UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.0:00 – 0:034 turns
Welcome to Lompoc City Council meeting, February 3rd, 2026. Opening of closed session. Roll call please.
Roll call — called by Unidentified speaker 2
Show transcript
Oral Communications come and talk about anything about closed session. Closed session, closed session only. We've got four items on closed session. Conference of Legal Counsel existing litigation. Conference of Legal Counsel again existing litigation and number three same as number one and two and number four same is number one, two, three, and four. So we'll cruise off into the closed session with closed oral communication. Nobody's rising.
We'll be back maybe at 630. Hi. Oh. Welcome to the Lompoc City Council meeting. February 3rd, 2026 open session. Roll call please.
Roll call — called by Unidentified speaker 2
Show transcript
Report on action we had four items of closed session anything to report city attorney
Mayor and Council, the City Council met in closed session to discuss the four items on the agenda. The closed session items. The City Council gave direction on all of those items but there was no reportable action taken.
0:05 – 0:135 turns
I pray lord that you give wisdom To our guys, to our people that work the streets, the engineers, Lord. Those are in the city. I met a smiling face today and she could have just got everything from me she wanted because I appreciate the pleasantry that we have here. And so Lord with that being said, we ask for your guidance. We asked for your wisdom That you continue to bless us, continue to protect the men and women that are on the streets right now.
That is protecting our city and run to the emergency not run away. So thank you for all the fire personnel, all the EMT. Thank you for this great cast of leaders in our city. And we pray in your name. Amen.
Please join me in pledge allegiance. Ready, begin.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Presentation Council Member Ball you have a presentation for proclamation honoring 2-1-1 community celebration month
Thank you, Mayor. First off I just want to say it's been an honor to serve on the Communify Board for almost five years now. You guys are doing tremendous work for not only our community but folks throughout the county so thank you for this. Today we're highlighting 211 so I'd like to read this proclamation to you and then present All right, here we go. 211 Community Celebration Month. Whereas the 211 Helpline is an information and referral system connecting people to free or low cost health and human services and up-to-date incident and emergency related information through call, text, and the web.
And whereas the 211 program was first enacted by the Federal Communication Commission in 2000 and now covers 85% of all households nationwide. And 96% of the population in the state of California has access to 2-1-1. And whereas, 2-11 Santa Barbara County was first implemented in 2005 and is a free and confidential service available 24 hours a day 7 days a week in 150 languages to every resident countywide And whereas in November of 2014, 211 became a program of Communify, the Santa Barbara County nonprofit which empowers people and transforms lives through their 16 programs which serve the community.
And whereas in 2024, 211 had over 22,400 web visits including 17,154 new users to 211SBCO.org And 10,000 resources were provided to residents throughout the county by a live call specialist with the most urgent needs including calls about housing mental health utility assistance family and community support services and legal and public safety services. Whereas Communify's Energy Services and Head Start programs will be hosting the free 2-1-1 Community Day celebration on Saturday, February 7th from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., at our own Dick DeWeese Community Center here in Lompoc with over 50 nonprofit agencies, free health screenings and vaccines, children's activities, food, entertainment and more.
Now therefore I should be he James Mosby, by virtue of the authority vested in me, him as Mayor of the City of Lompoc, do hereby declare the month of February 2026 as 2-1-1 Community Celebration Month and acknowledges Communify and their years of serving the Lompoc community through the programs and services they offer including the invaluable 2- 1-1 Helpline.
And I'd like to present that to you guys. Would you like to say a few words?
Good evening, my name is Patricia Keelan. I am CEO for Communify. I'm so pleased to be here tonight and I want to just begin by thanking the City Council for all of your tremendous support and partnership for 2-1-1 Santa Barbara. As Jeremy indicated since 2014 Communify has proudly operated Santa Barbara 211 Free 24 7 information and referral line that provides a variety of resources to the community. It's available to every resident in Santa Barbara County and here in Lompoc.
And it is available in over 150 languages. When people are in crisis or just simply in need of information, 211 is often the front door to help whether that be housing, utility assistance. We also provide information on mental health support and even disaster assistance and so much more. This year we've been expanding our services and we've developed an immigrant resource center, a database that's available through our 211 network.
And anyone can go to that resource. They can access information on know your rights, how to assist someone who has been detained, also how to assist a minor who may be unaccompanied or even reaching out to a consulate so that they can get information on repatriation. So, that resource is available and then this year we're proud to be introducing a new 211 youth app that will be available to youths so that they can on their phone simply look up the 211 app and access resources on their own We're very excited about our upcoming 211 Resource Day here in Lompoc this coming Saturday and we want to invite all of you To come and attend, we have over 65 organizations that will be participating. We'll have free health screenings, haircuts, free food, there'll be music and all kinds of family friendly activities.
So we would like to see all of you there. And please, if you are in the community, please come out and access all those wonderful resources that are available here in Lompoc and throughout our county. Thank you so much for this evening. We want to say a special thank you to the city of Lompoc for all of the support and helping us to organize this year's 2-1-1 event. Thank you so much.
0:13 – 0:1918 turns
Anybody have any quick questions for them? You guys are getting off the hook easy. I've got one, as an example of one of the questions being out on the street most of the nights meeting with people and stuff. One was who do we call to find out where the warming center is when people need to find a warming center? Is that something that 211 would call? Yeah. Do you guys answer that one? Yes. Okay. I know who it is. Go ahead.
Hi. City Council members. My name is Alejandra Enciso and I'm the 201 program manager for Santa Barbara County, and I work for Communify Yes, we do have a live registry of all the warming shelters in our county. And during weather disasters and any type of outage of power or any incoming turmoil that people might experience, we update those shelters in a list and we provide them in their newsfeed so when call specialists answer the phones they will We have a list directly of which warming shelters are open by the county as part of the OEM.
Yeah, the coldest night of the year. I was driving around trying to find it. I thought it was over on 2nd Street and it wasn't nothing was open but It's 35 36 degrees. I couldn't find a warming center open anywhere So
yeah, so we you can either we when it's something like that very emergency oriented We ask all our callers to call two one one and you can actually prompt into holding your Your queue in line and so you can ask to get a call back, and they'll call you back or you can text your your area code. And we'll call specialist will respond that way as well.
You wouldn't mind me sending this over to some of the Hispanic radio stations?
No, please do. I speak Spanish. We
have a gentleman that's around who is like hey, you know, I can do PSAs for you. So he's been in town doing other things so it might be a good thing. Thank you. Maybe get a call from him.
Mayor, can I add something to that real quick? This 2-1-1 event. I hope you guys can all go. It's a really exciting event but you're going to have a couple of radio stations there as well. I think Sunny Country and the Spanish speaking radio station will be there as well.
LALEA
will be there as well so I think they are already putting the word out for sure. We'll see if we got into
that one.
Yeah, the flyers are in English and Spanish and put some outside. And then they're also on our website in our social
media.
Thank you.
Something to report our consent calendar where there is one that gave I remember. Thank you, Mayor. I
just want to take a moment and let everybody know that I'm pretty proud of Parks and Rec. They've done about a four-year project on the RV parts. They've got 35 full hookup spaces that are completed. They can handle 50 foot RVs, 50 amp service. There's a lot of things to do. If your friends come and you can stay there, there's a playground or walking trails in Kiwanis Lake. And it's $50 a night, $10 for an extra vehicle. They have a host there if you have any questions. But it's a great opportunity if you have friends or family coming to town. It's a good place for them to stay.
Wanted to let everybody know that the library got two grants. One is a $500 grant from Coast Hills which will be used for teen internship programs This other one I thought was kind of interesting. It's a $10,000 grant we got from the Carnegie Corporation and it's in celebration of the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration. The reason I thought it was kind of interesting is because in 1910, we got a $10000 grant from them to build the building that's on Cypress and High at the Carnegie Library. Even though they don't use the library anymore, they restyled the building and we still were able to get that $1000 grant so pretty impressive building.
I want to let everybody know that transit has two weeks left on their free fares. It's a good opportunity to go out and check out the new routes. This is all part of the transportation unmet need workshops like they did in November. Midtown will take advantage of that. I want to also let everybody know that we are seeking lender applications for our first time home buyer program There's five slots, it'll be competitive rank and review. It needs to be in by February 20th and we look forward to people applying for that and you can get a hold of Snell if you have any questions there.
I also wanted to share something that's also pretty exciting for the police department. They'll be implementing a new dispatch system Tuesday, the 10th, that's called a hyper software. It will be part of the AI assisting program where they can handle a lot of the routine calls and reduce about 75% of emergency calls by utilizing this resource, non-emergency calls by utilizing this resource And it also has 30 different languages. It can be 24 systems, so it's a great move and we're doing some other stuff with AI for the dispatchers and I think it's going to be good technology for enhancing our services out there.
Lastly, I just want to remind everybody not this funding but the next funding will be February 16th and we'll be serving President's Day and like always trash recycling and green waste will be collected one day later. So that's all I have tonight.
Any questions for the city manager? Councillor Boehme.
So I had a quick question and just because I talked to you about this personally, maybe you can update us. There's a few people who reached out to me that said hey I thought they had paid for the park next to the YMCA, the new skate park nothings happened is that ever going to happen I think you gave me some good news, but I was hoping that maybe you could update all of us on our expectations for that college park next to the YMCA.
0:19 – 0:2416 turns
Yeah, so we are in the process of the RFP process. So that will probably go out in the next few weeks to a month. So we have our building permit and so we're looking at probably coming back in April-May for council approval once the RFP closes and to award the bid. And so we'll just start breaking ground hopefully in the summertime.
So best case scenario, we might see a new park by the end of this year or early the following year. Is that a rough? We're hoping
by late fall, probably October-ish would be a good time.
Awesome. Thank you. I don't skateboard myself. It's very dangerous and my son is curious and I'm scared to death of that but I know there's a lot of excited skateboarders that can't wait so thank you for that update. Excited to see a new park there.
Anybody else? Just a quick shout out to you and the police officers out there. I got a text last night, somebody was very impressed that their trespassers who were moving had a camp on their property without them have to call the PD. The PD actually engaged and asked the guy if he'd come down and sign the trespass warrant to take care of the business but the guy was very happy and impressed with the proactive engagement He was impressed enough to text me at 8.30 last night, so thank you guys.
It's always good to hear that. Thank you.
Thank you. Now, Gabe! There we go. See? Staged
ya. Gotcha staged up. Good evening Mayor, members of the Council, audience and audience watching at home. Item number eight is an amendment to the employment agreement for the city manager. It sets the salaries and benefits for the city managers at the levels listed in the staff report and the attachment and staff's recommendation is to adopt. Thank you.
