESIGNED DIFFERENTLY.

AND ALSO THE FACT THAT 95% OR SO OF THE CALLS ARE PARAMEDIC CALLS.

VERY LITTLE NEED FOR THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT. ALTHOUGH WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT I SEE THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT BEING USED, WHAT APPEARS TO BE. AND IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THE SALES, THE PRIMARY, THE SERVICE CALL ON THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT.

GUYS, WE HAD DOWN THE STREET, A HEART ATTACK CALL.

WE SAW A HOOK AND LADDER TRUCK. WE SAW THE CHIEF CAR.

WE SAW THREE, WE SAW THREE FIRE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES PLUS THE PRIVATE CARRY AMBULANCE.

AMBULANCE. YEAH. MCCORMICK AMBULANCE. AND THERE WAS NOTHING TO, THEY DIDN'T TAKE ANYBODY OUT.

SO, I MEAN, AS AN EXAMPLE OF PERHAPS OVERLOADING THE.

YEAH, NO, WE'RE SENSITIVE TO THAT. WE TRY NOT TO ROLL THE HOOK AND LADDER UNLESS IT'S, IT'S NEEDED.

THERE IS OCCASION, THOUGH, BECAUSE ALL OF OUR, BECAUSE ALL OF OUR EQUIPMENT AND LION'S SHARE OF OUR STAFF, OUR PARAMEDIC SERVICE CERTIFIED, WE'RE ABLE TO DELIVER ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES FROM VIRTUALLY EVERY UNIT.

SO IF WE HAVE ENGINES THAT ARE THAT ARE OUT IN THE FIELD ON A CALL, AND WHAT'S REMAINING IS THE LADDER, WE STILL HAVE A TEAM THAT CAN GO OUT AND ADDRESS A POTENTIAL HEART ATTACK. SO WE'LL DO THAT.

BUT IT DEPENDS ON THE TIME OF DAY, THE CALL. IF WE'VE GOT UNITS ON WALL TIME AND, YOU KNOW, TRANSPORTING TO HOSPITALS AND THE LIKE, THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS THAT GO INTO THAT.

BUT I WILL SAY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, IN FACT, PAT AND I, THE CHIEF JUST TALKED ABOUT THIS TODAY. WE MADE A VERY CONCERTED EFFORT TO KEEP THE LADDER TRUCK IN THE STATION AT, IN THE BAY UNLESS IT'S NEEDED AND, AND IF IT'S NEEDED IT.

WE'RE HAVING SOME KIND OF A RESOURCE ALLOCATION ISSUE AT THE TIME.

SO OUR FOLKS CONTINUE TO DO A REALLY, REALLY GREAT JOB.

ALSO JUST ANOTHER QUESTION. JUST THOUGHT OF WOULD IT MAKE SENSE ALSO TO BE LOOKING AT, SAY,

[00:25:05]

I MEAN, JUST SOME TOTALLY. A TOTALLY NEW SHIFT IN PARADIGMS ON THE.

INSTEAD OF CALLING IT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, IT'S REALLY PARAMEDIC RESPONSE, KIND OF.

THAT'S REALLY THE. YEAH, IT IS. I MEAN, WHAT WE TRY TO DO, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN WE LOOK AT AN ENGINE, RIGHT? IT'S HARD. YOU KNOW, WE ALL SEE AN ENGINE.

WE GO, OH, THAT'S A LOT BIGGER THAN A CAR OR A TRUCK. SO IT'S, YOU.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY COME ACROSS AS INTUITIVE, BUT THAT ENGINE FOR US IS A FAR MORE MOBILE PIECE OF APPARATUS.

RIGHT. AND IF WE'VE GOT A CAPTAIN AND TWO OPERATORS ON THE RIG THAT ARE ALL TRAINED IN ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT AND PARAMEDIC SERVICE, THAT IS FOR US, A ROLLING PARAMEDIC UNIT, WE DON'T ANTICIPATE TRANSPORTING ANYBODY, OBVIOUSLY, IN THE ENGINE. SO THAT'S WHERE MCCORMICK COMES IN AND WE MEET THEM ON THE SCENE.

AND THAT'S REALLY THE WAY IT'S MEANT TO WORK TO BE FLEXIBLE TO PROVIDE RESCUE SUPPORT, FIRE SUPPRESSION, AND TO YOUR POINT, 90% OF THE TIME, PARAMEDIC SERVICE.

AND AT LEAST NOW WITH THE EMS FEE THAT WE'RE CHARGING, WE'RE GETTING SOME RETURN FOR THAT SERVICE.

IF SOMEBODY CALLS FOR AN INCIDENT THAT THEY COULD HAVE OTHERWISE DEPLOYED IT BY GOING TO URGENT CARE YOU KNOW, AND WE, WE ADMINISTER SERVICE, THEY'RE CHARGED A FEE, JUST LIKE THEY WOULD BE IF THEY WENT OVER TO EXER OR EXER.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY WE'RE STARTING TO SEE SOME RETURN ON THAT WHICH IS GREAT.

AND I THINK THAT'S FAIR THAT BECAUSE THAT IS IT, THAT ISN'T A SERVICE NECESSARILY.

THAT IS AN INDIVIDUAL CALL FOR SERVICE, NOT A COMMUNITY CALL FOR SERVICE.

WHEREAS FIRE SUPPRESSION A LITTLE DIFFERENT MATTER, RIGHT? THAT'S A, YOU'RE PROTECTING NOT JUST THE HOME AND THE STRUCTURE, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THERE. BUT WE TRY TO BE NIMBLE.

WE'VE, WE ARE USING MORE PARAMEDIC SQUADS THAN ENGINES FOR WHEN WE CAN.

BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS WE'RE ALWAYS ON STANDBY FOR A POTENTIAL EMERGENCY OR RESCUE CALL.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE TO WORK IN TANDEM TO SOME DEGREE.

SO IF THERE IS A CAR ACCIDENT OR SOMETHING MORE SIGNIFICANT, WE CAN QUICKLY PIVOT TO THAT, THAT INCIDENT. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE ALSO PERHAPS TO PROVIDE ANOTHER VEHICLE, ANOTHER EMT VEHICLE, SO THAT YOUR FOLKS THAT NORMALLY RIDE WHEN YOU GET FIVE PEOPLE OR SIX PEOPLE ON THE HOOK AND LADDER OUT, TWO OF THEM CAN HOP INTO THE OTHER VEHICLE AND THEIR PARAMEDICS.

ALL OF A SUDDEN, INSTEAD OF INSTEAD OF RUBBER BOOT WEARING HOSE CARRYING GUYS.

WELL, THEY'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE RUBBER BOOT WEARING. THAT'S A FACTOR EVEN WHEN THEY'RE IN THEIR PARAMEDIC ROLE.

BUT WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT TRYING TO BE MORE NIMBLE WITH OUR APPARATUS, HAVE MORE ACCESS TO SQUADS, WHERE WE CAN ROLL. THE KEY IS JUST MAKING SURE WE DON'T BREAK UP THE UNIT THAT IS NEEDED TO RESPOND IF YOU HAVE THE MORE SIGNIFICANT EVENT.

AND THAT'S THE HARD PART. IF YOU GET PEOPLE TO DISJOINTED, YOU CAN'T RELY NECESSARILY SAFELY IN THOSE DIFFERENT CALLS FOR SERVICE.

SO, BUT I WILL TELL YOU PAT AND HIS COMMAND TEAM, THEY DO A LOT OF WORK TO TRY TO BE AS EFFICIENT WITH THAT ROLLOUT AS WE CAN BE. AND WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ENGINE COMPANIES.

AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE THE LADDER TRUCK.

WE'RE TRYING TO TRY TO USE THAT A LITTLE MORE SPARINGLY THAN WE USED TO. I WOULD SAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS.

REGARDING CALPERS, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THE UAL.

I THINK I SAW NUMBERS THAT WE WERE, THEY HAD A 7.7% RETURN FOR THE FIRST TWO QUARTERS OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

THE THIRD QUARTER, FIRST QUARTER OF THE CALENDAR YEAR WAS A BUMMER.

BUT AS OF A WEEK AGO, THE S&P HAD RECOVERED ITS LOSS FOR THE FIRST QUARTER.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE NOW IF THINGS HOLD STEADY WHERE THEY ARE NOW, THEY'LL MAKE THEIR 6.8%, BUT THEY WON'T DO MUCH TO ERASE THE NEGATIVES FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS. YEAH, I THINK WHAT WE NEED THIS YEAR IS FOR THEM TO HOLD SERVE, REALLY, IF THEY CAN JUST MEET THEIR, IF THEY CAN HIT THEIR RETURN MARK, MAYBE BEAT IT BY A TOUCH, THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US. BECAUSE LAST, THE PRIOR TWO YEARS, AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE SEEN PRETTY SIGNIFICANT GAINS.

WE JUST DON'T WANT TO GO BACKWARDS. SO I'D FEEL GREAT IF THEY, IF THEY JUST HIT THE 6.8, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WERE ANYWHERE FROM 6.8 TO 7 TWO, I'D FEEL, I'D BE THRILLED THIS YEAR.

OBVIOUSLY WE'D LIKE MORE, BUT IF WE CAN JUST GET THERE, KIND OF LIMP ACROSS THE FINISH LINE I THINK WE'D BE IN A PRETTY GOOD PLACE BASED ON OUR MOST RECENT PROJECTIONS. I WOULD SAY THE OTHER THING TO REMEMBER ABOUT KIND OF THE UPCOMING YEARS OF OUR UNFUNDED LIABILITY IS, YOU KNOW, WE RAMP IN THE LOSSES AND GAINS. SO THE POSITIVE IMPACT THAT THEY'RE PROJECTING FOR THE NEXT FEW YEARS,

[00:30:04]

SO AS THE CITY MANAGER IS SAYING, IF THAT CONTINUES TO HOLD STEADY, WE'RE ALREADY AT THE PEAK, I BELIEVE, OF THE THE LOSSES AND WE'RE JUST KIND OF RAMPING IN THE GAINS.

SO EVEN WITHOUT ANOTHER GREAT YEAR, WE SHOULD SEE SOME REALLY POSITIVE MOVEMENT.

I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS SUMMER'S ACTUARIAL REPORT ASSUMING THE S&P STAYS WHERE IT'S AT TODAY, OR MAYBE IMPROVED SLIGHTLY BY THE END OF JUNE.

BUT THERE'S SO MUCH VARIABILITY. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, AT THE TURN OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, WE'RE LIKE, OH MAN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER GREAT YEAR, THIS IS FANTASTIC. AND THEN. IT CHANGES ON A DAILY BASIS.

IT DOES. SO DEFINITELY, I'D SAY I'M HOLDING MY BREATH.

I DON'T KNOW IF I'M HOLDING MY BREATH OR KEEP MY FINGERS CROSSED OR WHAT I'M DOING. IT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS TO MIKE? OR ANY, ANYTHING, ANYTHING YOU THINK WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT WITH THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT.

I KNOW THIS GROUP'S ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, VERY FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE AND WE SHARE YOUR SENTIMENTS.

SO I KNOW THAT COMING IN BUT. YEAH, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A BALANCED BUDGET AND THE 4 MILLION RESTORED TO CALPERS AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS.

BUT WE UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES. YEAH, IT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE THIS YEAR, BUT I WILL SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO AVOID DRAWING, DRAWING AGAIN FROM THAT THAT FUNDING. IT'S GOING TO YEAH, I GUESS WE WERE I DIDN'T ATTEND ALL OF THE COUNCIL BUDGET MEETINGS LAST YEAR AS I WILL THIS YEAR.

BUT WE WERE SURPRISED TO SEE THAT. I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT THAT RESERVE DOCKED FOR THE 4 MILLION.

BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT. ONLY THREE AND A HALF.

YEAH, THREE AND A HALF. BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT, IT'S A CALPERS RESERVE.

AND IT WAS THE CALPERS UAL PAYMENT THAT REALLY CAUSED THE ISSUE.

SO YOU CAN, YOU CAN JUSTIFY GOING INTO THAT RESERVE FOR SOME AMOUNT OF MONEY TO COVER THAT.

IN ALL FAIRNESS, THE CALPERS PAYMENT WE MADE LAST YEAR FOR UAL FAR EXCEEDED WHAT WE TOOK FROM THAT RESERVE ACCOUNT.

I MEAN, I THINK IT WAS IT WAS 4, 4.2 LAST YEAR.

WE TOOK 3.5. SO WE FOUND A WAY TO PICK UP 700,000 OF THAT 4.2 WITHOUT TAPPING THE FUND.

SO THAT I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT. THAT'S WHY IT'S THERE.

AND THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE USED TO DO WITH THE FUND.

WE WOULD, WHATEVER THE UAL PAYMENT WAS, WE WOULD START WITH THAT FUND.

WE'D TAKE IT FROM THE FUND, WE'D MAKE THE PAYMENT, AND THEN AT THE END OF THE YEAR, WITH SAVINGS, WE'D HOPEFULLY PUT IT ALL BACK.

AND THAT SERVED US WELL. AND IT HELPED US GROW IT TO ABOUT 8 MILLION.

THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME IN A LONG TIME WHEN WE HAD TO DO THAT AGAIN.

YEAH. BUT I'M HOPING. I'M HOPING WE WON'T NEED TO THIS YEAR.

IF WE DO, IT'LL BE A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY. NOTHING LIKE THE 3.5 YOU SAW LAST YEAR.

YEAH. OKAY. YOU GUYS HAD A STRATEGIC PLAN MEETING.

IS THERE A DOCUMENT THAT SUMMARIZES WHAT WAS.

I'M ON A WEBSITE AND I'M TRYING TO FIND IT. THE DOCUMENTS COMING SO THAT WHAT THEY DO AT THE CONCLUSION IS THAT THEY CREATE DRAFT OBJECTIVES.

AND THEN WE TAKE THOSE DRAFTS, WE REFINE THEM, WE PUT WHO'S DOING THEM WHEN THEY'RE COMING DUE, WE PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE DESCRIPTION. SO IT'S VERY CLEAR THE OBJECTIVE IS MEASURABLE, CLEAR, CONCISE, ALL THOSE THINGS. AND THAT DOCUMENT WILL COME TO THEM ON MAY 5TH.

SO YOU'LL THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER ADOPTING THE STRATEGIC PLAN AT THEIR MAY 5TH MEETING, WHICH IS TWO WEEKS FROM NOW.

SO THAT'S PROBABLY A DOCUMENT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE IN THIS MEETING.

OTHERWISE, I HAVE NO DATA IN FRONT OF ME TO GIVE ANY INPUT.

WELL, THE STRAT PLAN IS ITS OWN. I MEAN, THERE'S THE PRIOR STRAT PLAN.

I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO SEE THAT, THAT'S STILL ACTIVE.

I MEAN, THAT PLAN IS CURRENTLY ONLINE. I MEAN, YOU'RE ABLE TO FIND THAT.

THERE WERE WE HAD 100 AND WE DID A ACCOMPLISHMENTS LISTING TO SHOW KIND OF WHAT WE'VE COMPLETED LAST YEAR.

WE HAD ALMOST, I THINK IT WAS 100 AND ALMOST 30 ITEMS THAT HAD BEEN COMPLETED OVER THE PRIOR PLANNING PERIOD.

WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE GOALS MUCH. THERE WAS A, THERE WAS A FEW EDITS TO THE GOALS.

BUT THEY'RE LARGELY CONTINUATION OF THE MOMENTUM WE BUILT LAST YEAR.

AND YEAH, THAT DOCUMENT WILL COME. IT'LL BE IN THE PUBLIC ETHER ON MAY 5TH.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL.

I WILL BE BACK HERE AGAIN, I GUESS, AT THE END OF NEXT MONTH.

AND HAVE A GOOD REST OF THE MEETING. TAKE CARE.

ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO ITEM J.2. JUST A PAUSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE WE MOVE ON.

ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM?

[00:35:05]

AND WHAT THE FARMERS MARKET SHOWED IS THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WITH MONEY TO SPEND WHO LIVE RIGHT WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF THAT BOULEVARD WHO DON'T SPEND THEIR MONEY ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

NOW, THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE OF FAIRNESS.

THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO FORCE THE RENT COLLECTORS TO GIVE UP THEIR PROPERTY, OR AT LEAST ALLOW IT TO BE USED IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

AND I KNOW THAT ACADEMIC STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE.

IN FACT, THERE ARE MANY ABOUT REVITALIZING COMMUNITIES.

AND I'M SURE THAT SOME ONE OF THOSE COMMUNITIES HAS FACED THE PROBLEM OF RENT COLLECTION.

AND I DIDN'T HEAR IN THE BUDGET THAT AND MAYBE THE AREAS PEOPLE WILL HAVE A SOLUTION TO THIS, BUT I KIND OF DOUBT IT READING THEIR CONTRACT.

BUT I THINK THAT IS THE BASIC PROBLEM. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION CAN DO ABOUT IT, EXCEPT TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL THAT THEY SEARCH FOR A WAY TO PRY THESE RENT COLLECTORS OFF THE BOULEVARD.

NOW, THERE'S ONE PROPERTY THAT I'VE BEEN REALLY INTERESTED IN 2017-2019, ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

GEORGETTE GANTNER IS INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING A COMMUNITY CENTER THERE AND OUR NONPROFIT THAT WE DEVELOPED TO SPONSOR THE MARKET OUR NRB IS GOING TO HELP HER WITH THIS HAS ALREADY HELPED HER WITH THIS.

AND SHE'S BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE PERSON WHO OWNS THAT PROPERTY, AND SHE'S BEEN ABLE TO PERSUADE THAT PERSON TO AT LEAST LISTEN TO HER PROPOSAL.

AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT EXPRESSES INTEREST IN HER PROPOSAL SO THAT THAT PROPERTY, WHICH HAS BEEN VACANT FOR AT LEAST 12 YEARS, THAT I KNOW OF, CAN BE USED FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

NOW, OUR NONPROFIT, OUR NRB, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO HELP PUBLIC INTEREST HELP THE NEIGHBORS HAVE THINGS THAT THEY CAN DO ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

PUBLIC BENEFITS, AND THAT THEY CAN SPEND THEIR DOLLARS AT HOME INSTEAD OF HAVING TO TAKE THEM TO MANHATTAN BEACH OR TORRANCE OR WHEREVER. SO I SUGGEST THAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL THAT THEY LOOK INTO HOW YOU CAN PRY THESE RENT COLLECTORS OFF THEIR PROPERTIES.

THANK YOU. THANKS. IS THIS OPEN OR SPECIFIC TO A.

SORRY, I WALKED IN A LITTLE LATE. OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT.

THIS IS ON THE BUDGET INPUT AGENDA ITEM. THAT'S KIND OF WIDE OPEN THERE.

TELL ME IF I'M OFF COURSE. MY COMMENT. MY NAME IS STEVE HAIGH, 35 YEAR RESIDENT.

AND I WISH MIKE DIDN'T LEAVE. I WAS GOING TO HAVE A CAR SHOW COMMENT BECAUSE THAT HAS TO DO WITH PARKING, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE BEST REVENUE INCREASE.

LAST YEAR'S GONE. THIS YEAR I'M AFRAID IT'S GOING TO COLLAPSE.

I'VE LIVED OFF ONE BLOCK OFF ARTESIA FOR 35 YEARS.

FORTUNATELY, I'M BLESSED TO BE TRAVELING THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.

NOW. I DON'T, I JUST MANAGE MY OWN PROPERTIES AND VOLUNTEER.

HOPEFULLY MY VOLUNTEERING IS IN THE CITY, BUT IT BECOMES HARD TO ENGAGE WITH SOME FOLKS IN THE CITY.

MY COMMENT AND JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION. I'VE HAD A FEELING OF REDONDO BEACH BEING ANTI-BUSINESS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

AND YOU CAN WALK. I'LL DRIVE YOU. WE CAN WALK DOWN ARTESIA AND I'LL SHOW YOU EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S BEEN NEGLECTED. WHEN YOU DRIVE INTO THE CITY, WHAT DO YOU SEE? WHAT KIND OF CITY ARE WE? IS IT DIVE BARS? OKAY.

YOU HAVE YOUR YOUR SELECTION. IS IT MASSAGE PLACES? IS IT SMOKE SHOPS? WHAT? WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD PEOPLE INVEST IN SOME AREAS OF REDONDO?

[00:40:07]

SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ON THE LIBRARY. I HAD SOMEBODY TRY AND GO TO THE LIBRARY.

YOU CAN'T GO. YOU GOT TO PARK THREE BLOCKS AWAY.

SO I'M SURE JIM'S BRILLIANT MAN, HE'LL ADDRESS THAT.

SOMEHOW WE HAVE TO CHANGE. WHAT DO WE STAND FOR? TWO THIRDS OF THE KIDS LIVE IN NORTH REDONDO.

IS THERE ANYTHING THEY CAN DO OTHER THAN E-BIKE? I'VE BEEN INJURED WITH BLOOD AND EVERYTHING ELSE FROM AN E-BIKE, SO SAFETY IS A CONCERN.

MY MAIN TOPIC, AND I'M GOING TO BE AT AS MANY COMMISSIONS MEETINGS UNTIL THIS GETS RESOLVED.

LGBT PLUS STATUE IN FRONT OF THE LIBRARY. COME ON FOLKS, REALLY? I TRACKED THIS, I SAW A BLURB AT ONE OF THE LOCAL COUNCIL MEETINGS LASTED 3 TO 5 SECONDS.

THAT'S BEEN IT AS FAR AS A DISCUSSION SINCE JANUARY.

WHAT ARE WE GOING IN? COMING UP MAY COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT TO GO HEAD ON.

WHY? THERE'S SOME POLITICAL GAMESMANSHIP BEHIND THE SCENES, IN MY OPINION.

I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT. BUT ANYWAY, I'VE DONE MY WORK.

90% OF THE FOLKS IN THE AREA, BUSINESSES, PUBLIC, ETC.

DO NOT WANT THAT STATUE, THERE SCULPTURE. I HOPE IT'S NOT DONE.

THANK YOU. THANKS. OKAY.

AND NO ONE ON ZOOM AND NO ECOMMENTS. OKAY. THANKS.

ITEM J.2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROCUREMENT. STEPHANIE.

GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS. WE ARE BRINGING THIS ITEM BACK TO YOU.

AS DISCUSSED IN PRIOR MEETINGS. SAD MR. MUELLER HAS LEFT TO NOT HEAR OUR DISCUSSION ON IT.

WE DON'T HAVE A LOT FOR YOU THIS EVENING. WE ARE WORKING, AS WE DISCUSSED IN PRIOR MEETINGS ON A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE IS IDENTIFYING EXACTLY HOW MUCH EACH YEAR WE SPEND ON PROFESSIONAL VERSUS CONTRACTUAL SERVICES.

ANOTHER ITEM THAT OUR PURCHASING LEAD IS WORKING ON SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS COMMISSION IS A VERY DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THOSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT IDENTIFIES EXACTLY WHAT IT, WHAT THE SERVICES, THE VENDOR AND THE TYPE OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOLLOWED.

SO AS I'VE MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES TO THIS COMMISSION, ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO DO ANY COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, FREQUENTLY WE DO. AND THIS WILL DEMONSTRATE, DEMONSTRATES KIND OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH WE DO OR DO NOT END UP GOING OUT FOR SOME COMPETITIVE PROCESS. SOMETHING I DID WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU THIS EVENING.

AND JACOB, IF YOU COULD PULL UP MY SCREEN. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT I THINK I'VE MENTIONED A FEW TIMES TO THIS GROUP IS ONGOING. IN THE CITY. AGAIN, THIS IS A CITY WIDE PROCESS LOOKING AT ALL ASPECTS OR MANY ASPECTS OF PURCHASING IN GREAT DETAIL, INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. SO WE HAVE A NUMBER OF TASK FORCES, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THE PROJECT PLAN WITH YOU THIS EVENING TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A GOOD IDEA OF THE LEVEL OF WORK THAT IS GOING INTO THIS.

WE ARE CURRENTLY PROBABLY IN THE MIDDLE OF PHASE II AND III.

JACOB IS SERVING ON A NUMBER OF THESE TASK FORCES, INCLUDING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ONE.

SO HE'LL HAVE SOME GOOD UPDATES FOR YOU IN THE FUTURE.

BUT AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WE ARE LOOKING AT OUR ENTIRE, OUR ENTIRE SYSTEM WORKFLOW INCLUDING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

WE'RE LOOKING AT DATA, WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOT OF BEST PRACTICES AND OUR GOAL.

SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HERE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE PLANNING, WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR CURRENT STATE.

FOLLOWING THAT, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT RECOMMENDATIONS AND DEVELOP MATERIALS.

WE ARE, WILL THEN, YOU KNOW, CONTINUE TO PLAN HOW THAT WILL HOW THAT WILL WORK OUT AND PRESENT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS INTERNALLY.

SO I WANTED TO SHARE THIS JUST SO THE COMMISSION AND HOPEFULLY ANY PUBLIC THAT'S INTERESTED ARE AWARE.

THIS IS SOMETHING THE CITY IS REVIEWING IN GREAT DETAIL.

AND IN SOME CASES, I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR AHEAD OF IT.

THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, AS THIS HAS COME UP AS A MATTER OF INTEREST, IF YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, BEST PRACTICES FROM SPECIFIC ORGANIZATIONS, IF THERE IS ANOTHER CITY THAT YOU KNOW, THAT DOES THIS REALLY WELL, WE'D LOVE TO RECEIVE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.

[00:45:01]

SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. I DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH ELSE TO SHARE WITH YOU THIS EVENING.

BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY FEEDBACK ON THIS OR IF YOU WANT TO KIND OF DIRECT US ANYWHERE FOR YOU KNOW, ANY SPECIFIC POLICIES OR PROCEDURES THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE.

WE'RE HAPPY TO LOOK AT THAT. DID YOU PROVIDE THE.

I THOUGHT YOU OR TODAY OR LAST TIME, THE TOTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS AND THEN BY DEPARTMENT.

I THOUGHT THAT'S WHERE WE LEFT OFF. WAS THAT ALREADY PROVIDED? THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS. I THOUGHT. WE DON'T HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S JUST A, IT'S A MUCH IT'S A MUCH MORE COMPLICATED TASK THAN IT WOULD APPEAR TO BE BECAUSE WE HAVE MANY OF THESE AND WE DON'T HAVE THEM. WE DON'T HAVE THE DATA BROKEN DOWN IN OUR FINANCIAL SYSTEM IN ANY WAY THAT DEFINES PROFESSIONAL VERSUS CONTRACTUAL SERVICES. WELL, THEN BOTH CONTRACT. OKAY. SO WE DEFINITELY HAVE BUDGET.

CAN I FINISH? THANK YOU. OH, SURE. OF COURSE. SO IN A BUDGET, USUALLY THERE ARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

SO YOU DON'T HAVE A SEPARATE LINE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN THE BUDGET, IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? WE HAVE A LINE ITEM THAT COMBINES CONTRACTUAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

SO YOU DO NOT HAVE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

SPECIFICALLY FOR PROFESSIONAL. NO. NO, YOU DO NOT. AND THAT'S THE I THINK THAT'S A PROBLEM.

I MEAN, WE CAN START OFF WITH THAT RECOMMENDING THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

I MEAN, THAT'S A BIG, BIG THING THAT WE DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY WE SPEND ON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

BUT AGAIN, I GUESS, IS THERE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LINE UNDER EACH INDIVIDUAL GROUP OR EACH LIKE, BECAUSE I KNOW PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CAN GO ACROSS FINANCE OR LIKE.

SO WE HAVE A. ORGANIZATIONS. YES. SO WE HAVE AGAIN, A LINE ITEM THAT COMBINES PROFESSIONAL AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES.

WE HAVE THAT LINE ITEM BY DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN EVEN FURTHER BY SPECIFIC ORG OR SUBDIVISION.

AND THEN WE CAN COMBINE THAT ANY WAY WE'RE INTERESTED IN LOOKING.

SO BY FUND, BY PROJECT, IF FOR SOME REASON A CONTRACT CROSSES DEPARTMENTS, SO YEAH.