Very good. We got that? So you turn it okay. So we'll open up public comment on consent calendar. Consent calendar, we have nine items on here. Approval of minutes from December 2nd 2025 approval ratification expenditures payroll January 2nd 2026 at $2.1 million and a voucher from December 29th to January 2nd $561,000 another voucher January 5th through 9th was $676,000 Approval agreement of operation of countywide library system.
Number four is approval MOU or MOA of Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control Justice to implement the 2025 Clean Air Fund program for Lompoc and designate the Santa Cruz Community Center as a clean air facility. And they got a generator coming too, right?
Still not approved yet. I think everything's for homeland security. Getting close. Getting tied up, so we'll keep our fingers
crossed. That's our FEMA triage facility. Number five, annual compliance report for development impact fees per government code subdivision 66006B1. Number six, approve a letter informing Santa Barbara County civil grand jury that the city intends to repeal the sub-recipient financial pragmatic and monitoring reporting requirement policy chapter 45 of Lompoc Administrative Procedures Manual.
Number seven is the introduction of ordinance number 1742, principles 26, amending section 2.12.050 of the Lompoc Municipal Code to establish a new acting city manager designation procedures. Number eight's approval of Fifth Amendment of City Manager Employment Agreement with Dean Alvarado and adoption resolution number 6798, principles 26, updating the city's publicly available pay schedule.
Number nine is contract for urban forestry service amount of $577,750. Anybody want to come up and talk about any of those items? Any council member who wants to pull any of these items or could do a motion as well? Council Member Bridge.
I would like to pull item five and
item nine.
Okay.
Item number five. Item number nine. All right, and items pulled by the council will be read prior to the last... before the second oral communication near the end of the meeting. Anybody else? I see nobody rise for public comment. We'll close public comment coming back. Oh, Council Member Ball? Just a quick question on item
six just for clarity if I may. Good idea. On item six that's our... we're saying... I know it's not... It's just part of the process. We're sending a letter to the grand jury. You probably expect them to respond but Can you get in layman's terms, can you explain to me? So it says under key details burden versus benefit. It says staff argues the policy is too onerous costing 25 to 50 grand annually and staff time to monitor even when no grants trigger the threshold. Can you just break that down for me what's happening and what are we trying to clean up here?
0:24 – 0:408 turns
This is a policy and procedure that staff complies with every year It takes staff time and staff expense to do this policy every year, and it's out of a set of circumstances that occurred back in 2012 time period. So the city has been complying with this policy for quite some time. At this point there are no outstanding housing grants in excess of the $50,000 minimum that would even trigger The requirements under the policy, and yet the city still has to go through the motions. And it costs about $25,000-$50,000 per year in staff time to comply with this policy.
We believe that we have other monitoring and compliance requirements in place that will be We believe sufficient for the grand jury to not have significant comments if the city wanted to repeal this policy that's been in place now for 13 years or so. So we're just notifying the grand jury that we plan to repeal this policy and we're seeking any feedback from them, and then we'll consider that feedback before we make a decision whether to repeal it or not.
Thank you for that. So if I could say we're not necessarily relaxing any rules, we're just tired of doing unnecessary paperwork. That would be an accurate
statement, yes. Great,
thank you. Anybody else? Council Member Bridge?
I move we approve consent plus items 5 and 6.
I'm sorry, 5 and 9. Motion by Bridges, seconded by Vega. Let's go ahead and vote. That passes 5-0. Staff presentation. Planning a kickoff discussion of the most exciting thing this city does, the General Plan. Lori, you're up for this one. Here we go. Ribbons and the popcorn?
Good evening, I'm Lori Tamora, contract planner for the city of Lompoc. We are here tonight to begin the process of updating our general plan. We have with us our consultant team, Jim Harnish with Minton Harnish Brent Gimbett, and I would like to invite up Brian Lester who will be making the presentation on how we're going to proceed forward with the general plan process.
Awesome hello thank you for having me today to start off the general plan So I'll just, I just have a few slides today kind of going through the project overview. What we heard from the council during the contract approval meeting and then we'll quickly go through our engagement program just to let you know what's going on with the general plan and what we're planning and then we'll take your direction so any direction comments you have for us of course we're looking for that today So our consultant team, there's three firms. Minter Harnish we will be handling facilitating the community engagement, managing the project and then working on the draft general plan.
Rincon Consultants and DKS will be working on the environmental analysis. So a quick project overview, this is actually part two of the general plan update. Part one is still partially in progress but three elements were adopted as part of part one so the housing element, environmental justice element and the safety element those are all required parts of your general plan excuse me and then the circulation element is still in progress so I believe that's what the planning commission is doing For this phase of the project, we are going to address the remaining general plan elements. So there are required elements as part of that so the land use element, conservation open space element and noise element are required so of course we'll be updating those but then there are some optional elements that are part of the current general plan and so under our contract we will be addressing those elements so public facilities element parks and recreation economic development and urban design Now, you know we paid attention to the contract approval meeting.
The council had a good amount of direction actually during that meeting. So he took notes and I've tried to reflect it here to make sure we're on the right page and to take any additional directions so some of the things we heard first of all less is more there's a lot going on in your general plan. It covers a lot of optional topics and subtopics, and those should be considered whether or not we want to include them. Just because it's there doesn't mean we should carry it forward.
We also heard that the existing elements may not have been as successful as they could be just due to that wide scope and overly prescriptive approach, and that perhaps it's better in this general plan update to narrow the scope a little bit, dial in what we really want to dial in. We also heard as part of that consolidating elements should be an option that we should consider, right?
The economic development element is not required. As we take a look at that and work with staff, we heard council direction to perhaps only keep what we need and make sure that it's maybe consolidated into the land use element. Urban design element, same thing. It's not it's not a required element. Anything that the city wants to keep can be in that element or it can be consolidated into the land use element as well so that's something we want to consider of course.
And then optional content so if we're going to include content You know it should be thoughtful right. We don't want to just carry forward what we were doing before, what the city's been doing because some of it has worked and some of it honestly could be dialed in better. We want to make sure to remove any of that optional content, especially content that may actually constrain development. Constrain growth. If we have policies that are actually not working for us they're working against us, that's bad. Obviously we want to identify those right away and consolidate those or remove them.
And then a few more things we heard so identifying and removing policies that constrain development. I mentioned that the updated elements should really be concise, they should be feasible and implementable right? We also heard that that we don't want to include policy language that creates obstacles or higher costs for developers right? We need to be sensitive of that And then finally that the land use element and EIR should consider the potential annexations and SOI adjustments to facilitate annexation, and that should be a major part of the land use element. So some of the focuses for the general plan update, so incorporating the ad hoc committee changes and comments Anticipating the housing need from the state that will come down for the next housing element period.
And actually, the general plan will cover two housing element periods so we really want to look at what those RENAM numbers may be and make sure that we're planning accordingly. We don't want to have the next Rena cycle come, next housing element come and say oh no we didn't plan enough right. And now we have to maybe look at some more rezones that after doing the general plan land use element right? We don't want that to happen so we definitely need to anticipate the upcoming Rena or the housing need.
We want to focus on infill property development and the potential that's there. We want to look at sphere of influence adjustments, pre-zonings for those areas and annexations. And then really focus on having a new EIR for the general plan that future projects can tear off of. And then on the topic of the annexations, we want to make sure we're consistent with SPCAG growth projections and the RTP.
The ongoing MSR process and then identified LAFCO policies. And that is just to make sure that we're aligned with the sphere of influence adjustments and the proposed annexations. Oh, and then we also want to make sure that those SOI adjustments are covered as part of the EIR. I've just got a graphic here with some of those potential annexation areas. And so, of course, we want to make sure to consider it and plan accordingly.
So for this project, we've crafted an engagement strategy. We tried to have within the budget a really multifaceted engagement strategy rather than just one or two things not getting enough input. We really need input in order to be able to draft general plan updates so it's extremely important. So first we do have a project website for the project from part one. EnvisionLompoc.com will do a new branding effort for this phase two, phase one logo has a house on it. We're not doing the housing element at this time so we will come up with a new branding scheme update the website and the website really is a critical part of our engagement. The website really is the central hub for everything we're doing it's where you're going to send people to find out information what is the general plan right?
We give them that context information that they need in order to participate, right? We also post all project documents notices about meetings just any information related to general plan we get it there And make it available for folks. Then when we do post stuff to the website, when we post notices, we send out email blasts. We do have an email list as part of the project. When you go on the project website there's a little button on the right. Click that and put your email in. You're part of the list. You'll get the notifications. This is really important. Anybody who's interested at all please sign up for the email list. Tell your friends and family to sign up as well.
And then workshops. We have three in-person workshops planned. These also have associated online activities so that folks who can't make the workshop can do the activity online, but the workshops are really centered on key points where we need input. So early on when we're analyzing existing conditions, we're looking at the assets in the town issues and opportunities right? We want to do a workshop then to get feedback from the public.
In the middle of the project as we're doing the land use alternatives and looking at, okay so what are some different options that we have for our land use map? We definitely want to do another workshop. So we'll hold a workshop and we'll get public input on some of those ideas. And then finally the third workshop is to present the draft general plan and let people know what's in it where to find it and then to take input on that.
I should say with each of these workshops, we do have a meeting with the City Council and Planning Commission that's associated to get the same input as well as to go over all of the input that we've heard from the public with you. Get your take your feedback and your direction. So we have several study sessions and hearings planned with the Planning Commission and City Council. They're listed here, but generally it's at the same spots.
We have today's meeting obviously to kick off the project in phase...in the existing conditions phase. We'll meet to talk about assets issued as opportunities. We'll meet again to talk about alternatives. And then we'll meet to talk about the draft plan and look at adoption. At all points in time, any of those meetings are public meetings. So we do encourage the public to come out to those meetings and share their input as well.
Just going over some of the products that we're gonna produce as part of this. So first, we'll start with the background report just looking at what are the trends in city currently? What's a projected population over the course of the general plan? We'll draft an assets issues opportunities report that also includes a vision for the general plan and this will be really to guide the planning of the general plan. We'll meet, of course, with the City Council to get their feedback on that.
An alternatives report, the draft general plan, and then the EIR itself in the next three bullets are all part of the EIR. And then finally, the final general plan. Our schedule, it's a little hard to see here but it's basically the whole project is scheduled to be wrapped up by October of 28. The first six months here will be in phases two and three where we're looking at existing conditions and assessing the existing general plan.