AND TO COMMISSIONER ALLEN'S POINT AS WE LOOK INTO THIS DATA, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D PROBABLY LIKE TO DO IF WE'RE NOT SPLITTING OUT AN ADDITIONAL OBJECT, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ADD AS A KIND OF FACTOR WHEN WE'RE ENTERING THE REQUISITIONS AND CONTRACTS ON THE FRONT END.

IF WE DO THAT, IT'S THEN VERY, VERY EASY. YEAH, IT'S VERY, VERY EASY TO PRODUCE.

JUST A QUICK QUESTION. DON'T, DON'T YOU SEPARATE THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FROM THE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO THE FACT THAT THE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES REQUIRE AN OUTSIDE BID. SO WOULDN'T YOU HAVE TO IDENTIFY THAT AT THE FRONT END AT THE REQUEST OR THE PURCHASE ORDER LEVEL? NOT ON, NOT ON THE PURCHASE ORDER. SO WE WOULD.

NOT IN THE PURCHASE ORDER. OR THE REQUISITION? YEAH.

NOT ON THE REQUISITION EITHER, BECAUSE BY THE TIME WE ENTER THE REQUISITION, WE ALREADY WOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH EITHER COMPETITIVE OR NONCOMPETITIVE PROCESS.

THE BACKUP DOCUMENTATION FOR THAT IS GOING TO BE WHATEVER AGREEMENT WE HAVE.

SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO INDICATE IN THE AGREEMENT THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS USED TO GET TO THAT POINT.

HELP ME UNDERSTAND THEN. SURE. YOU HAVE A DEPARTMENT THAT REQUIRES GOODS OR SERVICES.

YES. AT WHAT STAGE DOES THAT DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATE THAT TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT? USUALLY WHEN THEY HAVE WHEN THEY HAVE A NEED AND WHEN THEY NEED THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT'S INVOLVEMENT.

WHAT DO YOU CALL THAT DOCUMENT FROM THE DEPARTMENT TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT? WOULD THAT NOT BE A REQUISITION FROM THE DEPARTMENT TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT? IT'S NOT REALLY.

FOR SOME TERMINOLOGY. YEAH. NO, IT WOULDN'T BE A REQUISITION.

WHAT WE CALL REQUISITION IS SPECIFICALLY AN ITEM THAT YOU ENTER INTO OUR FINANCIAL SYSTEM SUPPORTED BY DOCUMENTATION.

WHEN WE ACTUALLY GO TO MAKE. MAKE A PAYMENT. RIGHT.

SO WE NEED A. WE NEED A PURCHASE. WE NEED A REQUISITION TO MAKE A PURCHASE ORDER TO MAKE A PAYMENT.

I THINK THE KIND OF REQUEST YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE A REQUEST TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT THAT SAYS, HEY, WE NEED TO PROCURE THIS ITEM. THESE ARE THE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WE NEED.

HERE'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO THE PROCESS.

SO FOR RFPS, WE DO HAVE THAT, BUT IT'S NOT A FORMAL PROCESS THROUGH OUR, THROUGH OUR FINANCIAL SYSTEM.

THIS WOULD BASICALLY BE AN EMAIL TO OUR PERSON WHO MANAGES THAT, WHO WOULD THEN WITH OUR RFPS,

[00:50:03]

WHERE WE WOULD DO A CHECK IS IF THEY COME AND THEY WANT TO MAKE A PAYMENT, WE THEN WILL NOT AUTHORIZE THAT PAYMENT UNTIL THEY CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAVE FOLLOWED THE PURCHASING PROCEDURES. AND THAT'S WHERE KIND OF OUR CONTROL COMES INTO PLACE FOR THOSE ITEMS THAT HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT ORIGINALLY.

SO THEN THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF HAS A CERTAIN PURCHASING AUTONOMY.

THEY CAN GO OUT AND DO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO PURCHASE SERVICES AND.

IT DEPENDS ON THE AMOUNT. NOT? OKAY. YEAH, IT DEPENDS ON THE AMOUNT, BUT YES, IT DEPENDS ON THE AMOUNT.

BUT REALLY UNDER $5,000 IS REALLY THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THEY CAN JUST KIND OF GO AND PURCHASE WHATEVER THEY WANT.

ANYTHING OVER $5,000 REQUIRES AT LEAST TWO QUOTES.

AND THEY WOULD NEED TO THEN PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION FOR THAT FOR FINANCE TO PASS THAT THROUGH OUR PURCHASING PROCESS.

IF WE DON'T SEE THAT, WE WILL, WE WILL YOU KNOW, WE'LL KICK THAT OUT OF THE SYSTEM AND WE'LL TELL THEM TO START OVER.

THANK YOU. I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR KIND OF A STARTING POINT ON TRYING TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE TWO. AND I WAS HOPING THAT IT WOULD BE FROM THE DEPARTMENT TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

YEAH. AND PROBABLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IF IT'S MORE THAN $5,000, THEN THAT WOULD BE COULD BE A LOGICAL POINT OF ORIGIN FOR THAT, BECAUSE THAT DETERMINATION WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE. IT WOULD.

AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING, AGAIN, JUST FOR OUR OWN INFORMATION AND AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, IS IDENTIFYING WHERE IN THE SYSTEM WE CAN IDENTIFY SOME OF THESE CHARACTERISTICS THAT WE WILL THEN WANT TO REVIEW AND REPORT ON.

AND, YOU KNOW, COMING INTO THE DATA, BECAUSE THAT'S IT HASN'T BEEN ESTABLISHED BEFORE.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO IT.

BUT IT IS A GOOD POINT THAT WE CAN KIND OF TAKE A LOOK AT OUR.

YEAH, WE CAN ADD OUR ELECTRONIC BIDDING SYSTEM KIND OF AS A DATA POINT, BUT AGAIN, IT REALLY KIND OF REQUIRES PRETTY DETAILED ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHICH ONE IS WHICH.

AND THEN IN ADDITION, WE WERE, WE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THIS COMMISSION DETAILED INFORMATION ON WHAT PROCESS WE ACTUALLY USED.

CAN WE GET A COPY OF YOUR VERY NICE OUTLINE ON HOW YOU'RE APPROACHING THE PURCHASING? I BELIEVE SO. EARLY ON IN THE DISCUSSION OF THIS STEPHANIE, WE WERE LOOKING AT TRYING TO DETERMINE EXACTLY HOW MUCH IS IN THAT PROCUREMENT IN THAT CATEGORY AND HOW MUCH WAS, WAS ACTUALLY PUT, PUT OUT FOR BID AND HOW MUCH WAS NOT, IS THAT, THAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE STILL UNDER REVIEW. THEY ARE STILL UNDER REVIEW.

AND I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMISSION'S PATIENCE.

I KNOW THIS SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE VERY SIMPLE TO GET.

I WISH IT WAS, BUT IT'S STILL IN PROCESS. I DID TAKE A QUICK LOOK.

I MEAN, BECAUSE SOMETIMES BY VENDOR YOU CAN GET SOME IDEA.

AND AGAIN, THERE ARE SOME THAT IT'S EASY TO PULL OUT THAT ARE CONTRACTUAL VERSUS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

BUT YOU KNOW, ANYTHING THAT ISN'T THOROUGH IS GOING TO BE AN ESTIMATE.

AND I WOULD PREFER TO PROVIDE. UNDERSTOOD. NUMBERS THAT I CAN DEFINITELY STAND BEHIND.

THE UNIVERSE OF OUR CONTRACTUAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS LAST TIME. I KNOW BECAUSE WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT IN OUR CORE BUDGET.

SO I THINK THE CORE BUDGET FOR THE GENERAL FUND TOTALS ABOUT $7.1 MILLION.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? YEAH. IT'S ABOUT 7.1 TOTAL GENERAL FUND.

COMBINING CONTRACTUAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

I CANNOT REMEMBER THE CITY WIDE NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

BUT AGAIN, THOSE NUMBERS ARE BY LINE ITEM IN OUR BUDGET BOOK.

UNFORTUNATELY THEY COMBINE THE TOTAL. BUT THAT GIVES SOME IDEA OF KIND OF THE OVERALL MAGNITUDE.

I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE LESS. I DON'T THINK.

YEAH. I WAS GOING TO SAY I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE MORE THAN HALF, BUT HONESTLY I, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE ONE VERY LARGE CONTRACT COULD SKEW.

[00:55:07]

YEAH. NO, NO ONE ON ZOOM AND NO ECOMMENTS. OKAY, SO I HAVE A MOTION ONE TO SEPARATE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LINE ITEM FROM ALL OF CONTRACTUAL SO WE CAN TRACK IT.

AND THIS IS THE PERFECT TIME TO DO IT BECAUSE WE HAVE BUDGET SEASON COMING UP.

SO WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE NEW BUDGET, THEY CAN SEPARATE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FROM CONTRACTUAL SERVICES.

SO WE CAN ONLY SEE THE PROFESSIONAL. SO WE ARE ABLE TO SEE THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SEPARATELY.

AND 2. TO OFFICIALLY REQUIRE A PROCESS OR AT LEAST THREE BIDS FOR SERVICES LESS THAN $50,000 AND AN RFP FOR SERVICES $50,000 PLUS. THAT'S A START.

NOT SURE IF WE CAN ACTUALLY OFFICIALLY REQUIRE.

WE CAN PROPOSE. THE COUNCIL CAN. SO RECOMMEND THE COUNCIL TO.

WE CAN'T REQUIRE ANY OF THIS STUFF I'M TALKING ABOUT OR ANY OF US.

SO RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL TO SEPARATE LINE FOR PROFESSIONALS TO REQUIRE SEPARATE LINE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN A BUDGET BOOK.

AND OF COURSE, I MEAN ALSO FOR THE DEPARTMENTS.

AND 2. TO HAVE AN OFFICIAL REQUIREMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES APPROVALS, WHICH WOULD BE ANYTHING UNDER $50,000 TO REQUIRE AT LEAST THREE BIDS. AND ANYTHING OVER, $50,000 OR OVER HAVE AN RFP.

OKAY. OR RFQ. IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND. HOW MUCH OF THE ISSUE OF, OF THE BID, THE DOLLAR SIZE THAT YOU'RE, ON THE SECOND PART OF THE MOTION.

IS ANY OF THAT COVERED IN THE CITY AND CITY CHARTER OR CITY REGS, ORDINANCES TO DATE? YEAH. DON'T KNOW. IT WOULD SEEM TO BE, BUT I.

FOR PURCHASE ORDERS, THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE THEY HAVE LIMITS IN, AS YOU CAN PROBABLY TELL YOU.

SO FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, THE ONLY, THE ONLY STATEMENT IN OUR MUNICIPAL CODE IS THAT COMPETITION IS NOT REQUIRED.

SO WE HAVE INTERNAL POLICIES THAT SET THRESHOLDS FOR PURCHASE ORDER REQUISITION AND FOR COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR ITEMS THAT DO REQUIRE COMPETITIVE BIDDING. BUT IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE, WE DON'T HAVE THOSE.

SO EVEN IF. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. EVEN FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, FOR TO CREATE A PO, TO BE ABLE TO PAY AN INVOICE, YOU NEED TO CREATE A PO.

CORRECT? WE DO. BUT I'M REALIZING AS YOU SAY THIS THAT I MISSPOKE.

SO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THAT BECAUSE.

SO FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICE YOU DO NOT EVEN REQUIRE PO? FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, SORRY. WE REQUIRE A PO.

WE JUST DON'T REQUIRE. WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME QUOTE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE AGAIN, THE.

OKAY, SO I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT A PO IN ORDER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ONLY AND FOR POS ONLY.

IF THE. AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, IF THE PURCHASE.

IF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS AN AMOUNT OF $50,000, DO YOU REQUIRE A PO? YES. IF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IS $5,000, DO YOU REQUIRE PO? YES. SO ANY AMOUNT YOU REQUIRE PO? BELOW $5,000 WE DO NOT REQUIRE.

OKAY SO FOR $1,000 YOU DO NOT REQUIRE A PO? WE DO NOT NO.

OKAY. $5,000 AND ABOVE. OKAY. SO THAT'S THE IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S THE ONLY REQUIREMENT THEY HAVE THAT IF THEY'RE CREATING A PO.

THEY REQUIRE A PO IF THE SERVICES IS $5,000 OR MORE.

BUT THAT'S. NOTHING. AT LEAST SOMEBODY'S AWARE.

MY PURPOSE IS I WAS TRYING TO TAKE NOTES AS YOU MADE THE MOTION, COULD YOU RESTATE THE MOTION SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? OKAY. SO TWO PARTS TO IT. FIRST IS IN THE BUDGET, WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE BUDGETING, THEY SEPARATE

[01:00:01]

SO THAT WAY WE ARE ABLE TO TRACK HOW MUCH MONEY CITY IS SPENDING ON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

YES. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH. PLEASE. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IT MAY COME DOWN TO A DEFINITION BETWEEN PROFESSIONALS.

IT MIGHT SEEM OBVIOUS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS BETWEEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES.

I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT IS A CLEAN DIVISION. THERE IS THERE IS THEY HAVE A, THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE DEFINITIONS FOR IT.

AND THEN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES. BY PEOPLE THAT ARE CERTIFIED PROFESSIONALS.

I MEAN IT'S WHAT CONSTITUTES A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE.

SEE, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. AND YOU'D HAVE TO.

THEY HAVE THAT THEY, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THAT.

THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH THAT THEY DO NOT, THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO BIDS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. SO THEY DO HAVE THE DEFINITIONS. THEY, THEY HAVE.

OKAY, WELL I THINK THAT IS. ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT STEPHANIE ASSUMING THAT THAT'S AVAILABLE? SO DO YOU KNOW THE. I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND, AND CONTRACTUAL SERVICES? THEY DO. OKAY. YEAH.

OKAY. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? YEAH. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, WE DO HAVE A DEFINITION, BUT IT'S SERVICES BASICALLY REQUIRING.

IT'S QUITE VAGUE, BUT IT'S SERVICES REQUIRING PROFESSIONAL EXPERTISE.

I MEAN, I CAN PULL IT UP IN THE, I CAN PULL IT UP IN THE CODE.

AND I THINK THAT DEFINITIONS ARE SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IN THIS BENCHMARKING STUDY AS WELL, BECAUSE PROBABLY BENEFIT FROM BEING MORE CLEAR.

AND THIS WILL FORCE THEM TO DO THAT. BUT IT IS.

WILL FORCE THEM. THAT'S WHY I WANT TO HAVE IT.

THE DIRECTION THAT I'M TRYING TO KIND OF. BECAUSE THIS WILL FORCE THEM TO.

STARTING WITH THE DEFINITION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VERSUS CONTRACTUAL IS REALLY AN IMPORTANT FIRST STEP.

THEN ONCE YOU HAVE THAT, I THINK YOU CAN, YOU CAN UNFOLD.

BUT WHEN THEY'RE SEPARATING, THEN IT WILL FORCE THEM TO UNDERSTAND IT, RIGHT? OTHERWISE THEY WON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE IS WHICH.

IT'S THAT ALL OF THE BUDGET IS LUMPED TOGETHER, AND IT IS NOT IMMEDIATELY SIMPLE TO PULL OUT VENDOR BY VENDOR AND IDENTIFY IF IT'S CONTRACTUAL OR PROFESSIONAL BY THE VENDOR TITLE.

SO IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS. QUESTIONING THAT WE DON'T. I DON'T, I'M NOT QUESTIONING THAT YOU DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST PROPOSING THAT WE SEPARATE THOSE.

SO THERE WOULD BE THERE WOULD BE AN EFFORT IN SOMEONE'S PART TO DECIDE WHETHER IT'S CONTRACTUAL OR PROFESSIONAL, IT'S PROBABLY. AND THAT WILL BE FINANCE, WILL BE LEADING THAT.

YEAH. I MEAN, IT'S A GROUP OF ACTIVITIES THAT CAN BE GROUPED TOGETHER.

AND ONE, ONE REQUIRES A PROFESSIONAL STATUS OF SOME KIND IN ORDER TO DO IT AND THE OTHER DOES NOT.

AND ONCE WE HAVE THAT, THEN WE CAN LOOK AT EXAMPLES AND SEE IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

BUT IF WE DO NOT HAVE THAT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

OKAY. SO THAT WAS THE FIRST. AND THE SECOND WAS REGARDING THE BIDS REQUIRED.

SO ANYTHING UNDER $50,000 THEY'RE REQUIRED TO DO THREE INFORMAL BIDS.

AND ANYTHING $50,000 OR MORE, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO DO AN RFP OR RFQ.

OR I MEAN, WHICH ONE I THINK. RFP, RFP WOULD BE MORE.

RFP. LET'S DO RFP. I MEAN, THAT'S. YES. I'M CERTAIN THAT THERE'S, ON THOSE BIDS FOR SERVICES. I'M CERTAIN THAT THAT IS REFERENCED IN THE IN THE CITY CHARTER, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CITY CHARTER.

AND I GOT THE NUMBER FROM. THERE IS ANOTHER SMALL, SIMILAR SIZED CITY THAT 50,000 IS WHAT THEY USE.

MY POINT IS, IF THAT'S IN THE CITY CHARTER, THEN THAT REQUIRES A CHARTER AMENDMENT.

IT, FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. IT'S NOT IN THE CITY CHARTER.

IT WAS ONLY IN THE CITY CHARTER FOR A PUBLIC WORKS.

OKAY. AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE JUST UPDATED, I THINK A FEW YEARS AGO.

SO THE THE COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO. OKAY.

OKAY, WE UNDERSTAND THE MOTION. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I GUESS, ARE WE SENDING A LETTER OR RECOMMEND LIKE WHAT ARE WE HOW ARE WE SAYING.

WE SEND A LETTER, A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

[01:05:03]

WHO WANTS TO WRITE IT? WHO WANTS TO SUB? WHENEVER WE ARE DOING SUB COMMITTEE.

I'LL VOLUNTEER. IF ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO VOLUNTEER.

LET'S VOTE ON THE MOTION, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE WHO PREPARES IT.

IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, LET'S VOTE ON THE MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

OPPOSED? NONE. COMMISSIONER JESTE HAD ALREADY SECONDED, JUST FOR THE RECORD.

OKAY. YES. WHY DON'T YOU WRITE THE DRAFT AND CIRCULATE IT TO.

WE CAN'T CIRCULATE IT TO EVERYBODY. NO, UNFORTUNATELY YEAH.

WE DRAFT IT. SEND ME A COPY OF THE DRAFT. OKAY.

IT'S ACTUALLY A GREAT IDEA BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SIGN IT AS THE CHAIR. I'M SORRY.

I THINK YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SIGN IT AS THE CHAIR SO YOU CAN GET A FINAL REVIEW.

YEAH. AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEND IT TO ME, I CAN SEND IT AND BE CC THE COMMISSION, OR I THINK YOU'RE FREE TO SEND IT AS WELL.

HE CAN SEND IT TO COUNCIL DIRECTLY AND THEN BE CC US.

OKAY, WE'LL DO THAT. OKAY. THAT'S IT, WE'RE DONE WITH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR NOW.

AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE THAT DATA, THEN WE CAN REVISIT.

OTHERWISE WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING. OKAY. OKAY, WE'RE FINISHED WITH J.2.

J.3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CIP SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVITY.

STEPHANIE, YOU WANT TO START THAT? SURE, WE'RE BRINGING THIS BACK BECAUSE WE HAVE THE LAST FEW MEETINGS TO ENSURE THAT WE CONTINUE TO GET UPDATES AND MOVE TOWARDS PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.

WHERE WE HAD LEFT OFF IN OUR LAST MEETING WAS THAT WE HAD RAISED, THE COMMISSION RAISED A NUMBER OF CONCERNS.

WE HADN'T SPECIFIED ONE SPECIFIC PROBLEM. THE SUBCOMMITTEE WAS NOTED TO STILL BE WORKING ON LOOKING A LITTLE MORE DETAIL AT THE LIST OF PROJECTS.

THEY'RE GOING TO IDENTIFY A FEW MORE PROJECTS AND GO THROUGH THEM IN DETAIL AND COME AND REPORT BACK TO THEN TALK TO THE COMMISSION ABOUT MAKING A RECOMMENDATION. I THINK TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK AGAIN TO SEE ANY UPDATE FROM THE CIP SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOING THIS ADDITIONAL WORK. AND THEN FROM THERE, LOOK AT WHAT OUR STEPS ARE TO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.

AND WE HAVE ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE HERE, TWO ARE NOT HERE.

SO WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER, WE OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE A REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE, AS FAR AS I KNOW.

SO WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT TO, AS A COMMITTEE ISSUE A REPORT WITHOUT THE INPUT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

SO VIJAY, ANY COMMENTS FROM YOUR STANDPOINT? I HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE CIPS THAT WERE COMPLETED LAST YEAR, AND NO TWO PROJECTS ARE ALIKE.

THERE IS SUCH A HUGE VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON.

I CAN ONLY REACH SOME CONCLUSIONS. ONE IS THAT THE ENTIRE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT OR CAPITAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCESS IS ANTIQUATED.

THE CHANGE ORDER PROCESS WAS ESTABLISHED 32 YEARS AGO, IT HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THEN.

AND THE, IT LOOKS LIKE IN PRACTICALLY EVERY PROJECT THE TENDENCY IS TO NOT TO PLAN AS WELL AS THEY SHOULD, AND THEN THEY RESORT TO SPENDING THE MONEY THROUGH THE CHANGE ORDER PROCESS.

THE BEST EXAMPLE IS THE MANHATTAN BEACH INGLEWOOD AVENUE REWORK.

THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS INVOLVED. AND THAT PROJECT LASTED FOR TEN YEARS.

SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT NEEDED SOMETHING URGENTLY.

AND THAT WAS. EXCUSE ME, GO INTO DETAIL ON THAT.

WHAT KIND OF PROJECT DO WE HAVE THAT LASTED TEN YEARS? IT'S QUITE COMPLICATED. I MEAN, I THINK THERE ARE ABOUT 20 OR 30 PAGES OF MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS AND WHAT HAVE YOU THAT I WENT THROUGH.

I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SUMMARIZE IT. I CAN GIVE YOU A REPORT AND SUMMARIZE IT.

THE THING IS ANYTHING THAT GOES THAT LONG, THERE IS NO REASON WHY.

[01:10:08]

YOU START DIGGING, AND THEN SIMPLY SUDDENLY, A PIPE BURST.

YOU NEED TO GET THAT FIXED. BUT THAT LIMIT WAS 25,000.

AND I WENT THROUGH ALL THE PROJECTS, AND I REALIZED THAT THE ENGINEERS HAVE USED IT VERY JUDICIOUSLY AND VERY SPARINGLY, SO THEY DO NOT. THEY'VE DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB.

BUT THEN THIS MANHATTAN BEACH INGLEWOOD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT THE CHANGE ORDER LIMIT WAS RAISED FROM 25,000 TO $100,000. FOR WHAT REASON? I DO NOT KNOW OR UNDERSTAND. AND THEN, AND I HAVE MENTIONED THIS MANY TIMES BEFORE.

IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE TOTAL OF ALL THE MONEY SPENT ON CIPS LAST YEAR, 80% OF THE MONEY WAS SPENT ON CHANGE ORDERS, 80%. AND I ALSO LOOKED AT THE JOBS THAT INVITED BIDS. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LOWEST AND THE HIGHEST BIDDER IS BETWEEN 5 AND 7.5%.

SO, MY CONTENTION IS IF WE SOLICIT BIDS FOR EVERYTHING THAT IS EXPECTED TO COST MORE THAN 25,000, I THINK THERE IS A BIG SAVING. IT'S A BIG OPPORTUNITY.

BUT SINCE WE HAVE THAT OPTION AVAILABLE, THAT IS USED FAR MORE OFTEN THAN NECESSARY, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION.

I EVEN WROTE WHEN I TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL ISSUES, I WROTE A LETTER TO THE MAYOR.

HIS RESPONSE WAS THE CIP PROCESS IS CONFUSING.

THIS. THESE ARE HIS WORDS AND HE HAS ASKED FOR CHANGES AND HE HASN'T GOTTEN THEM.

SO IF THE MAYOR FINDS IT CONFUSING AND HE'S NOT ABLE TO GET SOMETHING CHANGED, WHAT ARE OUR CHANCES OF GETTING SOMETHING CHANGED? THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN RUBBER STAMPING ALL THE CHANGES, ANYTHING OVER 25,000 AND IN ONE PARTICULAR PROJECT, OVER 100,000.

SO THEY DON'T ASK ANY QUESTIONS. THERE IS NO DISCUSSION, NO PRESENTATION OF MORE DATA.

AND THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT IN ORDER TO IMPROVE THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF PLANNING A PROJECT AND, AND MANAGING IT YOU NEED TO HAVE DATA, AND WITHOUT THE DATA AND WITHOUT ANALYZING THE DATA, YOU HAVE NO WAY TO KNOW WHERE YOU CAN MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS AND HOW YOU CAN MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT, MORE COST EFFECTIVE. JUST IT'S NOT POSSIBLE. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE WE NEED A TOTAL REVAMP OF THE ENTIRE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROCESS AND SEPARATE THE MAINTENANCE FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.

AND THIS WAS THE SUGGESTION EVEN BY THE AUDITORS THAT IF YOU HAVE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THAT'S NOT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.

SO IT SHOULD NOT BE LUMPED IN WITH ALL THE OTHER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SHOULD BE EXACTLY WHAT THE TITLE SAYS.

I AGREE, BUT I THOUGHT THEY. SO THEY ARE TOGETHER.

THEY'RE ALL TOGETHER. THE FINANCE DIRECTOR CONFIRM ARE THE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ARE, THEY'RE NOT SEPARATE, THEY'RE ALL LUMPED IN TOGETHER. SO TALKING ABOUT PROFESSIONAL AND CONTRACTUAL, IT'S THE SAME THING HERE. EVERYTHING IS TOGETHER.

I JUST WANT HER TO CONFIRM YES OR NO. ARE THE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS AND CIP PROJECTS LUMPED IN TOGETHER? I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY LUMPED IN TOGETHER, BUT WE CONSIDER THEM BOTH AS PART OF OUR LARGER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

OKAY, SO YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU WILL SEE SOME PROJECTS, BUT SOME PROJECTS ARE MAINTENANCE.

YEAH, WE CONSIDER THOSE BOTH PART OF OUR CIP.

OKAY. THAT'S SO BAD I DIDN'T BELIEVE IT. I BELIEVE WE DO INDICATE WHAT IS MAINTENANCE AND WHAT IS WHAT IS A, LIKE, WHAT IS KIND OF LIKE AN ONGOING PROJECT AND WHAT'S KIND OF A STANDALONE PROJECT.

I BELIEVE WE DO IDENTIFY THOSE. OKAY. I, THAT'S SO BAD THAT I DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS TRUE, BUT YOU'RE CORRECT.

[01:15:04]

THAT'S WHY WE PUT THEM IN THE CIP. SO WE'RE NOT DOING REGULAR, YOU KNOW, KIND OF SMALLER, SMALLER DOLLAR VALUE ONGOING MAINTENANCE IS NOT IN OUR CAPITAL PROJECT.

THAT'S KIND OF OUR LARGER, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF ONE RIGHT NOW.

LIKE OUR RESIDENTIAL REHAB OR OUR ANNUAL, LIKE STREET REPAVING.

RIGHT. THOSE ARE GOING TO BE, WE'RE GOING TO ORGANIZE THOSE IN OUR BUDGET AS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, BECAUSE THEY ARE LARGE DOLLAR VALUE ITEMS THAT KIND OF FIT THAT CATEGORY.

OKAY. SORRY. IF WE WANTED TO KIND OF SHOW THEM, SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS SECTION OF THE CIP ARE LARGELY MAINTENANCE AND THESE ARE STANDALONE PROJECTS. I MEAN, THAT'S VERY EASY FOR US TO DO.

I THINK JUST MAYBE FROM AN ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT, IF A ACTIVITY EXTENDS THE LIFE OF.

THIS DEFINITION. IT'S A CAPITAL EXPENSE. IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT JUST IS IN THE NORMAL SCOPE OF OPERATING, THAT PARTICULAR ASSET IS NECESSARY TO KEEP IT OPERATIONAL WITHOUT SUBSTANTIALLY EXTENDING THE LIFE.