And then the second half of 2026 will be doing the land use alternatives process. You can see that drafting the general plan here. It's no five is like an eight month process, and the ER itself is like almost a year process so that the a lot of the in person engagement up front in the plan for it's drafted. And then this is just a, it's really hard to see here but we wanted to let the council know that we've lined up the schedule with the schedule that LAFCO is undertaking so that our project unfolds similarly and we're not trailing them. Our data is actually available.
And with that, you know I just wanted to give You know just an overview of what the project is what we're going to be asking of you when we come for study sessions and Just take any questions. So we're here if you have any questions Thank you
0:40 – 0:5512 turns
Anybody comes from bridge Yeah, you might want to know maybe Lori will answer So, we seem to get in a circle where RHNA numbers come out or state mandates come out and we get into reaction mode. Is part of the 2050 general plan engagement going to address capacity? I mean, we can do all these numbers but if we don't have the capacity. And I'm thinking that...I don't know if rationale works with the state but when the time comes and we get told we need to put another 3,000 houses in it might be good to have a pre-configured component of our general plan that says well this is our capacity And just because you say we're going to put 3,000 houses in.
We've looked at the infill. We've looked at the history of LAFCO and we don't have the capacity. But we have to put some energy into determining it would seem to me as part of the general plan development looking forward A lot of years, it's hard to fathom we can look that far forward. But capacity should be an issue if we're going to protect ag land. We're not gonna cross natural barriers.
So I didn't see that anywhere in anything. I've looked at previously, doesn't mean it's not there. But could you comment on that?
Sure thing. Part of the first task that the consultants and the staff will be working with is the trends. What's driving growth for the city of Lompoc? One of them is what Santa Barbara Association of Governments provides which is their long-range plan for 2050. They've calculated an estimated population growth for the county of Santa Barbara as well as each one of the cities. And that's kind of the guiding principle that the cities are working with to extrapolate forward what the population growth will be in the county. For the city of Lompoc, it's somewhere between 60 and 65 thousand by the year 2050.
So our effort is going to be looking at how many, what's the population occupancy for each unit? Are we talking about 2.5 people, 3 people, three and a half people per unit? And then how does that extrapolate for the additional 20... So what we're going to be looking at is. We're going to have a combination of recommendations coming forward to you once we've taken all that information and see how that far horizon of a population of 65,000 people.
Yeah but again you're taking a pre-configured number and saying this is how we have to change our city to meet it so I'll keep asking this question as we go through but what if Lompoc can only hold 55,000 people and maintain its quality of life and without LAFCO won't let us expand? We can't get a bigger sphere. I mean, it's all wonderful we're putting that on a map but at some point reality has got to come to play so I'll just keep asking that question kind of fair warned.
And if I may just carry forward with that is you know obviously we all know what happened three and a half years ago with And so a lot of that had to do with how our policies were written and are existing. One of the challenges that came out of those hearings was you still have a lot of land built inside the city. The city doesn't agree with that.
History doesn't agree with that
exactly. So what we have to do is document and be proactive in responding to that comment. justifying infill development as well as the opportunity for growth in our sphere of influence and annexation. So it's a balancing act, we know what the challenges are other jurisdictions are dealing with the same challenge and so we will be anticipating when those sphere boundaries and annexation projects go to LAFCO we'll be prepared
Okay, I'll just make one more comment on that and then move on. I tend to disagree that the general plan was a reasonable blockade or whatever the right word is for LAFCO. LAFCO had their own agenda. That agenda was very heavily weighted on ag land They have arbitrarily fixed those in their mind. Now, I agree they're getting more flexible because they're getting driven in a box but I don't believe the Bodger development to blame our general plan is a little biased, I believe. But that's enough on that.
So could we make a policy or at least an understanding that if we fall 60 days behind We drove to get a schedule. I love your schedule. We want to get this done, and I believe the longer you do things the more it costs. So what I'd like is an understanding that if we fall 60 days behind, which is a pretty significant delay in my opinion, that you will come back to the council and tell us how we're going to recover that time. And I don't know if you can agree on this for me, but that's what I would kind of like to see.
And if I may respond to that comment. We spent most of the day today, not only with the consultants but many of the city staff leadership going over the effort that we will be putting into this general plan process and also looking at the calendar that you see above you and targeting We know how important it is to get that information and feedback. And so we'll keep you engaged. I believe that we're looking at an April meeting to come back to the City Council and get more information on that.
It's a great plan, I'm just saying life happens and then all of a sudden we're six months back and we're going wow how did we get there? I'd like to have a little bit earlier on that. And then I'm not sure I understood the branding. You have a branding already in Vision Lompoc? Are you suggesting you're going to change that branding?
The branding that we have currently is the one that you see here. It says Envision Lompoc, and that was our first phase. And we thought it would be important to make a distinction between that effort finishing up and the new effort that includes the logo or some reference to 2050. OK.
The only comment I would have on that It took me, personally I'm a slow guy but it took me a period of time before I recognized that kind of entity Envision Lompoc existed. Kind of outside the Lompoc website and obviously the purple part under the bottom housing element could change but I'd recommend you think about keeping the Envision Lompoc because A lot of money and energy has been spent fixing that in people's minds, and now I know where to go. And if all of a sudden it changes into something else, I'm a slow guy. It's going to take me awhile to figure that out again. So that would be my only suggestion on that. Thank you. That's a good plan. If
I can make some comments about the last 25 years in a general plan that we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on, if not millions? In what happened in the last 25 years and our population basically had zero growth, 25 years. Probably the only central coast town or coastal town that saw level of a death spiral so to say without growth you will die. And we've been in that layers of stagnation you mentioned about infill. I would say probably at least 600 units of housing in the arena plan of infill are not going to happen.
We were also told, the previous council was told that you couldn't put the Bodger plan into the arena plan because it wasn't a guarantee of annexation. However as at the last LAFCO meeting they had stated that can be part of the overriding consideration for annexation cause it was part of your arena plan. That was a project that we should have had in the plan and would've been used as a potential to get us annexed another argument We are supposed to go back through and to see how our development is going with Rina And I don't think anybody from the Elks Lodge has come to the city to say we're ready to build our 50 60 housing units in our parking lot yet I Think I did but he heard any of that coming along, but no so what I'm getting at is our general plan in the past has been Really a death knell to our community and why that happened.
I'm not exactly sure I think we've had pretty I know there was an agenda by certain people to see that we had no growth. I do not and very successful of that component, but some of the catastrophes that happened when our as their school district that have this in the late 60s, we had 12,500 students in the local unified. I think we're around 9000 right now.
And it makes it very difficult for the schools to function this way. Also with the mandated poverty that came to our town, it also affects things like medical or hospital and a lot of places in capacity that they can't afford to operate. But our general plan in the past supported these movements and these measures. And now you're referencing SBCAG. So remember SBCAG? Those are the guys that I belong with about an airport land use plan that said we had 30,000 takeoff and landings at our airport.
So I don't know how many people have visited our airport to see what's not happening there, but that's probably off by a magnitude of 10 times. So very cautious about SPCAG likewise with the 900 housing units that were taken and removed out at the base. We know that those were generally our housing units, but SPCAG relocated them to the whole county, not to us which increase our impacts And also understanding that South County has an agenda because they have the jobs housing balance where they have over a surplus of 25,000 jobs in South County. And they would support workforce housing here.
So they're part of the manipulation of rezoning business park properties to residential because they need us to be their servants. But what does it do to our local economy? So if you've watched what happened with our jobs housing balance Where we used to be 40% commute, just in the recent past couple decades. We're now close to 70% of the people who have a job in this town have to commute for this job and exasperating that component can make things work general plan did these things.
They definitely spoon fed it. The agricultural protectionism component is put it as a position in your office over here I don't know if you shared with these guys what What the zoning plan used to look like and how the city of Lompoc was anticipated to grow. Not saying we needed to be there, but in 1968 we were going to be 220,000 no 196,000 people by the year 2020.
And we've been on a death spiral and again this little that we're putting together. We have to understand what we're doing then reason why I'm bringing these up is to move forward in the future. Understand when we stepped The guys that are doing the commute coming home. They're not You get skewed ideas and such for a general plan. And we have seen that. So if we're going to be spending, what are we looking? $600,000, $800,000 on this coming up?
Let's just make sure that we shoot for success for our community because we definitely failed I think in the last 25 years. Not on your shoulders, just saying. OK?
0:55 – 1:0420 turns
Thank you. Appreciate those guiding statements with many of those things that you mentioned here, we discussed today so that the consultants are hearing it not only from me and from Greg but they're hearing it from you tonight.
Just
feel the
pain outside these walls that's going on in our town and see what's not happening.
And one of the things that we had talked about was, again, we understand how many people attend night meetings and coming to City Hall. But there's many opportunities for engagement including going to the swimming pool on a Saturday when all the kids are in the pool and the parents are sitting there. Let's go talk to them while they're sitting there. Go to Dick DeWeese Center. Go to the farmers markets. Go where people are at.
I think our
farmers market is closed now. I think the Saturday swap meet is closed now. These are some of the things that we're retracting and going backwards. I hear you on that, but I'm just saying again...
Very good.
Council
Member
Ball?
Yeah, and I think all of these points are valid. I think Council Member Bridge talking about capacity that is something that makes us all perk up and think about right in a vacuum we think hey well if we just never got to annex or expand our borders and the state insisted push housing and we became a more dense population here, well then I automatically start thinking do we have fire capacity? Do we have police services? And all those things are impacted by that. Our schools of course as well.
And something to just help, I don't know if there's a perfect answer for some of this but maybe humor me just a bit. If the county is facing some sort of pressure from RENA, the RENA numbers they've got They've got a pony up to and we do as well. I'm curious, you mentioned like there's some sort of number that Lompoc is expected to grow too. You know, we have to gobble that up. I'm curious is there numbers for Vandenberg Village and Mission Hills that are in line with that? And if so, I think I might like to learn a little bit more about that because again, I'm looking at who's going to have more leverage over each other as the state. The state probably doesn't care what LAFCO thinks. The state may not care what we think. They just say we need housing.
So I'm interested like who's going to get there first and who's gonna take advantage Or take the weight off of their partner and say, hey, let's take that on. And we can help and we can provide service. Can you talk to any of that in terms of? Because we don't know if we'll ever be able to annex anything. We don't know if LABCO will move an inch. But I'm just curious how you look at some of that.
So every jurisdiction right now is looking at what's going to happen 2050. There's a window there. City of Santa Maria, they're looking at almost 50,000 people additional. And that's assigned in the SB CAC numbers. The city of Lompoc is about 20,000 more people and so our effort with the general plan is to take that number and embed it into the existing city as well as the annexation areas. What does that look like?