THEN IT'S CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, SO.

SO THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO ACTUALLY SEPARATE THAT, WHICH I'M FOR.

THAT'S ONE. SECONDLY. OKAY. DO AWAY WITH THE CHANGE ORDER PROCESS THE WAY IT IS.

YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ALWAYS HAVE THE AUTHORITY FOR THE ENGINEER TO SPEND UP TO 25, 000 FOR EMERGENCY.

NOTHING ELSE SHOULD FALL INTO CHANGE ORDER. AND THIS IS WHERE 80% OF THE MONEY IS GOING.

I'VE TALKED TO INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS IN THE AREA AND THEY ALL SAY THEY LIKE THE WAY IT IS BECAUSE WHEN THERE IS A CHANGE ORDER ISSUED, THEY DON'T GET THE BID. SO THEY WILL ALWAYS QUOTE A MUCH HIGHER PRICE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THEY MAKE MONEY.

SO WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE CHANGE ORDERS? WHAT WOULD YOU COMMENT ABOUT HIGHER PRICE? I MISSED THAT. THE SERVICE PROVIDERS LIKE IT BECAUSE WHY.

THE CHANGE ORDER ALLOWS THE ADMINISTRATION OR THE PLANNING PEOPLE TO PLACE THE ORDER ON WHOEVER IS ALREADY DOING SOME WORK AND THEY SAY, OKAY. TELL US HOW MUCH THIS IS GOING TO COST AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO OUT FOR BIDS.

SO NATURALLY, HE'S GOING TO QUOTE MUCH MORE. BUT IT'S, IT IS AT THE PRIOR AGREED TO PRICE.

IT'S NOT A HIGHER PRICE. IT'S AN EXTENSION OF THE PROJECT SIR.

THIS IS WHERE THE PLANNING COMES IN. AND THE PLANNING IS VERY POOR BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THEY CAN ALWAYS ISSUE A CHANGE ORDER AND KEEP THE PROJECT GOING. SO IF THE WORK IS DONE AND IN THE MEANTIME, THE CITY FINDS OUT THAT THEY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS FROM WHATEVER SOURCE THEY ARE GETTING, OR IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT THEY FEEL JUST LIKE THE 180TH STREET AND PCH INTERSECTION, YOU KNOW. WHEN THEY STARTED WORKING ON IT, THEY INVITED THE BIDS.

THAT PART WAS DONE. AND THEN IN THE MEANTIME, THEY THOUGHT, WELL, IT WOULD BE NICE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE IN ADDITION.

AND THEY SIMPLY GAVE THAT JOB TO THE CONTRACTOR WHO WAS WORKING ON IT WITHOUT GETTING THE BIDS.

AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS TIME AND AGAIN ON EVERY PROJECT THAT I LOOKED AT.

SO IF THEY DON'T GO OUT FOR BIDS, THE CONTRACTOR KNOWS IT.

HE KNOWS WHAT HE HAS TO DO. AND THIS IS SOMETHING IN ADDITION TO THE INITIAL PROJECT.

BUT YOU USED THE COMMENT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT FOR BID.

THEY DON'T GO OUT FOR BID ON THE EXTENSION OF THE PROJECT.

BUT IT IS DONE UNDER THE MANDATES OF A BID, AN RFP PROCESS THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE.

SO IT IS UNDER TERMS OF A CONTRACT IT'S UNDER A CONTRACTUAL TERM.

THAT THE PROJECT NUMBER AND THE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION DOESN'T CHANGE AS BEST I CAN TELL.

THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGES IS THE SOURCE OF FUNDING OR SOME ADDITIONAL WORK THAT THE CITY FEELS THAT COULD BE DONE. YOU SEE, THE PROBLEM I'M HAVING WITH THIS WHOLE PROCESS, NUMBER ONE IS.

I WASN'T. I DIDN'T SIT IN ON THOSE MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC WORKS.

SO I DON'T KNOW SOME OF THE REJOINDER TO THE COMMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LOGICALLY MAKE AND THAT IF I WERE IN YOUR PLACE,

[01:20:07]

I CAN'T MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR, AND I DON'T THINK THIS COMMISSION CAN MAKE A DECISION BASED ON WHAT WE'VE RECEIVED SO FAR. THIS IS WHY. WHAT WAS IT THAT YOU NEED INFORMATION ON, THAT YOU DO NOT.

I WANT TO HEAR THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS EXPLAIN WHY WE ISSUE WORK ORDERS SO OFTEN.

AND I ASK HIM THE QUESTION, ARE YOU ARE YOU SURE THAT YOU'RE NOT PAYING A HIGHER PRICE FOR THIS THAN IF YOU WENT OUT FOR A WORK ORDER? NOW, HE COULD, HE OR SHE, COULD BE CLOUDING THE ISSUE IF THEY WANTED TO AND, OR THEY COULD BE GIVING AN HONEST OPINION THAT THERE, THERE IS NO INCREASE IN PRICE, IN MY OPINION, BECAUSE OF THESE FACTS. THAT'S THE KIND OF THING WE NEED TO HEAR FROM.

THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING WITH THE PLANNING PEOPLE.

AND THE PROBLEM IS EVERY PROJECT IS UNIQUE. SO YOU CANNOT, YOU KNOW, COME TO SOME GENERALIZATION.

I THINK YOUR OBSERVATION, THOUGH, THAT 80% OF THE OF THE COST WAS BASED ON CONTRACT CHANGES, ORDERS. I THINK THAT IN ITSELF SPELLS OUT THE PROBLEM THAT THE PLANNING AT THE FRONT END DOESN'T, ISN'T COMPREHENSIVE ENOUGH TO CARRY THROUGH TO THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.

AND IF THE PLANNING PART OF IT ONLY COVERS 20% OF THE COST, I GUESS THAT'S ENOUGH FOR ME TO SAY THAT THERE APPEARS TO BE A PROBLEM WITH COMING UP WITH THE QUOTE INITIALLY THAT THE ORIGINAL BID IS BASED ON.

AND IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THAT, IT'S ONLY 20% OF THE TOTAL COST.

SO THE CONTRACTOR THEN GETS BROUGHT BACK IN FOR TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT THAT ENDS UP BEING 80% OF THE COST.

THE PEOPLE IN PLANNING, THEY DID NOT SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

THEY, YOU KNOW, WERE VERY PROTECTIVE AND THEY DEFENDED THEIR STATUS.

AND THEY SAID, WE KNOW WHAT THE COST IS GOING TO BE, SO THE CONTRACTOR CANNOT CHARGE US MORE.

NOW, HOW DO THEY KNOW? BECAUSE WHAT THEY ARE ASKING THE CONTRACTOR TO DO IS SOME SOMETIMES COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT HE HAS DONE. AND YET HE IS GETTING THE JOB BECAUSE HE WAS INVOLVED WITH IT.

SO CHAIRMAN, THE PROBLEM IS EVERY PROJECT IS UNIQUE.

EVERY PROJECT IS DIFFERENT. THE ONLY THING I CAN CONCLUDE BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN AND WHAT I HAVE READ. AND I THINK THE WHOLE PROCESS NEEDS TO BE REVAMPED.

AND IN 30 YEARS, A LOT OF THINGS HAVE CHANGED, TECHNOLOGY HAS CHANGED.

THESE PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ANY TRAINING OR ANY EDUCATION OR EXPERIENCE IN PROCESS IMPROVEMENT, IN DATA ANALYSIS. AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE MISSING.

THE PROCESS. THE PROJECTS THAT I'M USED TO SEEING HAVE A CONTINGENCY PERCENTAGE AND USUALLY IT RUNS BETWEEN 5 AND 15%.

SO IF THE PLANNING IS DONE PROPERLY, YOU MAY RUN INTO A CONTINGENCY, BUT IT SHOULDN'T EXCEED SOME CLOSE RANGE OF WHAT THE ORIGINAL PRICE WAS.

CERTAINLY 80% MORE THAN WHAT THE ORIGINAL PRICE IS.

IT. THAT'S BECAUSE IT WILL CONTINUE TO EXPAND.

MY POINT IS THAT THIS CONVERSATION SHOULD BE TAKING PLACE IN FRONT OF THE HEAD OF PUBLIC WORKS, WHO CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION OF WHY WE DID IT THIS WAY.

WE DID THAT. WASN'T HE HERE NOT LONG AGO? AND HE ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS.

AND THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY PROTECT WHAT THEY DO.

SO FAR IS THAT THEY'RE DEFENSIVE AND DEFENDING THAT.

THEY DEFEND IT. BUT I WANT TO HEAR HOW THEY'RE DEFENDING IT AND WHAT.

WELL, WE DID HERE. NO WE DIDN'T. MAYBE YOU WEREN'T HERE.

WELL, I MEAN THAT. YOU WEREN'T HERE, THAT'S ON YOU.

WE HAD A COUPLE OF MEETINGS WITH THE PLANNING PEOPLE.

WE HAD A VERY HEATED DISCUSSION, AND THEY WERE.

YOU CAN MEET IF YOU WANT TO MEET WITH HIM, YOU CAN SEPARATELY MEET WITH HIM.

WE'VE GOT A MEETING WITH PUBLIC WORKS WHERE WE'RE ASKING THEM TO APPEAR IN OUR MAY MEETING, RIGHT? MONDAY? IS IT? NO, WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE.

IT'S NOT CHANGED. IS IT CONFUSING THE ISSUE TO BOTH TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET AND THEIR PROCESS AT THE SAME TIME WHEN WE HAVE THEM IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION? I CAN ASK. I GUESS. YEAH, I THINK SO.

I THINK THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ALSO, YOU KNOW, FEELS THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS EXPLAINED

[01:25:05]

I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT TWO THIRDS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS NOT HERE TO, YOU KNOW, SHARE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION.

I'M JUST TRYING TO BE MINDFUL OF HIS TIME AND THE EXPLANATIONS THAT HE'S PROVIDED.

I CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MEETINGS WHERE THEY PRESENTED.

WE OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE VIDEO, WE HAVE TRANSCRIPTS.

SO HE GOES INTO A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS IN DETAIL, I THINK.

YEAH. SO HE GOES INTO SOME OF THOSE IN DETAIL.

DEFINITELY. I THINK WE CAN BRING UP THE THE QUESTION WHEN WE HAVE THE OTHER COMMISSION JOIN US IF THEY CHOOSE TO JOIN US.

I GUESS I WOULD HESITATE TO TURN THAT INTO A DISCUSSION OF THE CIP PROCESS WHEN WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE BUDGET.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IT CAN'T HURT TO BRING IT UP. BUT IT IS PART OF A BUDGET.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE BUDGETED THIS MUCH AND THEN YOU'RE DOING ALL THESE CHANGE ORDERS.

WELL, IF IT WASN'T BUDGETED, THEN WHERE DO YOU GET THIS MONEY FROM? SO THAT'S A GOOD BUDGET QUESTION, RIGHT? YEAH.

SO I WOULD ASK THAT THAT'S I MEAN, THAT'S RELEVANT.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE. AND THAT'S VERY CONNECTED TO THE.

BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. IT'S BUDGET. IF IT'S NOT BUDGETED, WHERE IS IT COMING FROM? MOSTLY IT IS FROM FUNDING FROM SO MANY OTHER, LIKE THE METRO AND.

RIGHT, BUT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PART OF THE BUDGET, RIGHT? WELL, IF IT'S EXTERNAL SOURCES, THEN THEY'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR IT.

SO IT'S COMING FROM A SEPARATE FUNDING. RIGHT, BUT IT'S FORECASTED IN THE BUDGET BOOK.

BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN IF WE BUDGET FOR IT, RIGHT? IT SHOULD BE FORECASTED IN THE BUDGET BOOK. IT'S NOT LIKE THE MONEY COME, YOU KNOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN.

SO GENERALLY WHAT WE WHAT WE PUT IN THE BUDGET BOOK.

SO ESPECIALLY FOR THE ITEMS WHERE WE GET AN ANNUAL ALLOCATION, LIKE THE TRANSIT FUNDING OR OTHER COUNTY FUNDING.

THEY'LL GIVE US AN ESTIMATE OF THE FUNDING FOR THE YEAR.

WE TAKE THAT FUNDING. AND ANY REMAINING BALANCE.

WE PROJECT SPENDING THAT THE ITEMS THAT COMMISSIONER JESTE IS REFERRING TO IS MANY TIMES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, YOU KNOW, SOME CITIES DON'T SPEND MONEY. THEY HAVE REVISIONS TO THEIR ESTIMATES.

THEY'LL COME BACK TO THE CITY AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, SO AND SO SAID HE DIDN'T USE THEIR ALLOCATION.

WE HAVE ANOTHER, WE HAVE ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS FOR X.

AND THEY SAY, HEY, WHAT CAN YOU GUYS USE IT ON? SO WE PROJECT IN OUR BUDGET BASED ON THE BEST INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE.

THAT IS THE ONLY MONEY WE PLAN ON SPENDING. AND THEN IF OTHER INFORMATION COMES IN, WE'LL PROGRAM THAT AT A LATER POINT.

LOOK, I DON'T MEAN TO SPEAK FOR THE COMMISSION.

IF YOU ALL HAVE HAVE SEEN THOSE PRESENTATIONS AND YOU HAVE A FIRM VIEW OF WHAT PUBLIC WORKS IS SAYING.

THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE. I APPARENTLY MISSED THOSE MEETINGS BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL SITTING IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC.

I THINK YOU WERE ABSENT. I MISSED. WHAT, THERE WERE TWO THAT YOU MISSED.

IN A ROW. LET ME, I HAVE SOME NOTES FROM TWO PROJECTS THAT I HIGHLIGHTED.

JOB 41240 ANITA STREET AT PCH IMPROVEMENT. INITIAL COST WAS 213,800.

THEN WHEN THE PROJECT STARTED THEN THE MEASURE R FUNDING AVAILABILITY WAS ANNOUNCED IN AUGUST OF 24.