And, you know, do we have certain areas that are denser within the city and then we have We will be bringing that forward to you. and the county, but I think the most important thing that Lompoc needs to be looking at is what's happening at the Space Force Base. And the programs that are being generated there and the people that are coming based on those expectations where they're going to live and Lompoc should be their home.
And so how do we get Lompoc positioned to make that happen?
When it comes down to it and LAFCO has to make a move or not, are they going to hold the area that we want to annex close because they benefit from keeping that area because that helps them pencil out something? Or is there a situation where we've got a better story and they want to offload that to us because we help answer that question. And I know there's a lot of politics involved in that but it is something I'm starting to think about.
And the mayor brought up the jobs housing balance. So that's going to be part of this process, is how can we get the jobs to stay in Lompoc and the residents to stay in Lompoc and make it attractive to have a balanced community? And we don't have as many people commuting to the South Coast or to the Valley or to Santa Maria. We need to come up with that good balance.
And that's what we're looking for.
And I wish you all the best. I hope that we have a better argument than the other side and that they can start to realize that unless we grow healthily, we cannot improve our services for our city. We can't have the property tax balance that we need to have. We can't help the environment by having less people get in their car and turn on their gas engine and go 60 miles to work. There's a lot that we can do here so I'm hopeful that you guys can make some end roads on that discussion. Thank you.
Something little out of the box. I was thinking about one of our largest landholders inside the city limits is the prison with approximately 3200 acres. Is there an opportunity to work with them? To build housing, the prison. I mean, I know it's like their land blah blah blah but I know it's federal land. I'm aware of that. I mean, they did offer us 350 acres was offered to us up there.
They have bigger prison but it's inside our city limits and maybe there's an opportunity we can initiate some discussion. I know the City Manager came from the prison area and maybe there's an opportunity. I know in some places prisons actually get smaller and they keep their mace infrastructure. Maybe agriculture is reduced on them I don't know if that's something...
You got something to say, City Manager? What'd you think?
Well, just putting my prison hat and I know they like a buffer around people. In case inmates get out into the communities The 350 acres is actually one that we were looking at through the base, through an enhanced use lease. And that's still a possibility. Yeah but I don't know if the prison...I know they were talking about potentially expanding their housing but that's something they would be doing on their own.
Maybe we can talk to some federal people and see if we can help them with something else because we desperately need land. That would be a beautiful place to build land, not just for that but for the rest of the infrastructure along the lines of everything else. I mean, I don't know if our general plan needs to have something looking into that. I know when I talk to outside people outside of Lompoc they go what about all this land? You could build everything because it comes from mathematical computation of how many square miles in our population density.
Well it reduces it significantly when you look at all that open land up there. I don't know, I know it's complicated and the prisoner will probably be all mad that I even talked about it because
it's theirs but... Well one of the conversations today was we need to make sure our exhibits are really clear when you see that vast open space where the prison is it's not necessarily available directly for development for the city of Santa Maria and we're going to make sure that the exhibits are clear as to what's federally owned land Take that off the table, at least for now. What's at Alan Hecker College?
Take that off the table. What's left for infill development versus the annexations that we think are appropriate for the city? So you'll see the exhibits coming forward that tell a different story than has been told in the past about the opportunities for the city.
Maybe they could sell some of that land and help balance their federal budget or something a little bit, right? Council Member Bridge.
1:04 – 1:096 turns
Well hearing the conversation I just wanted to make couple points. We're reaching for good solutions in cooperative achieving roles. But I believe the reality, and perhaps you can tell me if I've got it correct is if the county gives us a piece of land they lose those RHNA numbers and in fact the Bodger development, one of the sticking points as I understand it is that the county doesn't want to let us.
That's an over-exaggeration but doesn't want to let us have that because they would lose those RHNA numbers so I think there is going to be a natural tension there that unless the state changes their approach, there is gonna be a challenge there trying to work cooperatively The other is, I'm pretty pragmatic mostly. And I remember being on the Economic Development Committee, God I'm getting old, 20-30 years ago and every economic development committee goes we've got to get business in here.
I now have kind of come to the conclusion that maybe the vision for Lompoc might be it's the best place to live. Yeah, maybe I gotta go work at the base, maybe I gotta go work in Santa Maria but this is the best damn place to live and incremental or integrated into that process we're going into is establishing a vision for what Lompoc is And I just, I'm very nervous. The vision is we're going to have 65,000 people and they're all going to be stacked up on top of each other. We're not gonna have any business for those people.
So what? We just have a bunch of slumlords and they come home every day? So I want to be really careful what we think of our vision. And I really want my kids to have the best place to live, and if that means dad has to go drive to Santa Maria to work let's get some good rapid transportation in here And take care of it that way. So when you're going through the vision, please let's not just say all the state says we got to be 65,000 and that turns into our vision because I'm not sure that's the vision we all want.
Councilor Boehme. Silly question and forgive my ignorance, but the state I think kind of surprised a few folks in this whole conversation about housing by creating the builder's remedy thing. Now as I understand it that's kind of a one-off thing and it happened for a couple different contextual reasons. We're talking about 25 years of stuff is there a chance or has there been discussions about the leverage that the state has in its future to insist You know, to get in the way of LAVCOR, to get involved in this discussion more heavily down the road by saying hey you guys aren't all moving at the rate that we want you to.
I'm sorry. We're the state and we insist. Is that something that we should be? And again that's just projection and we have no idea but the state can always do a lot of things where we're learning.
The state has stepped in housing and community development has stepped in with jurisdictions that refuse to. I'm going to say the politics of the region are jeopardizing I don't want to speculate quite yet on what may happen, but housing is a number one priority in the state of California. And every opportunity that we can do to for our city is the goal of this effort.
Ultimately we're in better shape if we are able to say look, we planned, we tried, it's LAFCO's fault essentially to stay out of trouble with the state
I think that's a great way of putting it
Thank you
1:09 – 1:154 turns
We are here to make this presentation. We look forward to bringing more information back to you in April and we're available for any direction that you'd like to give us tonight, we heard a lot and I think we're looking forward... Hold
on because we got public comment coming so hold on. Public comment?
Nick Gonzalez resident of Lompoc. So Just a flashback for those of you who were not around. The general plan is very important and the reason, as the consultant explained, is that I was on previous planning commissions where we tried to eliminate certain elements and certain policies. Specifically ag preservation was the big kicker. Ultimately the city was sued by the Environmental Defense Center from not protecting ag, and that was one of the items that was kind of the barrier to being able to annex and expand the sphere of influence. And they were joined in with the Santa Barbara Action Network for what reason?
If you go back historically and you listen to the arguments there was the little slogan that keeping building houses people need Rids the community of greed. And it was just a philosophical argument that we should only be building affordable housing. Well, you saw what happened to Lompoc. They took all our moderate and upper income apartments and they converted them to tax credit, and our per capita incomes crashed.
And we got more than our fair share of affordable housing. And that was devastating. So it's important when you go through the housing element and you go through the general plan, that you eliminate those elements and policies that are going to block your expansion of your influence and allow it to expand. The other item is the Housing Community Development is going to put big teeth into cities and counties now.
California ranks 49th out of 50 states for housing units per resident. And that explains our affordability issue. We're not building enough housing, it's well known. One of the items on your arena is that if you have a low income housing site, you were supposed to show a nexus of how that site that is presently occupied like the Elks would be, that use would be abandoned within the housing cycle There's an agency, Californians for Home Ownership is now suing cities for their site analysis and making them prove that nexus. And when they don't, the state HCD steps in and enforce it. And Builder's Revenue comes right back as soon as they say that your housing element is no more substantially in compliance because those sites have been rendered not to meet the definition of what the state has outlined.
So that's something you really need to look at your housing sites and make sure those housing sites have that justification or if you get challenged by this agency, they've done cities like Beverly Hills and other cities with substantially more resources, you will get bitten things.
Mayor and City Council, Karen Hauenstein. I first started paying attention to our general plan back in the 1990s and the time has been taken away from us that we could have pussyfooted around this issue. You're going to have to get hard about representing Lompoc and just like The political elements that attacked us, the environmental elements, they sued us.
You need to be prepared to litigate. You need to be prepared to do the research necessary to protect our community because it wasn't protected by Joyce Howerton who ended up developing her Surf Development Company that was in on all these HUD developments that we're now sitting on. Half of them are like quasi-filled, got a lot of them here. We don't need any more Hasbarco or HUD developments.
We definitely don't need to be expanding agencies that are billing MediCal to try to sustain our community. So be prepared to litigate just like they did to us, and go to the press about it. Make it known they shouldn't be trying to take advantage of our community the way they have in the past.
1:15 – 1:215 turns
Anybody
else? Seeing nobody rise close public comments you guys any more questions or Receiving file, what do you guys got? No other questions. Thank you guys. That was entertaining right? Open up for general oral communications three minutes
Hello, Carl Jones. My concern is public safety. I was over at Home Depot the other day, watched a gentleman grab hold of a bunch of D-Walt girls and just start walking around the room. The guys come out, filmed them. I was following them through the parking lot, called the police. Of course they had emergency calls and I understand that because our police force even though they're almost 100% are actually 50%. We know this.
Per capita, we're at 50% of what we should have. So they don't even have the officers to come over and take care of this problem. Talked to the people at Home Depot. The guy that walked out with the drills does it a couple times a week. If they can't spot the guy before he comes in, he just walks in, grabs stuff, heads out, heads over past the dang winery place area and heads straight down to Riverbed and takes off.
You know, we've seen multiple cities in California where these big box stores get tired of it and they just shut down. I hope ours doesn't do that if we can use the jobs and the income that comes from that store. I'm asking the city council, we need to figure out how we can get our police force up to strength. They are up to strength for the budget but they're not up to strength for the populace.
We need the strength for the populace. I can't blame the police force when they're actually short Because, you know, the police chief sat up here in front of the council member. You can go back and look. He's at, for the populace, we do not have the right number of police officers. Okay? And then that ain't me. I go out to dinner with friends, come pulling out of the parking lot. There's a guy sitting on the curb smoking crack pipes nonchalantly, doesn't care. Look across the street there's a bunch over there doing drugs too.
Emergencies always take place, but we don't have officers that are available to do the enforcement necessary because we don't have it in our budget or whatever. Maybe we need to find a way to come up where we can hire the amount of police officers we're supposed to have for this city. I mean those are some concerns and just getting tired seeing it. Just right there on my street People throwing trash out and we report it. And if it doesn't get moved because it's too far off the street, next thing you know there is actually a couch down there and now there's multiple people sleeping on it every night because it's a little bit too far so it's not the city's responsibility. It's the landowner's responsibility but we know how that happens over in that area.
They just keep ignoring it until six months later when they finally get a threat that they're going to get a fine You know, just the way it is. But you know, just bring with your attention this still continuing. Still stuff that we need to address. I mean, I can't...I try to sit and rest but they don't stop. There ain't nothing I can do because I can put my hands on them so I'll lose my house to somebody that doesn't deserve to be suing me for it.
Just letting you know. Thank you.
Maria Genica, resident of Lompoc. During the city manager's report, unless I misunderstood, did he say that the down payment assistance program was seeking lenders? If that's the case, I want to know. To my knowledge, the down payment assistance program has not been open for probably over a year. We currently have lenders in town who are already approved so I'm a little confused as to why we're seeking Lenders to apply when the program has not been up and running for the past, probably year.
So very concerning. We know that the funds are there. We know that there's people in need of the funds and who are eager to use those funds. And all we keep hearing is that the staff, there's not enough staff to process the loans. So I would like for the city council members to kind of ask for an update as to where we're at with that and maybe get the program up and running again.
It's been a very successful program. I know I personally am a real estate broker. That's my profession. I have helped people get into homes. I would say 90% of the people I have helped have refinanced. That means the money went back into the pot, so for other first-time homebuyers to be able to use it. So I plead with you to please ask the city manager where we're at with the down payment assistance program and when is it coming back because the residents of Lompoc do need that and are ready to take advantage of it. Thank you
Just quickly, the last meeting or two we put $980,000 in there to be lent out. So it just happened recently. We just did it. I'll talk to you more but just to answer your quick question
1:21 – 1:272 turns
Good evening, you guys. I'd like to expand on this gentleman's comments about we can't afford police officers in this town but yet we can afford to pay our temporary city building official $350 per hour for her services and if you do a little math on that 350 an hour times eight hours is twenty hundred dollars a day $2,800 a day times five days for a week is $14,000. $14 thousand dollars times four weeks is $56,000 $56,000 times 12 is $672,000. That's quite the pay scale for somebody that's not even a city employee. So we get up here and we talk that we can't afford things in this town but yet how can we justify paying somebody $350 an hour?
That's twice what our city manager makes. That's three times what the normal building official officially hired by the city makes. How is that possible? Who okays that contract? Who thought that was a good idea? Okay, so I got to rewind back to 2018, seven or eight years ago. I found out at that time, I was told that this same person The temporary building official was making $250 an hour then.
And I'm asking, well how come we can't get answers to our questions on our plans from the building department? And I was told, well because she's too expensive she only works two days a week. I'm sitting around waiting for answers from myself and my client, and we're wasting money. But the city knows she's so expensive the contract is only two days a week. I don't understand the logic in that.
And so here seven years later now she's making $350 an hour. So somewhere along the line she got $100 an hour raise? Who signed off on that? Did you guys sign off on that? Because to me it's ridiculous. And being a general contractor, retired like I am, I've had to put up with this for years from the city and so this person is getting paid obscene amounts of money and we're not getting the benefit as a contractor, as my clients or anything out of it.
What are you guys going to do about that? Can we look into why she's getting $350 an hour? That would be nice.
With the homeless issue, I was at the Board of Supervisors down in Santa Barbara today, and there was a debate going on about not expanding the jail. The state has set up this state to handle our homeless issue that's on drugs and has mental issues by implementing SB43 in Proposition 1. And when they pull the trigger, it's going to have to be a coordinated multi-county operation and this city if they want to track this solution needs to inquire of the state of California, because they were really leaning on the county hard with this and all counties threatening them that if they didn't implement these laws that passed months ago.
So we need to not ignore this solution that's been set before us because there are You know, homeless drug addicts sleeping in the Eucalyptus Grove at the corner of Highway 246 and Highway 1 at night. And eventually those people are going to have to be accountable to themselves or leave. That's the plan. So let's not ignore the plan and let's get on board with finding out How it's going to be implemented because down in Santa Barbara, they have a crisis of political.
They have a political crisis down there and they're not necessarily dealing with reality very well. Because they're not gonna get away with not fixing the South County Jail and expanding the mental health facility At the North County Jail and the units there that have already been planned, which they have to fund the expansion. So be aware of that. Thank you.
1:27 – 1:3210 turns
Anybody else? Close oral communications come back to Council request number 10. Council Discussion and Review of City Handbook for Commission Committee and Board Members specifically regarding the Public Safety Commission. Who wants to go first?
Councillor Bridge. I think I was the original generator of this when we were doing the commission handbooks. And I have to commend the commission and the police department and the fire department. It appears to me they've improved their relationship. The last commission meeting was pretty interesting, however this policy...I mean I can suggest adding a couple items like Policy budget recommendations could come from the Commission Or we could have the commission submit an annual report, but I pulsed at least the members I could of the Commission They did not feel that they had had adequate time to review this Document and so my suggestion is that we would send this back to them.
I think we have a I would like the commission to weigh in on that.
Pardon? The joint meeting is March 3rd.
Okay, thank you. So I don't know if a motion's appropriate for that but that would be my motion if it is that we send this back to the commission and they report status in their combined meeting that's coming up on March 3rd so there, I guess I can make that motion.
Anybody else have something before I open up
Is that an opportunity for us to discuss the efficiency of those meetings? Or should we talk about that now, or are we talking about pushing that back till when they're here.
The efficiency of the commission meeting? Yes. So before we deliberate, I want to take public comment. But if you had anything else... All right, let me open up for public comment. Anybody from public comments? about the council's discussion review of City Handbook, about the Public Safety Commission.
Nick Gonzalez, resident of Lompoc. I think the attendance was evidence of the potential importance that a commission could be used for. On that note, I don't see why it would hurt to push it back to a commission, have it reviewed and then discussed jointly at the next meeting. You want to look at efficiency? Whatever, but bring it all back at the meeting. Thank you.
Good. Anybody else? Public comments? Nobody else will close public comments. Bring it back to the council. I believe one of the original questions was, you know, the viability of it and I think the last meeting showed it to be quite viable and I think maybe we can defer this as you're saying with your motion that you want to make on bringing us back. I agree with you when we're having the joint meeting and do a discussion with him.
Sure, and no arguments except to say I did attend and I know there was many of you here in that room. And no judgment about the commission or its intentions, the committee, its intentions at all. But I stood next to a lady, and I won't point her out but I know her and I disagree about almost everything. Almost everything. We didn't talk about this, but she left and she was very frustrated.
And I stood there and I had to leave at eight o'clock and I watched a third almost half the room leave in frustration because of the format of the meeting they were there prepared to engage get their questions answered for whatever reason and it's no one's fault maybe it's just the system But they didn't get a chance to ask their questions and they were frustrated. So again, no judgment here but just to say that the room was full and it's viable.
That's why I'm questioning the efficiency of the way we're approaching this discussion. So again, I have a lot of opinions you may not agree with. I'm happy to talk about those on March 3rd. But a full room doesn't necessarily mean it's working well so that's just my two cents.
1:32 – 1:385 turns
Well, my motion was that we would send this back to the commission. And the March 3rd meeting they would come back and report if this meets the needs of both police department, fire department and the commission. I was in attendance at the last meeting. I agree that it appeared there was not As much engagement with the audiences might have been nice. I think what happened was between the county giving their presentation and the commission being passionate about the topic, that perhaps that got away from them a little bit.
So perhaps the answer is they have another one of those meetings and allow citizens to have more of an engagement in it. It's really easy Monday morning quarterbacking. I don't know, I might not have done
it. I'll second your motion to have them come back go to them and come back first in a second by votes. Passes 5-0 Number 11, City Attorney review of outdated unused and unnecessary section of the Lompoc Municipal Code.
Mayor and Council, this is an ongoing item where the city staff periodically will return to City Council to update, repeal or amend outdated unused unnecessary sections of the Municipal Code. We do that as time permits. Additionally, staff has very recently engaged with the vendor that codifies our municipal code because they offer a service to review and look for duplications, conflicts or inconsistencies with the code and so we plan to have that service performed soon.
But this particular item tonight is coming back to council at the request of Council Member Bridge, who I believe requested that this be placed on the agenda so that some particular code sections that he wished to discuss or have staff evaluate for whether they are necessary, needed, outdated, or what have you. Could be discussed by council and some direction given about those. So if that's not the reason this is on the agenda, I'm available for other questions too but that concludes the staff report.
Council Member Bridge, question?
No, I've been waited with bated breathes for this opportunity so prior to the meeting I provided the city clerk With my comments and suggestions. There's about 1000 pages of code there, so I don't think tonight is an appropriate review of all my comments. My request. But I've included comments as revisions on the right and any revisions that I would like to suggest that staff look at. And if they'd like to have a meeting with me to go over any of those, I'm happy to do that.
And then at some future reasonable date, maybe within three months it comes back. And those that need to be approved by the council could then be windowed down and brought forward. That would be my suggestion. No, like I say there's 1,000 pages in there. And I probably have comments on 20% or something. I have some new code I'd like to see in. I think there's code that doesn't belong in there anymore for example.
One of them is you can't drive a truck over 4,000 pounds on any streets that are not coded for trucks but anybody who has got a Ram 2500 It's just been made illegal in the city. I don't think, I think that's old code. You can't have animals on the sidewalk. There's about six pages of bicycle registration code. I checked last year and the year before, we had one bicycle registered for each year.
So there's code in there that says this code is only good for six months since we initiated it in 1922 or whatever. We ought to get rid of that kind of stuff. So I'm not trying to create work, but there are opportunities. I have some permitting elements in there I'd like to see streamlined. So I made some effort over the last six months to do what I think would be reasonable and I'd like to see the staff evaluate that.
1:38 – 1:4411 turns
Councilor Storbart?
I agree with you and there is a lot of repetitive It's almost like how to eat an elephant, you know. You take one bite at a time I guess and this it seems as though as a council every month maybe we could do a chapter put it on an agenda ongoing is that a difficult thing? A standing item on the agenda and page or chapter whatever. I mean it's reasonable.
With all respect, and I'm not speaking for you, but I'm willing to take little bites here and there. I do have a couple questions on what we maybe should or shouldn't consider. But I also don't want to be here until midnight every single meeting because we're deciding whether or not some old code from the 1920s should be removed or altered. I guess my question would go back to you. What is it? Every city has code that gets old. Every city has code that expires or is irrelevant or et cetera, et cetera.