SO THIS IS WHAT I'VE SEEN IN MANY PROJECTS THAT AFTER THEY START THE WORK, THEN THEY SAY, OH, WE GOT SOME FUNDING FROM SUCH AND SUCH MEASURE OR METRO OR WHATEVER, AND THEN TO SPEND THAT ADDITIONAL AMOUNT FOR ANY IMPROVEMENT, THEN THEY GO DIRECTLY TO THE CONTRACTOR AND THROUGH CHANGE ORDER PROCESS, THEY PAY THAT ADDITIONAL AMOUNT. AND THIS THE GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE INGLEWOOD AVENUE AT MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD INTERSECTION RECEIVED $5,175,000 FROM LA METRO CONTRACTOR WAS AWARDED TO TRIPLE A ON JUNE 15TH, 2021 FOR 935,000. THAT THE CHANGE ORDER FOR 300,000, 305,000 APPROVED TO OFFSET SETBACKS AND DELAYS.

CONTRACT DID NOT INCLUDE IMPROVEMENT OF SIGNAL EQUIPMENT, SOMETHING THAT THEY ADDED TO THE JOB NOTICE TO PROCEED WAS ISSUED IN JULY 22. FIVE CHANGE ORDERS WERE BUNDLED INTO ONE IN DECEMBER 2022 AND THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED IN

[01:30:01]

WELL, WHAT'S THE RESPONSE FROM PUBLIC WORKS WHEN YOU ASK THE QUESTION WHY WEREN'T THESE ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING THE ORIGINAL PLANNING PROCESS? THEIR RESPONSE PROBABLY IS BECAUSE WE HAD NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT THEY WOULD OCCUR.

WELL, IF THEY HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THEY'RE GOING TO OCCUR I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW YOU DO THAT EXCEPT THROUGH A CHANGE ORDER.

CAN YOU SIMPLY BLUE SKY IT AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO DO X OR BETWEEN X AND 50 X? YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU'VE GOT TO, YOU'VE GOT TO BID ON WHAT YOU KNOW IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE, RIGHT? ARE YOU ASKING THAT IT GOES BACK OUT TO BID IF THERE'S A CHANGE ORDER OVER A CERTAIN LEVEL? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? GUESS. COMMISSIONER.

JUST IT SEEMS THAT CHANGE ORDERS HAVE TO BE ABLE HAVE TO OCCUR IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES.

NOW, YOU MENTIONED A PROJECT THAT TOOK TEN YEARS, CLEARLY THAT'S OUTSIDE THE NORM OF ANYTHING WE CAN TALK ABOUT HERE.

BUT IN A NORMAL PROJECT, YOU PLAN FOR WHAT YOU KNOW.

IF YOU, IF THE COUNTY OR THE STATE COMES ALONG AND DROPS MONEY IN YOUR POCKET AND YOU SAY, WELL, WE CAN DO MORE THAN WE ANTICIPATED. THAT'S A VALID REASON FOR.

YOU DIDN'T ANTICIPATE THAT AT THE BEGINNING. IF YOU HAVE MONEY, YOU SPEND IT AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CHANGE ORDER FOR THAT.

SO IT SEEMS THAT THERE ARE SOME SITUATIONS WHERE NO MATTER WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FOR THOSE CONTINGENCIES.

THAT'S WHAT PUBLIC WORKS WOULD TELL US I THINK.

THE SCOPE OF THE WORK, IF IT CHANGES SIGNIFICANTLY, THEN THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET BIDS. THAT'S AS SIMPLE AS IT CAN GET. AND THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN HERE.

AND THIS IS WHY WE START WITH $200,000 PROJECT, END UP AT 800,000 OR WAY MORE THAN THAT.

SO THE QUESTION WILL BE AT WHAT POINT DO YOU GO AND GET.

AND I SUPPOSE YOU COULD ARGUE THAT THE METRICS OF A, OF A $5 MILLION PROJECT COULD BE DIFFERENT THAN IF THAN THE BID FOR A MILLION. SO THERE COULD BE ECONOMIES OF SCALE SO THAT IF WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE 5 MILLION, WE GET A LOWER BID THAN IF IT'S GOING TO BE 1 MILLION.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS, AND I'VE DONE THIS FOR 30 YEARS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

AND I CAN TELL YOU ONE THING, INITIALLY, YOU HAVE TO SPEND AN AWFUL LOT OF TIME IN DEVELOPING THE SPECS AND THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT.

AND THERE WAS ONE LADY OH HAD THE PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT 3 OR 4 MONTHS AGO.

I DON'T REMEMBER HER NAME, MAYBE STEPHANIE MIGHT REMEMBER.

AND SHE SAID THE SAME THING THAT MR. MUELLER HAS SAID A COUPLE OF TIMES THAT THE INITIAL PLANNING IS VERY, VERY POOR. AND THIS IS PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, HAPPENING NOT AT THE CITY LEVEL, BUT EVEN AT THE STATE LEVEL.

THAT'S WHY SOME OF THESE PROJECTS THEY STARTED YOU KNOW, VERY LOW PROJECTION.

AND THEN WE END UP SPENDING MILLIONS AND BILLIONS MORE BECAUSE NOBODY DOES THE KIND OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPING THE SPECIFICATIONS UP FRONT BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THEY WILL GET FUNDING DOWN THE ROAD.

YEAH. THAT'S THE THING I WOULD QUARREL WITH AS FAR AS THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, YOUR SUGGESTION THAT YOU DON'T DO CHANGE ORDERS AT ALL.

I THINK THAT'S CLEARLY NOT EVEN FROM A, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A PROFESSIONAL.

RIGHT, THAT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE. IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE.

SO YOU'VE GOT TO. I DIDN'T SAY, I DIDN'T SAY NO CHANGE ORDERS.

CHANGE ORDERS. I DIDN'T SAY NO CHANGE ORDERS.

ANYTHING OVER 25,000 GET THE BIDS. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.

BEFORE EVEN WE GET TO THE CHANGE ORDER PART. I THINK COMMISSIONER SHERBIN AND I HAVE BEEN MENTIONING SOMETHING THAT'S WORTHY OF DISCUSSING IS WE THINK THAT. AND. AND YOU CAN INTERRUPT ME WHENEVER YOU WANT.

BUT IT IT STARTS WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING.

SO IT ALL STARTS WITH THE RFP AND HOW IT'S WRITTEN.

SO I'D LIKE TO FOCUS MORE ON, YOU KNOW, INITIALLY BEFORE WE EVEN GO TO THE CHANGE ORDERS, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE RFP AND WHAT'S NOT INCLUDED AND WHAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED, WHO OVERSEES THE RFP? IT IS A LEADERSHIP.

I THINK IT'S A LEADERSHIP ISSUE. I THINK SOMEONE NEEDS TO APPROVE THAT RFP, NOT JUST BY SIGNING, BUT REALLY GOING THROUGH IT AND THINKING WHAT'S, YOU KNOW, ARE OUR OLDEST SCENARIOS IN THIS AREA.

[01:35:02]

THEN IT'S LITERALLY ANOTHER PROJECT. IT'S NOT THE SAME PROJECT.

IT'S ANOTHER PROJECT. IT'S ANOTHER BID. IF THAT ADDITIONAL COST IS GOING TO EXCEED A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE ORIGINAL BID.

ALL VALID COMMENTS. WHAT DID THE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE FROM PUBLIC WORKS SAY IN THEIR 2 OR 3 MEETINGS THAT I MISSED TO ADDRESS THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS? THAT'S MY POINT. WE NEED TO HEAR THEIR RESPONSE TO THE DAMN THING.

I MEAN, THEY DID GIVE RESPONSE, BUT THEY, THEY.

MY RECOLLECTION OF THE RESPONSE WAS THAT AS THE PROJECT DEVELOPS, THE SCOPE CHANGES BECAUSE OF SOME BETTER VISION WHATEVER IT IS. THEY GO, AND IF THEY NEED TO, THEY GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL, AND THE COUNCIL SAYS, PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. THERE ISN'T A REAL CHECK TO SAY THAT I'M THAT THAT WAS PRESENTED THAT THERE'S, THAT THEY GO THROUGH ANOTHER PROCESS OF REBIDDING, REEVALUATING AND ASKING SOME QUESTIONS.

WHAT'S THE REASON THAT WE NEED THIS CHANGE? WAS THERE, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL WORK THAT WAS REQUIRED THAT WASN'T ORIGINALLY PLANNED? OR IS IT NEW WORK THAT WASN'T ORIGINALLY PLANNED? I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO FOR ME. AND IT'S THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THAT GOALPOST THAT THE US, THAT THE DEPARTMENT USES, AND THEY JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SO IMPORTANT FOR US TO DEFINE THE PROJECT RIGHT NOW COMPLETELY BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THIS ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THE GOAL AS WE NEED TO IF IT'S LEGITIMATE, IF WE IF IT'S QUOTE UNQUOTE LEGITIMATE.

AND THAT JUST MEANS IF THERE'S A DESIRE TO MAKE A CHANGE.

AND THESE NEED TO BE PROACTIVELY ANTICIPATED.

SO THEY NEED SOMEONE WITH KNOWLEDGE, NOT JUST AN ASSOCIATE ENGINEER DRAFTING THE RFP, BUT SOMEONE AT A MORE EXPERT LEVEL WHO CAN ANTICIPATE THOSE KIND OF CHANGES COMING UP.

DO WE HAVE THAT PERSON ON STAFF AND. THE PUBLIC , THE CITY ENGINEER SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT, OR BECAUSE TO ME, THIS SAYS WHAT'S GOING ON IS EITHER THEY DO NOT HAVE A QUALIFIED CITY ENGINEER, OR THIS PERSON IS NOT DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.

I THINK IT'S PHILOSOPHICAL. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE BEING HELD TO THAT, TO THE TO THE TEST TO SAY IF IT'S MORE THAN 10%.

LET ME TALK WITH THE ENGINEER BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THIS OR, OR WHATEVER THE CRITERIA IS.

BUT I THINK AS OPPOSED TO THAT, IT'S KIND OF IT'S MISSION CREEP OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED.

I'LL GIVE YOU A GOOD EXAMPLE. YOU WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE, YOU GET THE CONTRACTOR, 2 OR 3 CONTRACTORS TO BID YOU AWARD THE JOB TO THE LOWEST BIDDER, WHATEVER. AND THEN HALFWAY THROUGH THE PROJECT, WHILE THE HOUSE IS BEING BUILT, YOU SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN OLYMPIC SIZE SWIMMING POOL IN THE IN THE BACK.

SO WOULD YOU GIVE THE JOB TO THE CONTRACTOR REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER HE PRICE HE QUOTES? OR WOULD YOU GO AROUND AND SOLICIT BIDS FROM A COUPLE OTHER PEOPLE? THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HOUSE IS AN ADDITION TO THE PROJECT.

THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS HERE IN THIS CASE, IN THE CASE OF THE CITY.

THEY WILL GIVE THE JOB TO THE SAME CONTRACTOR WITHOUT GETTING BIDS.

AGAIN, I'M MISUNDERSTANDING THAT BECAUSE THE DISCUSSION I'VE TIED MYSELF TO BEFORE IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SIMPLY ADDITIONAL UNITS OF WHAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL RFP.

IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A TOTALLY DIFFERENT A TOTALLY DIFFERENT ITEM, THE SWIMMING POOL WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE ORIGINAL RFP.

SO HOW IS THAT INCLUDED UNDER THAT ORIGINAL CONTRACT? EVERY, EVERY JOB IS DIFFERENT. AND THIS IS WHY IT IS SO DIFFICULT TO.

I MEAN, THAT'S A GREAT POINT YOU'RE BRINGING, BECAUSE THEN SOMEBODY IS BREAKING THE RULES.

YEAH. THAT THAT SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE. BUT BY CHANGE ORDER THEY CAN DO THAT.

AND I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER JESTE IS SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE HAS TO BE RULES FOR THE CHANGE ORDERS.

YOU CAN ONLY DO CHANGE ORDERS FOR ITEMS THAT WERE IN THE RFP.

IF IT WAS NOT IN RFP, YOU CANNOT DO THE CHANGE ORDER.

OKAY. ASSUMING THAT THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE CHANGE ORDERS WERE DONE INCORRECTLY OR NOT BASED ON

[01:40:05]

SO WE DO MORE THAN TWO SENTENCES, BUT THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO.

IT NEEDS BETTER OVERSIGHT. I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT IS.

IT'S A, IT'S AN ISSUE WITH AN OVERSIGHT. IT'S ACCOUNTABILITY BACK TO WHAT THE ORIGINAL REQUEST FROM.

SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, CUTTING THE CORNERS AND EVEN IN CASES WHERE THEY COULD HAVE GONE TO ANOTHER RFP.

THEY SAID, OH, WELL, WE CAN DO A CHANGE ORDER, WHY WASTE TIME ON ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS? INSTEAD OF A PROBLEM I WOULD CALL IT AN OPPORTUNITY TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING I'VE DONE IT BEFORE AND I KNOW HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE IT MAKES.

AND WHY DON'T WE DO THIS JUST A NEW SUBCOMMITTEE OF TWO.

YOU AND YOU. GET TOGETHER AND DO A SHORT DRAFT OF WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND, THE KIND OF RECOMMENDATIONS WE WOULD MAKE TO CITY COUNCIL.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THOSE ISSUES EXIST, BUT THEY MIGHT.

AND IF THEY DO, THAT PROCESS DOES NEED AN OVERHAUL.

AND SO ALL WE CAN DO IS RECOMMEND THAT THAT YOU, CITY COUNCIL CHANGE REVIEW THE PURCHASING PROCESS.

AND FOR THESE REASONS, THESE ARE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS THAT WE SEE.

YOU GUYS HAVE WORKED IN THIS, IN THIS FIELD AND, YOU KNOW, THE TERMINOLOGY AND, YOU KNOW, HOW TO DRAFT A RECOMMENDATION. THAT'S THE MOST WE CAN DO.

AND WE CAN DO THAT WITHOUT THE OTHER TWO MEMBERS OF THE ORIGINAL SUBCOMMITTEE WEIGHING IN.

SO DO YOU HAVE A MOTION TO DO THAT? WHAT ARE YOU SAYING, DO YOU OR DO YOU NEED ADDITIONAL PEOPLE? OH, YOU'RE THE, YOU'RE THE ADDITIONAL PERSON, AREN'T YOU? WANT ME TO BE? I CAN, I CAN IF YOU KNOW, I'M JUST WHATEVER YOU WANT.