So again, all of this is going to take staff analysis, staff times, money etc. How do other cities approach this type of thing when they're updating code? Are they constantly trying to make sure it's perfectly current and nothing outdated is still in existence or do they just let it roll off and it's not important? I think that's where I'd love to learn a little bit more about this.
There are certain times when a new state law is adopted that if you do not change your code by a certain date, then the city is subject to liability risk because we haven't updated our code to be consistent with state law. In those cases, we actively bring code changes to the City Council or Planning Commission as well, if needed, to make sure that we are not subject to liability.
Those are high priority things. But then in other cases, for example the 4,000 pound limit on vehicles or the no animals on the sidewalk. They just become archaic code sections that are left in the code and are not enforced And it's likely due to the fact that the benefit of removing them just is not worth the staff time and the expense that would be required for the publications, and the time to draft the staff reports, and the time to draft the ordinances.
Practically I think that is the reason.
So I guess my suggestion and again, I'm not against some of this for sure. But I don't want to sit here for an hour going over something that just is not important we're not facing litigation risk it's outdated it just rolls off but perhaps back to where maybe there are some things that are current or important or should be updated Perhaps, you know maybe at a top level the staff can analyze some of these suggestions and say look there's no risk these aren't important.
Here's the area where council might make an adjustment obviously it's your guys' role to make sure that we understand hey the state's coming down if we don't update our code we're in trouble but maybe there are some other things that we can have some input towards but I don't want to eat an elephant
If I could just input this a little bit, please. The vendor that we hired is going to be about $28,000 for us for them to go through our code and look for outdated code. It's probably about a year-and-a-half process. It'll be layer and layer of questions and probably doing what you probably did yourself. My recommendation is once we start kicking this off, we can give you guys an update of where we are.
Maybe what is going to happen in the future kind of just like we're doing the general plan update. We could come back to you guys and give you information as we're moving through this process. I think it's a very valuable process. There's a lot of things that they're gonna look at, ADA compliant, there's a lot of compliance issues That's what they know how to do very well, instead of us trying to go through each one and read them. And maybe have them go through it, get rid of a lot of stuff that we probably would've got rid of anyways, and then we can update you and come back. And we could do it before the 18 months and give you an update where we are in that process.
Well, I have no problem with whatever approach we take. I would suggest perhaps they do a triage because I fully agree with what Councilman Hall is saying. I did it and you guys... You could read through the whole thing of my red lines in an hour-and-a-half to two hours and you could very quickly triage You know, we don't care there's animals on the sidewalk and the code.
But some of them like Chapter 17 where there's a lot of impact on development that would be a section in the permit processing I think there's some there that would be worthy of coming back less than a year and a half So that would be my suggestion. I agree with, you know we don't want to spend time on meaningless things but...
And I know I've gone through some of your work and you spent a lot of time on it and maybe this might be something that we could kick off with the vendors say here's one of our council members. I'm
happy to work
with you. And like I said we can come back maybe in three months and give you an update on where we are with that process.
And we can give our own editorial input as well, if we know that the council is particularly concerned with Title 17. Well then we can say let's focus on that first.
1:44 – 1:5115 turns
Councillor Vega?
Hey, Jeff. Would that include the streamlining of permitting processes and whatever? Can we do that the same way that he suggested to come back, have staff come back with suggestions? I think it's kind of a... So how do we go about doing that in the way that was suggested instead of having council do it?
I don't know if those kind of comments are in Councilman Bridges' sheet, but if you want to add that to the triage, the first level priority of triage is streamlining the permitting process.
And I appreciate Councilmember Bridge doing this much homework, but I think it's kind of It'd be a little bit easier to have someone else that does this all the time instead of having one person comment 20% of 1,000 pages and we'll be here all night So if we could add that I would appreciate that To add the permitting process and streamlining the permitting process and take a look at it. I think that would be beneficial to the economic development of Lompoc
Okay, got it.
Thank
you.
And with all respect to Councilmember Bridge I personally feel that we may not all have the luxury to do as much homework as he did but I wanted to be clear that he is not necessarily speaking for all of council's will on changes or So I, however it comes whoever wants to do it first that's great but I'd still like for some of those discussions to come back before council. I may completely agree on a lot of those things.
But I'd love for, maybe you can educate me on should I or anyone else here at Council start to dig in and do a little homework and have some input. What's the process before this comes back to Council? Are we submitting our ideas and thoughts to you or the City Manager? How do we do the same thing as Mr. Bridge here?
We would need to have an agenda item for you to give that direction. So perhaps the next time that one of these items comes back, to make some amendments, you could add your areas of emphasis that you want us to focus on at that point. You've come up with some new ones.
Council Member Starbuck.
Yeah, I'd like to throw in a permitting process. I'd like to hold off on that till June. This is part of the ad hoc right now and the expected report's going to be June or July on that and that's right what we're doing.
I just would like to see the one code that it's in there should be used. It's unused And it's health and safety code 80404 section, what? C? Probably BC indeed in there. And that's thou shall not dig in the garbage can and thou shall not dig in the landfill. And probably most violated city code day-in day-out is the people digging in garbage cans and spreading garbage up and down the alleys and couches Thank you.
Let me open this up to public comment
if you guys have any more questions. Before I sit down, I want to make sure that the City Clerk posts Council Member Bridges' document on the city website and also distributes it to the City Council. Okay thank
you. 4,000 pages? That's awesome! I get something to read tonight can't wait. We could print it out a roll of toilet paper for us or something just... Coming down, public comment. Either way, you're at work.
Okay gentlemen, yeah. Speaking of codes here it would be 17.224 and this is in relation to the cultural resources overlay zone specifically the south side overlay zone so you know what that is if you live south of Olive and you want to do anything to your house you have to first go hire an archaeologist and do a survey of your property Okay. And that's $1,500 right off the top right there because as a general contractor I've done that multiple times for clients on the south side and it's ridiculous what you have to go through. One example is you're a homeowner on the south side and your sewer line breaks because of a tree.
Okay? The plumber can't just go in and dig it up. You have to go get a permit from the city to dig up a sewer line OK, to look for Indian artifacts. But the sewer line was put in 1950. It was already dug up in that spot. What's the point of having to pay for something that you there's nothing there? This ordinance has been around what 25-30 years back in the old Dick DeWeese era I think it showed up.
Nothing's ever been found. Nothing of significance has ever been found with this ordinance. Me being a general contractor, I have found stuff all over this valley. It's asinine to think that the Indians just stayed south of Olive because that's where the mission was. Okay? In fact, I live right over here on the 200 block at G Street and I've got this beautiful skinning tool right here that I found in my backyard in a gopher hole.
I have dug trenches all over this valley and found grinding stones, tools. It's everywhere if you look for it. Okay so I don't...I think this one right here is a hindrance to any kind of development and it targets the people on the south side. So you either repeal that or you make the entire city do it Okay, because you're picking and choosing where you want to enforce this. And trust me like I said, this stuff is everywhere in this valley. The Indians were everywhere.
Okay, so to me this one is just it's just ridiculous. It's something that I think was forced in by the Chumash or whoever why did this ever get into it? I understand overlays there's other overlays in the city of Lompoc but this right here is lame okay you guys so look into that one yes Steve Bridge 17 that one's a good one right there thank
1:51 – 1:5617 turns
We're closing public
comment. Bring it back to Council. What do you guys want to
I don't know that there's any action here. I've accomplished what I wanted to do. We have a policy that says if we want to bring something forward, or talk about it, or try to get it improved, it has to be agendized. And so that's all I've done here is said hey, we need to fix our code. I made some effort. I'm not suggesting we accept them. I am suggesting staff look at them and they're smart Let's look at getting the consultant to make the changes. If there are some that need to come back to council, I'm all for it but I certainly don't want to come across that I'm trying to ramrod all the changes through. You just heard a perfect example. I think I found that one and would comment why are we doing that?
But the whole purpose is just to make our life of our citizens better That code is a monster. And we expect everybody to follow the rules. If you can't even tell what the hell the rule says, then I'm sympathetic to that and I'm going to spend some of my time trying to get that fixed. So that's all it was. I don't know that a motion is made. Staff's going to go off and... Do you need a motion for you to review what I've submitted?
From my perspective, I have the idea of what council wants
We're waiting for ad hoc to come back with some suggestions. You put in some very specific suggestions, you've got a consultant that is working on some of the no brainers or old outdated stuff. The whole thing, but maybe my suggestion is like don't let them get too far ahead of their skis and we pay a lot of money to the consultant if we're going to hack through some of this stuff ourselves.
So timing wise if maybe that consultant is working on some of the stuff that's in that we don't even need to discuss because it's outdated great. Let's wait until we get a chance to I'd love to see Mr Bridges comments love to hear from the ad hoc. Because I think that's going to inform whoever we're working with to triage or do whatever the term is.
Yeah, everything will come back and I wish I had more information but we just really just started the kickoff and we're just starting the process so I'll make a point to come back and educate you guys on where we are in that process and what it's gonna look like.
Awesome thank you
Council Member Vega. I have a question and a comment. Council Member Starbucks said the ad hoc committee is supposed to meet in June or come back with a report, and you guys picked that date for a certain reason, I'm sure, right? Was that just a date you guys just pulled out of the sky? Or I'm just asking, OK?
Because it's January. It's kind of ad hoc. And let's just say that council member Bridge is going down the left path, and I'm going down the right path. So
that all turned out to be June?
Well, it's going to involve permitting, planning, building, streamlining, various other things.
Thank
you. It's a huge endeavor and we are tentatively planning on reporting to council in late June or July possibly.
One last quick question, and again forgive my ignorance. They may come up with a lot of different suggestions before it comes back to council will it be vetted to see what aligns with state compliance or not? Or do we have to get into the weeds of figuring that out because I'd hate to be talking about a bunch of hey that's a great idea or that's it. We should change that and then find out no we can't do that.
No, both the vendor and Council Member Bridges' suggestions will be run through my office to make sure that they are in compliance with state law. If they're not in compliance with state law then we'll report that to the City Council when we bring some changes back.
So to be clear your ad hoc report is going to go through his office and then we're going to talk about it? Is that what I understand? I don't want to talk about stuff that doesn't get vetted and the state's going to throw it out, we waste our time or the people's time by having a great idea that we can't follow through on.
Time seems critical for what you want to do but of course we're gonna have make sure that everything we recommend is done correctly and legally. Great.
1:56 – 2:022 turns
We good with that one? And finished business, number 12. Adoption of ordinance number 1741, pursuant to these 26, submitting a special... Right? Special transaction and use tax measure to the voters perverse to repair and maintenance of city streets, and potentially adoption of resolution number 679726 calling and consulting in a special municipal election on the measure with the June 2nd, 2026 statewide primary election.
Mayor and City Council, this is the very last step to putting the special sales tax on the ballot for June 2026 election. I'm going to try to be very brief because we've had several agenda items on this already and this is just the last one to basically vote to approve it on put it on the ballot and there's a few more decisions that need The first task that needs to be done tonight is for the Council to, by a four-fifths vote, adopt the Ordinance 1741 that would submit this special transaction tax to the voters at the June 2026 election.
And then we have Resolution No. 6797 which requests that the County conduct Conduct the election and consolidate it with the statewide primary election that the county is already conducting in June. You will see At the last meeting, we had some amendments to the ordinance at Council's request. And those are underlined on pages 3 and 4 of the staff report. Unless you have some comments on those I think those...I'm pretty confident that those fulfill the intent of the City Council's direction from the last meeting.
The three items that need to be decided by Council tonight are The ballot question language that's actually going to be the language that the voters read on the ballot when they're voting yes or no. We have three different options for what that question on the ballot should be. On pages four and five of the staff report, there's option one, option two and option three.
They're pretty much Rewarded ways of asking the same question and if The council has any well, the council needs to choose one so that we can plug it into the resolution or you can Create one yourself tonight. If you wanted to edit one of them The second thing that needs to be decided by the City Council is with regard to the arguments in favor and against the ballot measure that are printed in the voter guide materials that gets mailed out to all of the voters.
So, the City Council has the ability and the option to decide that you want to appoint one or two council members to draft an argument in favor of the ballot measure. And if you decide to do that and you submit your arguments in the state law timeline, then your argument in favor of the ballot measure will be printed in the voter materials. Those are arguments in favor of the measure If any council member wanted to submit an argument in opposition to the measure, then that is possible too.
City Council members have first priority among anyone who submits arguments to the city clerk. City Council members are the first priority and so those will get printed if a council member submits an argument. And the last item that needs to be decided by council is whether rebuttal arguments will be allowed. So, arguments in favor and arguments against are always allowed but the City Council has the authority to decide whether responses to those arguments in favor or arguments against are going to be allowed and printed in the voter materials. You could say no rebuttal arguments and then you just have the argument in favor and the argument against.
So those are the three items that need to be decided tonight and then you need to vote to adopt the ordinance. That needs to pass by a four-fifths vote of the council and vote to adopt the resolution, and that would place this special tax measure on the June ballot. I do have one This is the second amendment that I recommend to the resolution. It didn't get put into the packet, which is my mistake.
But at the end of section 4 We need to add the sentence. The City Council acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code Section 10418. So if City Council adopts the resolution tonight, I would ask that that sentence be added. And that concludes the staff report. I'm available for questions.
2:02 – 2:0819 turns
Jeff, I've seen news articles and I've seen other articles on the ballot measure between the county or what the county has proposed. Can you tell me if there's any difference between our ballot measure and their ballot measure? Because I have seen reports that said the county's ballot measure was for the unincorporated areas of Santa Barbara. Don't know that that's to be a fact but I wanted to know since this was a horse race the way it was presented If you could clarify that for me.
The county has the ability to adopt a sales tax that applies throughout the county, even in incorporated cities. Or the county can choose to adopt a sales tax that only applies in the unincorporated areas. So if the county decides to put a sales tax only in the unincorporated areas then you're right we do not have to worry about the horse race anymore. Perhaps staff has some information on what the latest information about what the county's proposed measure is.
And I just want it for clarification so we know that, hey if there's not a horse race and it's a different measure that's being asked for and how does it affect Lompoc because it doesn't sound like if it's in the unincorporated areas it would affect us but still the sales tax for Lompoc will still be Something probably in Lompoc's favor, correct?
That's exactly correct. I just don't know what this county is planning to
do. I got you because I just wanted that clarified for everybody because at first it was kind of like a horse race and I don't see that anymore but thank you those are my questions. Councillor Boehme.
So I certainly have heard that, but if anyone has the information or read an article or got that verified, I'd love to see that. I think that's important. I question it first of all because if the county...I think they're at tens of billions of dollars in deficit for their on what the budget was, from what I understand. If they decide to only put it in the unincorporated areas, they're missing out on a lot of sales tax, right? So they don't get sales tax from the City of Santa Barbara, City of Goleta, City of Lompoc, City of Buellton, City Of Santa Maria. They only get sales tax from Orca, San Ynez, Los Alamos, Isla Vista. So Mission Hills, Vandenberg Village. So maybe that's the case but that's not going to bring a lot of sales tax and if I would bet against them maybe taking that approach.
So, I still think it's a horse race so let's verify that information for sure.
I have one more question. Councilor Vega? Also, Jeff, there's been questions out there maybe you can help clarify. The sales tax would be throughout Lompoc. I know there's people that shop for cars and they...I'm told there is different tax structures in the City of Santa Maria so if there was a dealership that was in one section it's possible they could pay less sales tax on a purchase here and do you know of any Anything like that here in Lompoc or would it be a general sales tax for everything here in Lompoc?
Well, it'd be general sales tax for everything in Lompoc but there is a rule where a use tax is paid on cars depending on the place where they're delivered. So if you live in Lomboc and you buy a car somewhere else then Lompoc is going to be receiving some use tax for that purchase
Okay, but there's not an extra use tax plus a sales tax for purchasing a vehicle in Lompoc. Is that correct?
That is correct
Thank you
I Heard a rumor. I didn't get to watch the county supervisor meeting today, but it was trying to verify whether It did but I think it was did he didn't get their four votes to put it on Councilmember Bridge.
Arguments for do we have to wait? Until we pass it and see if we're gonna do it Or is there an order you were looking to get this address.
There's no particular order needed but you could just vote on the ordinance first just to see if that passes and then go to the Resolution make all the decisions about the arguments arguments here
comes from a one more question Jeff Is there, there's not a add-on or an attachment for a general tax in this measure that we're asking for correct? Whatever happened to that and is that even on the table because I'm really not in favor of a general tax. The specific taxes, the only reason I would probably be in favor of this because it would get something specifically improved significantly.
No, this is very most definitely not a general tax.
We're not even considering that we're not going to put two ballot measures because I remember that was part of the conversation
before. That is not before you okay only special tax for street repair and maintenance.
Thank you Council Member Boehme.
2:08 – 2:169 turns
Do you mean to submit an argument?
Yeah, so is it up to council to allow a rebuttal argument or a council member to be against something?
Well there's always going to be arguments in favor and arguments against. So if there's a council member that wants to submit an argument against then that council member is free to do so and as long as no other council members submits an argument against it will be published Because council members have the highest priority in getting arguments published.
Thank you for that clarification. Just to remind me so everyone's very clear, if they decide to pass and the Council decides to put a special tax on the ballot and it fails do we get a refund of the $60,000 from them?
No. We pay for the election whether it passes or fails.
Anyone else for bringing to public comment?
Hi there, me again. I just feel saddened that we're at a spot in the city where we have to add another tax to pay for basic items that should be just natural road repairs really? We have to have a special tax for that? So, you know, I see this going through you guys are gonna vote for this and put it on the ballot. Whether he gets defeated or not that's up for we the citizens to decide, but I think at the same time, maybe the city council could make an effort to look at the city itself and find out where the waste.
Is and maybe we can trim some fat. I brought it up an example about $350 an hour for a certain individual to me is excessive, and then when I see some of the employees in here and I wonder why does this person have this job that's making 90,000 a year? What's the point? Why do we need certain positions? And I'm not going to get into that, but I think some of you know what I'm talking about. So I think on top of what you're doing here and putting this on the ballot, make an effort to cut fat and see if we can't come up with money for potholes.
OK guys? Anybody else?
With that, we'll close public comment. So we went through the budgetary items. We looked at it. We went through the PCI. We tried to add positions to find ways to do it efficiently and following 20 years ago when we had massive cutbacks in I want to talk a little bit about the streets department. We used to have 15 people employed in the streets department and other things got refunded back from the 07-08 crisis, but that one didn't.
And now with our PCI dropping every year, poor Mr. Craig Deerling coming out all the time chiming in about how our PCI keeps dropping, dropping, Trying to tighten the belt to get through this quagmire. And we can sit there and talk about it, wait for it, look for it. What ends up happening is our asphalt keeps falling apart and we end up going from having to do patch jobs tearing out whole streets. I think one of my stimulus that I had was watching what oil's doing right now Well, it's probably not going to get much cheaper than what we're going to see in the next year or two. And understand the electrical mandate that's going on and goo, get oil out and all this, you know they can't drill. Eventually oil and asphalt is going to be an endangered species especially in this county.
We're gonna have to import it probably from China or somewhere else. Can you only imagine in 10 or 15 years from now what the price of asphalt is going to And if we don't go plug this in and do this, all this public safety talk over the night and we'll get down the streets. We talked to somebody today who busted a rim on her husband's truck. There's a $500 alloy rim they have to go and replace.
This potentially pencils out to about a dollar a day per family of four to address this. Possibly we could get out there and be creative with bonding and give a ton of money You know, a ton of projects if this should pass. Get them done early. We can save the people upwards of 50 to 100 million dollars by doing it this way. But you hear the conversation for 20 years about we need to do something. Streets and sidewalks.
We all know somebody who's tripped somewhere, broken a hip. I talked to somebody that preacher over here one of the church his wife fell down in the alley broke her hip in a pothole The city so if anybody thinks is everything's going great and we're doing great the way we're going on right now and asphalt getting better. The staff is doing what they can to get through this, and to try to patch and repair and seal coats.
And just think of the house value of your house would be. If you can't get to your house or if they got a big pothole in front of your house. This is some bang for the buck, and I think we've worked hard. It's probably our third or fourth or fifth meeting on this. And now Council Member Vega is beating it up pretty hard to make sure that we plug and program this money into asphalt, not to positions and raises at City Hall but to get this done.
So who wants to go first? We got four people.
I'll just do a quick comment. It's clear our city streets have been repeatedly reported as needing attention, and we can have long discussions on whether it will be more successful as a special or as a general tax but buried in that whichever one you want, you want it. But there is one significant issue Just can't lose sight of, and that is the tax is going to come. It either could be our tax and our money or it could be the county's tax and the county's money because the politics of this situation is they can get another half cent of tax put on the books. That's all they can do.