THE THREE OF THE THREE WOULD. LIKE TO, I THINK IT'S BETTER IF IT IS THREE OF US.

RIGHT. OKAY. WHATEVER YOU NEED. I'M SORRY, YOU SAID JUST THE TWO, OR YOU? THREE. THREE, OKAY. THE THREE. DAMIEN, DO YOU WANT TO.

OH, NO. THAT'S OKAY. IF YOU WANT, I DON'T HAVE.

I WAS JUST, I THINK I CAN APPOINT A SUBCOMMITTEE IF THE IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO.

I'M OKAY WITH IT. BUT WE. YEAH, WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS FOR A LONG TIME, AND I THINK WE'VE QUESTIONED A LOT OF PEOPLE.

WE'VE GOT A LOT OF ANSWERS. AND NOW IT'S UP TO US TO THINK AND DO WHAT WE WANT OTHER PEOPLE TO DO.

AND A SUGGESTION. THE TERMINOLOGY SHOULD NOT BE IN THE SENSE THAT THERE IS WASTE, BUT THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR WASTE.

AND THESE ARE CORRECTIVE STEPS THAT WE THINK SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.

YEAH. AND ALL IT IS, IS A RECOMMENDATION AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE GIVING TO COUNCIL, WHO MIGHT NOT DO ANYTHING WITH IT AT ALL.

I THINK WE NEED A. I DON'T WANT TO START WITH THAT AS A MANDATE.

BUT I THINK WE NEED A MOTION BY THE, MOTION APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION THAT WE WILL SEND SUCH A LETTER TO COUNCIL.

AND THEN IF THAT WILL. CREATE A DRAFT OR SEND IT TO YOU.

THEN YOU CAN, THEN WE CAN DECIDE BECAUSE THAT ISN'T THAT A LITTLE BIT.

CAN WE DO THAT? CAN WE DO IT THAT WAY. FOR THE COMMISSION TO VOTE ON.

WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO PROCEED WITH. YOU DRAFT A LETTER OR A POLICY STATEMENT OR A STATEMENT TO COUNCIL, IT'LL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL.

TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS. REVIEW AND APPROVE. OKAY.

YEP. LET'S DO THAT. ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO. SORRY, BEFORE YOUR MOTION, JUST HAVE TO SAY THERE'S NO ONE ON ZOOM OR NO ECOMMENTS.

THANK YOU. I CAN OH, SORRY. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I CAN GO AND FIND THE MEETINGS THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS WAS PRESENT AT AND SHARE BOTH THE VIDEO AND THE TRANSCRIPT WITH YOU, IF ANY OF THAT IS INSTRUCTIVE. SO I THINK IF YOU GO TO THE MEETINGS, IT WAS RIGHT BEFORE YOU GOT ELECTED FOR THE POSITION OR NOT ELECTED.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT, IF YOU DON'T MIND DOING THAT.

YES, I WILL DEFINITELY DO THAT. I'M SO SAD I DID NOT RECORD OUR SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING WITH PUBLIC WORKS.

I THOUGHT ABOUT IT. I DID NOT DO THAT. COMMISSIONER JESTE, YOU SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT OF THAT BRILLIANT IDEA.

I'M CLEARLY NOT UP TO IT. I'M TIRED OF ARGUING BECAUSE I'VE DONE THIS SO FOR SO LONG.

I DON'T THINK I CAN MAKE A MOTION, CAN I? WHY DON'T YOU MAKE A MOTION? ANYBODY? OH A MOTION THAT WE CREATE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF COMMISSIONER JESTE, COMMISSIONER SHERBIN AND COMMISSIONER ALLEN TO WRITE A MOTION. LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION. LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION.

TO CITY COUNCIL. TO CITY COUNCIL. REGARDING PURCHASING PRACTICES.

YES. PERFECT. AND THEN WE BRING IT TO THE COMMITTEE FOR APPROVAL.

[01:45:05]

AND I WANT TO KIND OF START JUST BEING ON THE AGENDA TO START THINKING ABOUT THIS AND START DISCUSSING IT.

I KNOW I CAN'T DO IT, BUT EITHER IF STAFF CAN GO TO THE WEBSITE, THE FINANCE WEBSITE, OR THE COMMISSIONERS CAN GO TO THE FINANCE WEBSITE AND SEE WHAT KIND OF REPORTS ARE POSTED BECAUSE I WANT US TO BE ABLE TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS HOW WE CAN HAVE PUBLIC FRIENDLY REPORTS SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN LOOK AT IT AND EASILY UNDERSTAND OUR BUDGET.

WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY, AND THIS IS WHY I KIND OF WANTED IT TO BE EVERYONE TO SEE.

WE HAVE REPORTS THAT ARE HUNDREDS OF PAGES AND THERE IS NO WAY FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THESE REPORTS. SO. OH, IS ACFR ON OUR WEBSITE? AND FOR US ALSO TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT'S ON OUR WEBSITE? WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO PROVIDE? WHAT CAN WE DO SO THAT IT'S PUBLIC FRIENDLY? SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A FINANCE PERSON TO UNDERSTAND, BUT YOU CAN EASILY GO IN THESE REPORTS AND WITHOUT READING 300 PAGES, UNDERSTAND THE CITY FINANCES. SO OUR BASIC REPORTS, AND COMMISSIONER ALLEN IS CORRECT.

WE ARE, MAIN REPORTS ARE JUST THE BUDGET WHICH YOU'VE SEEN OUR BUDGET DOCUMENT.

WE HAVE OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET.

WE ALSO HAVE HERE, WE INCLUDE OUR BUDGET RESPONSE REPORTS.

AND THESE AREN'T, THEY AREN'T QUITE BUDGET DOCUMENTS, BUT THESE ARE THE REPORTS.

THAT'S THE BUDGET. I'VE CLICKED THE WRONG ONE. BUT THESE ARE.

OH NO IT'S JUST THE SAME. IT'S JUST THE SAME COVER.

THESE ARE THE REPORTS, THAT KIND OF SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS THAT WE PREPARE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL EVERY YEAR IN RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC KIND OF PROGRAMMATIC QUESTIONS.

SO WE HAVE THOSE ITEMS. WE HAVE OUR REGULAR BUDGET, OUR CIP AND THESE REPORTS.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE OUR ACFR HERE. BY YEAR AND I ALSO STARTED ADDING OUR SINGLE AUDIT REPORT, WHICH IS OUR REPORT FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ON ALL OUR FEDERAL FUNDING.

I WOULD AGREE, AND I COMMUNICATED THIS TO MR. MUELLER. HE HAD SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE READABILITY OF THE ACFR.

THE ACFR IS NOT DESIGNED FOR THE PUBLIC. IT IS NOT DESIGNED FOR DECISION MAKERS.

IT IS DESIGNED FOR ACCOUNTANTS. AND IT IS DESIGNED FOR FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT.

AND THE WAY THAT, THE FORMAT THAT IT'S IN MEETS ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

AND WE KIND OF NEED TO KEEP IT IN THAT FORMAT.

I DO HAVE A COUPLE PROPOSALS FOR THIS. ONE IS TO CREATE WHAT'S CALLED A PAFR.

I'M SURE, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER ALLEN, YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF THIS.

IT'S A POPULAR ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT, INSTEAD OF COMPREHENSIVE.

AND WHAT THIS DOES IS IT DOES AIM TO TAKE ALL OF THIS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF NOT READABLE FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND IDENTIFY WHAT IS MEANINGFUL TO PEOPLE. SO OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, SHE'S DONE THIS IN OTHER CITIES THAT SHE'S BEEN A PART OF, SO SHE'S EXCITED TO WORK ON THAT FOR OUR CITY.

WE'VE ALSO LOOKED FOR THE BUDGET AT PRODUCING LIKE A BUDGET SNAPSHOT.

AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING A LOT OF OTHER CITIES DO.

AND APART FROM THAT, IF THE, YOU KNOW, COMMISSION HAS IDEAS FOR WAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR BEST PRACTICES TO SHARE FINANCIAL INFORMATION, WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO DO THAT.

YEAH, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, WE CAN LOOK AT THE GFOA.

THEY USUALLY HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING KIND OF PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE BUDGET.

I WILL SAY THOUGH, ONE TOOL THAT WE REMOVED WAS OUR TRANSPARENCY SITE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE PAID FOR THROUGH OPENGOV.

AND IT'S WHERE THE CITY, WE UPLOAD OUR EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE DATA AND YOU CAN KIND OF CREATE THESE CHARTS AND GRAPHS.

A LOT OF CITIES ADOPTED THESE ABOUT TEN ISH YEARS AGO.

I LOOKED THROUGH A VARIETY OF CITIES. MANY OF THESE HAVE RETIRED THOSE SITES.

[01:50:02]

SO, AND WHAT HAPPENED WITH OUR SITE IS THAT FIRST FINANCE WAS VERY BUSY, WE DID NOT UPDATE IT, BUT ALSO WE'RE COMING TO THE END OF OUR CONTRACT.

IT'S ABOUT $10,000 A YEAR. AND IT WAS UNCLEAR HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE LOOKING AT OR USING THE INFORMATION, AND WE DETERMINED TO NOT CONTINUE THE CONTRACT AT THAT TIME.

THIS IS SOMETHING OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S INTEREST IN IT, WE CAN LOOK AROUND AND SEE WHAT OPTIONS THERE ARE.

SO THAT'S AN ITEM WE CAN LOOK AT, BUT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT PROGRAM THAT WE USED TO HAVE ON THE SITE.

SO WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS A FEW PAGES, A FEW PAGES OF VISUAL GRAPHS THAT SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU KNOW, THE WAY WE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY, OH, THIS IS WHAT OUR REVENUE IS. AND OH, THIS IS WHAT OUR EXPENSES ARE.

THIS IS WHERE OUR REVENUE IS COMING FROM. THIS IS HOW MUCH PROPERTY TAXES WE ARE RECEIVING.

THIS IS HOW MUCH SALES TAX WERE. JUST VERY HIGH LEVEL, PUBLIC FRIENDLY.

YEAH, AND. A FEW PAGES. SO I'M SURE YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I MEAN.

I CAN GIVE EXAMPLES FROM OTHER CITIES, BUT JUST SOMETHING THAT'S PUBLIC FRIENDLY.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, I DO NOT EXPECT ANYONE TO OPEN THAT UP FOR AND UNDERSTAND OR OPEN IT.

THAT'S ALL. WHO WOULD DO THIS? WE HAVE PEOPLE ON STAFF.

YEAH. YEAH. WE COULD DO IT. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO IN IN BUDGETS.

I MEAN, WE HAVE LOOKED AT A BUDGET SNAPSHOT. I THINK WE STARTED LOOKING AT IT LAST YEAR AND I LOST MY BUDGET ANALYST.

SO THAT WAS A LITTLE CHALLENGING. BUT YEAH, THIS IS NOT DIFFICULT FOR US TO DO.

GENERALLY YOU KIND OF PULL KIND OF THE HIGH LEVEL NUMBERS, PUT TOGETHER KIND OF NICE TWO PAGE OVERALL CITY REVENUE, CITY EXPENSES, HIGHLIGHT A FEW PROGRAMS. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S VERY DOABLE FOR US.

YEAH, AND JUST TO HAVE IN THERE, HOW MUCH OF THAT MONEY GOES TO POLICE DEPARTMENT TO FIRE DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE OUR PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY WE ACTUALLY SPEND ON POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS HIGHER THAN ANY THE PERCENTAGE WISE, IT'S HIGHER THAN ANY CITY I KNOW THAT I'VE LOOKED AT.

SO THAT WOULD BE A GOOD INFORMATION FOR PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT, HEY, YOU KNOW, 70% OF OUR BUDGET GOES TO FIRE AND POLICE.

I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE. I WILL SAY, IF YOU LOOK IN OUR BUDGET BOOK, BECAUSE IT'S DIGITAL, IT'S PRETTY EASY TO PULL UP AND JUST GO TO ANY ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL PAGES WHERE THEY HAVE THE LINE ITEM BUDGET.

IF THE PUBLIC'S NOT GOING TO DO THAT, THOUGH, WE, YOU KNOW.

SO, SO YES, I KNOW YOU HAVE THIS, BUT. I'M JUST SAYING THAT.

A LOT OF. IT IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, AND IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE AT THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE NAME, YOU HAVE AN ORGANIZATIONAL CHART.

WE HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT BREAKDOWNS OF THEIR SPENDING.

AND WE HAVE PERFORMANCE MEASURES. SO IF YOU'RE, I AGREE WITH YOU, I THINK WE COULD DEFINITELY DO SOMETHING THAT'S KIND OF HIGH LEVEL AND POINTS POINTS ON THESE THINGS OR POINTS ON ITEMS THAT MIGHT BE OF SPECIAL INTEREST.

BUT I DO THINK THAT OUR BUDGET IS FAIRLY EASY TO LOOK AT.

IF YOU JUST OPEN THIS AND YOU WANT TO GO TO AN INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENT AND SEE WHAT THE SPENDING IS, SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND SEE SOME TRENDS OVER TIME.

YEAH. I MEAN, THIS CERTAINLY WORKS FOR US FOR THIS GROUP.

THIS IS, YOU KNOW, VERY COMPREHENSIVE FOR US, EASY TO NAVIGATE, BUT, BUT FOR SOMEONE WHO'S NOT IN THE SAME INDUSTRY AS WE ARE, JUST FOR THEM TO JUST TAKE A LOOK AND SAY, HEY, PROPERTY TAXES ISN'T THAT MUCH AND IT'S REALLY COMING.

THE SALES TAXES IS WHAT'S PAYING OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, NOT MY PROPERTY TAXES.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE, JUST SOMETHING FOR THE PUBLIC TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE TAXES ARE NOT REALLY COMING FROM THEM THAT MUCH. IT'S COMING FROM OTHER SOURCES.

IT IS COMING FROM OTHER SOURCES. WE DO HAVE A FAIRLY DIVERSIFIED. BUT I THINK FOR NOW, THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

AND I KNOW A FEW PAGES OF POWERPOINT CHARTS IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL TO CREATE BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAVE THE NUMBERS.

YOU'VE GOT THE DETAIL YOU'RE GETTING GOING UP THE UP THE MATRIX IS NOT SO DIFFICULT.

IT'S JUST DECIDING ON A GRAPHIC AND THEN. IT'S JUST DECIDING ON A GRAPHIC, DECIDING WHAT TO HIGHLIGHT, SO. AND THERE ARE PLENTY OF CITIES WHO HAVE THAT, SO YOU CAN JUST GO AND COPY IT.

YEAH. I MEAN THAT'S JUST COPY WHAT OTHER PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S MANHATTAN BEACH OR WHATEVER, LIKE JUST COPY WHAT THEY HAVE, THAT'S IT. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAD FOR THE WEBSITES.

[01:55:06]

SO WE DO, WE WANT TO HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO CREATE SUMMARY CHARTS, BUDGET CHARTS. I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'LL CALL IT OR WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT.

YOU'RE MAKING THAT MOTION. OH, SORRY. NO, NO ONE ON ZOOM AND NO ECOMMENTS.

OKAY. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO HEAR A SECOND. SECOND.

SECOND. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. GOOD PICTURE.

OKAY, WE'RE THROUGH J.4, READY FOR J.5. PROPOSED REGULAR MEETING.

STEPHANIE, YOU WANT TO COVER THIS? I THINK IT'S THE CHANGE IS TO MOVE THAT APRIL 27TH MEETING TO LATER IN MAY AFTER THE BUDGET IS PRESENTED BY STAFF TO CITY COUNCIL.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DISCUSS UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.

YEAH, AND THIS IS PARTIALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE INFORMATION LAST YEAR.

WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE TIME TO HAVE A MORE SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION WITH THIS COMMISSION BEFORE COUNCIL MEETS.

SO WE'RE PROPOSING THAT. SO WE'RE PROPOSING TWO THINGS.

FIRST, I'LL TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET AND FINANCE REGULAR MEETING.

NORMALLY THIS WOULD TAKE PLACE I BELIEVE MAY 14TH WHICH IS DIRECTLY BEFORE WE DELIVER THE BUDGET TO COUNCIL.

WE WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE RESCHEDULE THAT.

SO WE DO NOT HOLD THAT MEETING AND INSTEAD WE HOLD THAT ON THE 26TH.

IT'S A TUESDAY. COUNCIL DOES NOT MEET THAT DAY.

AND AT THAT POINT WE WILL HAVE DELIVERED THE BUDGET TO COUNCIL AND HAVE YOU KNOW, PRESENTED KIND OF THE RECEIVE AND FILE.

SO THIS WOULD BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A REALLY SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION WITH THIS COMMISSION.

AND THEN WE WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO MEET AGAIN THE SECOND WEEK IN JUNE BEFORE FINAL BUDGET ADOPTION.

SO I WANTED TO PROPOSE THIS TO YOU. THE SECOND PIECE OF THAT IS THAT WITH KIND OF THE SAME THINKING IN MIND, WE HAD PLANNED TO HAVE A JOINT BUDGET AND FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING NEXT MONDAY ON THE 27TH.

WE WOULD LIKE TO CANCEL THAT MEETING AND INSTEAD INVITE THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION TO JOIN AT THE APRIL 26TH MEETING.

WE DON'T NEED TO DO A JOINT MEETING, KIND OF DISCUSS THAT.

YOU MEAN MAY 26TH. OH, SORRY. MAY. YES. WOW. MAY 26TH.

BUT WE WOULD INSTEAD INVITE THEM TO COME AND THEY CAN PARTICIPATE IN THAT MEETING AS WELL, WHICH WOULD AGAIN BE A MORE SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION.

OKAY. MOTION TO CHANGE MAY 14TH MEETING TO 26.

I THINK THAT'S REALLY ALL WE NEEDED TO DO. YEAH.

YEAH. ALL RIGHT. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. I'M FINE.

I CAN DO IT. WELL, IF THEY'RE VOTING YES. I MEAN, I'M ASSUMING.

YEAH. NO, IT'S VERY SAD. I WONDER HOPEFULLY ONE OTHER PERSON WILL MAKE.

ENOUGH RESPONSES FROM. WE HAVE WE HAVE GOTTEN NO RESPONSES EXCEPT FOR COMMISSIONER JESTE.

YES, BUT I THINK 4 SHOULD BE ALL WE NEED FOR A QUORUM.

IS THAT CORRECT? OH YEAH. 1234. I WAS NOT COUNTING MYSELF.

OKAY. ANY SECOND. DID WE DO SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AND ALONG WITH THAT, KEEP IN MIND THAT JUNE 2ND IS COUNCIL DISCUSSES SPECIFIC OPERATIONS

[K. COMMISSION MEMBER ITEMS AND FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA TOPICS]

SO USUALLY ON OR AROUND MAY 16TH, WE SEND COUNCIL AN EMAIL WITH A LINK TO OUR PROPOSED BUDGET DOCUMENT.

I WILL SEND THAT INFORMATION TO THE COMMISSION AS WELL SO THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO BEGIN LOOKING AT IT.

AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A MEETING TO PRESENT THAT BUDGET TO COUNCIL THE FOLLOWING TUESDAY.

SO THE COMMISSION WILL NOT SEE THAT DOCUMENT BEFORE IT IS PRESENTED TO.

NO. TO COUNCIL ON MAY 16TH. AT THE SAME TIME THEY DELIVER IT, WE'LL SEE IT BEFORE THEY PRESENT.

[02:00:02]

RIGHT. SOMEHOW WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT. SO THAT'S HOW IT'S HISTORIC.

FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, FROM THE CITY MANAGER, THAT'S KIND OF COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE.

IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DELIVER THE BUDGET TO COUNCIL AND WELL, YES, YES, YOU HAVE TO DELIVER IT TO COUNCIL AT A CERTAIN TIME.

BUT I MEAN, THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMISSION IS TO SEE THIS STUFF AND ADVISE DO SOMETHING BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.

NOT NECESSARILY. I MEAN, WE'RE RESPONSIBLE TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED BUDGET UNTIL IT'S A PROPOSED BUDGET.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REVIEW. WE CAN'T. THAT'S EXACTLY MY POINT THAT WE SHOULD REVIEW BEFORE THE COUNCIL, IS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL. WELL, AGAIN, BEFORE THERE'S NOTHING THERE'S NO DOCUMENT TO REVIEW.

PROPOSED BUDGET THAT I THINK THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO WE WON'T SEE THE PROPOSED BUDGET, BUT WE'LL GET IN BETWEEN THE TIME THAT THE BUDGET, WE GET THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND THEY TAKE ACTION ON THE BUDGET.

I THINK THAT'S. YEAH. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING.

USUALLY COMMISSIONS BEFORE COUNCIL TAKES ACTION ON IT.

YEAH. WE NEED TO GIVE FEEDBACK ON IT. DOESN'T THAT HAPPEN BETWEEN MAY 16TH AND SUBSEQUENT TO MAY 16TH? EVERYBODY GETS A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSED BUDGET, SAY ON MAY 16TH THE COUNCIL DOESN'T TAKE ACTION ON IT UNTIL A SUBSEQUENT DATE.

SO WE CAN ALSO TAKE ACTION ON IT DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME AND SAY, HERE'S OUR RECOMMENDATION.

WE KNOW YOU GUYS ARE CONSIDERING IT. HERE'S WHAT WE'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER.

WE'LL HAVE AS MUCH TIME TO DO THAT BEFORE. SO IN WHICH MEETING WILL YOU DO? WELL, THE 16TH, THE 16TH OF MAY, THE INFORMATION IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE MAY 20TH MAY 26TH.

MEETING IS THE MEETING AT WHICH WE'LL DISCUSS THE BUDGET.

WE'LL DISCUSS THE BUDGET THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US, SENT TO US ON THE 16TH, AND THAT'S PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE 19TH.

SO THERE'S A ONE-WEEK DIFFERENCE. AND WHAT IS ON MAY 19TH, WHAT IS THE CITY COUNCIL GOING TO DO WITH THAT? THEY'RE GOING TO SEE IT BEFORE WE DO. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON IT OR APPROVE IT BEFORE THE COMMISSION MAKES A COMMENT ON IT.

COMMENT ON IT, BUT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE IT. THEY DON'T.

THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, THAT'S THE COMMISSIONER. PRESENTING ON, YOU'RE PRESENTING THAT ON THE 19TH.

YES. SO WE AND AS THE AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, THAT'S A RECEIVE AND FILE ITEM.

SO COUNCIL IS TAKING NO ACTION ON IT. IN MY EXPERIENCE, THEY DON'T THERE ISN'T EVEN SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION ON IT.

THE PURPOSE IS FOR US TO PRESENT IT IN A PUBLIC SETTING.

THE CITY MANAGER SHARES HIS VISION FOR THE BUDGET AND THEN COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, GOES HOME AND THINKS ABOUT IT.

SPEND SOME TIME LOOKING AT IT. AND THEIR OFFICIAL BUDGET DISCUSSIONS BEGIN THAT FIRST TUESDAY IN JUNE.

SO JUNE 2ND IS THE ACTUAL DISCUSSION. YES. SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE A SCHEDULED MEETING TO DISCUSS THE BUDGET BEFORE CITY COUNCIL HAS A MEETING TO DISCUSS.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO. YEAH. AND THE COUNCIL DOESN'T MAKE ANY DECISIONS ON THE BUDGET UNTIL THE LAST MEETING IN JUNE.

SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE BUDGET ADOPTION. THAT'S WHEN THEY VOTE ON EVERYTHING.

THAT'S WHEN THEY ADOPT THE BUDGET. THEY MAKE NO DECISIONS BEFORE THAT POINT.

WE HAVE THEM SCHEDULED TO ADOPT THE BUDGET JUNE 16TH.

WE DO HAVE ANOTHER TUESDAY IN CASE THEY HAVE SOME, YOU KNOW, OUTLYING ITEMS THEY'D LIKE TO DISCUSS.

BUT YES, COUNCIL WILL BE IN DISCUSSION MODE ONLY.

SO WE HAVE TWO, WE HAVE TWO MEETINGS AT WHICH TO SCHEDULE MEETINGS TO DISCUSS THE BUDGET BEFORE COUNCIL.

ADOPTS IT. ADOPTS IT. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THE STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING, BUT IF ANYONE CAN ATTEND THESE MEETINGS, THEY'RE IMPORTANT.

AND IF THERE'S A. 2ND. OH, YOU DID OKAY. OH, OKAY.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 2ND AND THE 9TH? YES.

OR YES, YEAH, THE 2ND AND 9TH. AND IF YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, A PASSION FOR ANY OF THE ITEMS, I THINK AS MANY AS POSSIBLE. IT WOULD ATTEND THE MAY 19TH AS WELL.

I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO GO TO ALL OF THEM. AND TO, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S WORTHY OF SPEAKING.

YEAH. THAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT TIME TO DO IT. BECAUSE WHEN YOU, I THINK WHEN YOU TALK TO THEM DURING PUBLIC MEETING, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN JUST SENDING THEM AN EMAIL.

I'VE TRIED BOTH WAYS. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE.

ALL WE CAN DO IS TRY. OKAY, WE'VE APPROVED THE CHANGE IN THOSE THOSE MEETINGS.

[02:05:05]

NICK, ANYTHING? NO. SO WHAT IS GOING TO BE ON OUR NEXT MEETING'S AGENDA? PARDON. WHAT ITEMS ARE GOING TO BE ON THE AGENDA FOR OUR NEXT MEETING THAT WE KNOW OF SO FAR? THE PROFESSION. OH NO. WELL WE'VE GOT THE. PUBLIC WORKS AND THE BUDGET.

TWO LETTERS. OKAY. SO THEN LET'S BRING BACK THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROCUREMENT.

THINGS IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE BUDGET AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PUBLIC WORKS COMING.

YES. AND I AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANYTHING SUBSTANTIVE TO DELIVER FOR YOU ON PROCUREMENT AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

YOU MAY WANT TO POSTPONE A WEEK. I JUST DON'T WANT TO.

LOSE IT, I GET THAT. TO LOSE IT. BECAUSE WHEN IT'S ON A ON THE AGENDA, WE CAN ALWAYS SAY, OKAY, LET'S MOVE IT TO THE NEXT TIME. AND I DON'T WANT TO FORGET.

SO WE CAN MAYBE TALK ABOUT HAVING THIS NEXT MEETING.

WE'LL HAVE THE FULL BUDGET TO DISCUSS. YES. SO THAT, THAT WILL BE, SHOULD BE THE PRIMARY TOPIC.

MAYBE THE ONLY TOPIC. PUBLIC WORK IS COMING AS WELL.

YEAH. THE PUBLIC WORKS. WILL YOU ALL. WELL, WE ALSO WANT TO VOTE ON THE LETTER FOR THE.

YEAH, THAT'S NOT GOING TO TAKE THE PROCUREMENT AND THE LETTERS ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THAT.

I MEAN, THEY'LL TAKE MAYBE TEN MINUTES EACH. PHONE CALLS BACK AND FORTH ON THAT.

OKAY. SO THAT'LL BE ON IT. SO I NEED TO MAKE SURE I HAVE EVERYONE'S.

OKAY, WE'RE ON ITEM K, COMMISSION MEMBER ITEMS AND FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA TOPICS ANYTHING.

SO THAT'S, I THINK WHAT WE DISCUSSED. SO LET'S BRING BACK AND WE'LL DISCUSS ONLY TEN MINUTES.

WE DO NOT HAVE TIME WE WON'T. BECAUSE WE, TO DISCUSS THE LETTER OR.

I KNOW THE LETTERS YOU'RE GOING TO, THE PROFESSIONAL LETTER YOU'RE GOING TO DIRECTLY SEND IT TO COUNCIL.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COMMISSION IS ALSO AWARE.

AND BECAUSE NOBODY CHECKS THEIR EMAILS. AND THEN.

THAT LETTER SHOULD COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION BEFORE WE SEND IT.

OKAY. THEN WE HAVE TO JUST APPROVE. SO IT WILL BE FIVE, TEN MINUTE MEETING MAX.

SAME WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVITY. SO WE BRING IT BACK JUST TO APPROVE THE LETTER.

OKAY. VIJAY? DAMIAN? DID I HEAR A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

WE'RE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.