If they take it, they get it. Well, they'll be as fair as they can in their minds as to whether they send some of that money our way. If we get it, we get the control. Councilman Vega has been very strong making sure that it's just for roads. The little byline I thought of is it's local control. It's our money and it's our roads. So I have no issue with agreeing that our streets need to be addressed. There's no argument here, none.
2:16 – 2:2110 turns
What I have an argument about is the approach that we're taking to try to get this across the finish line. You may have great ideas, Council Member Vega had some input on what we should do with curbs and some protections here and there but all of that's out the window if this fails. And to Council Member Bridges' point, if the county has done their homework and gets their thing across the finish line, we don't get better roads, we don't get anything. The county takes more of our citizens money Will we get it back from the county?
I'll leave that as a rhetorical question. I will say we did hear from some members of the audience in different public comment tonight. Mr. Jones mentioned going into Home Depot and seeing somebody shoplift, and then going out to eat with his wife, and seeing somebody smoking a crack pipe on the curb, and then some people doing drugs across the street. Someone else mentioned maybe he mentioned there's a couch that he wishes he could address but that's on somebody else's property and they won't do anything. The whole point was our public safety is not In good enough shape to address a lot of these issues that are still important and super relevant to these folks in our city.
We talked about code enforcement, the mayor brought up something very specific memorized a code where you're not supposed to dig in a trash can. Well, we're out of luck when it comes to trying to enforce any of those things. If all we did was try to pass a special tax that didn't pass, we didn't get anything and now we have no future resources, no revenue coming in. No flexibility as a current council or a future council to say hey, we need to beef up in some of these areas. We need to make sure public safety is taken care of if you really care about someone digging in the trash can what are we doing about the ratio of police officers that we still currently don't have? What are we doing to make sure that we can get on top of shoplifting? If I've only got four officers and they're responding to emergencies all the time, we don't have any option to grow that.
So my argument here is not to say let's not put money towards the roads two things. I'd rather get two out of four people convinced that the city needs revenue to address something that's important to them. And that's a balance of many things. It's right now streets, but it is also the cost of future public safety. We talk about code enforcement all of these codes that we want to be tightened up. We've got litter signs all over the city don't litter and there's trash right next to it. So our ability to enforce a code is only as strong as the enforcement mechanism. And that comes down to public safety, code enforcement and other of those things. Guess what?
Those revenues come from the general fund. We can put a special sales tax if it passed. That road in front of the restaurant might be perfect but that doesn't address the person smoking or doing drugs on the street they just have their feet on really nice asphalt so my argument here is yeah you may not like the general tax But A, two out of three people most likely are not going to vote for this. 50% plus one is a general tax. We are currently benefiting from the revenue that a general tax is bringing in. The mayor led on this before I got elected to office when I was at the chamber. We championed the General Tax Measure I. Those revenues have helped us sustain and grow our current public safety today.
So this argument that only a special tax, that's where we can keep that revenue and it benefits us. To me, that doesn't make any sense. So I'm just telling you if this fails and the county takes our money, if it wasn't this guy, I think there's a way to get us revenue that we can address streets and a lot of other priorities for our city. And that's a general tax. And I'm frustrated that we're not discussing that tonight as an option.
Let me clarify for you actually there is a solid waste code enforcement officer that By solid waste, so there's a full position that is funded and employed for them to go out and do that. So it started there. Does he take care of shoplifting at Home Depot? You just mentioned about solid waste and pickups in the streets and stuff like that. So there's other reasons that you could go but we did do a general tax and unfortunately a lot of that money went away. You already did a one cent tax.
So a lot of that money went away and you didn't address asphalt It wasn't. So we can keep talking about it and not address it or specifically fix this, you fix this there's other sustainable revenues that come in through sales tax to property taxes through growth and development we have to do that are sustainable methodologies to fund your public safety. This year he's got to do something about it in the old days, we had fuel tax.
We had other mechanisms that went to the asphalt. A lot of it has been changed over that's going to transit, it's going to buses... I have
no argument with
any of this. I'm just letting you know where the money went.
If this doesn't pass...
Vehicle license fee? We had a lot but we're not addressing it and we haven't addressed
it yet. If this doesn't pass your argument to say we need to do something
fails. Get on your soapbox if you're good at it and we'll get this passed together all right? I'm
not 100% sold on a
tax.
2:22 – 2:294 turns
But globally, if we look at all the expenditures and rate increases and everything that's being asked of us is what I'm looking at which is a concern. Our next item we have a use rate adjustment. These are all monies that are being taken out of our taxpayers' pockets Whether it's a dollar, whether it's a nickel. And I'm concerned because globally we don't look at the whole picture. We're looking at one agenda item. We vote for this and this other one comes up and it's taken us for a ride also so it's almost like we're getting robbed in one way because we don't look at the whole the whole picture of revenue you know we have I think one of the reasons the general tax is, and I agree with Councilmember Ball to a point, is once you give it to finance or you give it to whoever everyone can spend in any way they please.
We're already in trouble on agenda item number 13 which shows that people aren't perfect, consultants aren't perfect And part of what we're doing here is we're going to borrow from Peter to pay Paul and it ends up costing us a lot of money because the state never stops charging these things. So if we look at everything globally, to say okay it's only $1 per day or whatever it is per family, people right now are just tired of solid waste, trash, utility rate increases. They are tired of it. I can tell you. I've had so many calls about the people that are worried about when they get their utility bill.
So as far as the revenue stream coming out of people's pockets, I think we need to be conscious as people up here at council because everything we do does take away from somebody to shore up the boat that somebody else put a hole in and I just think we need to be a little bit more The firm on what we expect from the city, from finance, from our expenditures. We don't have any control over a lot of this and without the controls the money will be wasted. That's why with the specific tax I get it I would really think that the general tax would be a benefit if there were controls to say it would go toward this or toward that. I would be more than in favor of that, but they said it's up to the councils. Okay? So the council changes, they're going to throw the money somewhere else, or they're going to let finance spend the money any way they want or do inter-fund transfers and then we find out about it a little bit late like what's happening on agenda item 13.
It's not good. It's a lot of money and to pay interest to somebody else because you moved money and you can't pay it back, I just want you to know that there are better ways to do this. I just want us to be cognizant of all the money globally, not just a nickel, not just a quarter, not just a dollar. I think we're just looking at one item at a time and that's what's expected of us. So anyway, just be a little bit more conscious of where we're taking from the taxpayers Council Member Bridge.
Well, I know you've heard me say this before, but I'm kind of pragmatic. I understand Councilman Vega's points. I fully understand Councilman Ball's points. I think we've been informed by the city attorney it's too late to get a general. So, I mean that's spilt milk there's just no sense spending a lot of consternation on it. I would implore us if this is the path and I don't win all my votes so you know but if this is our path we should pull together and make this happen We all know it's good for the roads. We know that it'll work. Like I say, I'm not for taxes but once we get on this path, we as a council should pull together and make this happen.
And yeah when it's all over we can say well I didn't really want to do it that way but for now let's get something done so...I always try to make motions ahead of time so I don't know if the time is now Take the vote and see if we're going to put it on the ballot and move forward or let it die.
Let me get Council Member Boehl, and then I'll let you come back to your motion. Council Member Boehl? You
know again there's no argument here on the need to address our streets but let me ask the City Attorney a couple rhetorical questions he might help me understand this. So say in 10 years we hit a recession and we have less revenue coming into the general fund And the police department is impacted because other cities, for whatever reason, are giving bonuses or starting to poach from our department. And we are looking at three extra of almost $4 million from streets that's definitely benefiting streets. They're getting better and better and better but now we're losing police officers We talked about property value, crime matters all those things. So would we in any context with a special tax be able to say hey let's pause for a second on the streets the special tax?
We need revenue because we only have 30 police officers and crimes going through the roof. Can we dip into that Special Fund Revenue to help out our Police Department? No. So the reason I'm pushing the general tax is not because somebody down the road's going to go spend it on lollipops or something else, but flexibility. We do not have the ability to project.
We can only speculate how things will play out over time. And if we hit a recession, and we've been lucky up to now. We've been doing pretty good. But if we hit a recession and our general fund is impacted, we don't have another resource to go and draw from to stabilize or to sustain or to even think about growing our public safety mechanism. But! We might have crime going through the roof but God bless us we got perfect streets The reason I'm not supporting the special tax is specifically for that reason. I feel like people elect us up here to make decisions, and that's the way it works. If a future council gets elected they are tasked with either sustaining investment in streets or changing what needs to happen for the challenge that exists in front of them.
So I look, I make as many agreements sign a couple contracts stipulate that money from a general tax goes towards streets but I cannot support this because I don't think we're keeping a vision for what could happen in the future. But if this fails and the county takes our money, we don't get anything. We get nothing. And we can't address any of those challenges that I just mentioned in the future. I know that's something that we can't vote on now but no, I can't just jump on the soapbox and say kumbaya let's go shout and try to pass a special tax. I think we're setting ourselves up for a situation where we can't access that revenue to help us where we need it most if we hit a worst case scenario. So that's my argument.
2:29 – 2:367 turns
I 2020 you guys previous councils, you guys took a big shift and you did support massively towards the public safety you increase the budget in police. About $5 million a year and a fire up $3 million more a year. Nothing to asphalt. So your answer to the question, should we go down the road and we get in a precarious situation? You said 10 years. Eight, ten years from now is what you're saying? I-2020 would be expired. You have an opportunity.
And fortunately, the council before that, we took the $95 million unfunded pension obligation and locked it into a 15-year payoff. That'll be off the books. That will free up I-2020 seven or eight years from now. Where are we approximately? It's a 15 year tax. You have the opportunity to put that on the ballot and come out of that after general tax, whatever you need to do at that point. So there are options down the road. This tax itself wouldn't be a 15-year tax. To address this situation that the council before was not...
I mean they felt there were other obligations they needed to do instead of addressing asphalt So we can talk about it. I get it, the guys with the badges are great. I get it. If we don't fix the asphalt out here you're in trouble and we are doing what we can and have done a significant amount. In fact a lot of that money that we took to do the unfunded pension obligation was for public safety significant amount of that went to that area and that avenue. And that was something that was owed them, it wasn't being addressed.
In some cases people were bankrupting on it and refiguring and all that you couldn't do that to the people they deserve that pension and locking it in and paying it off as a very smart thing. You're independent people saying that that was a very good idea and a very great thing that we did that but the rest of the money that was there about $5 million six million dollars There it went.
All right? And you didn't do the asphalt. You guys didn't, you didn't direct it and this is a way to do it and I wouldn't trust another general fund tax. Personally myself, I would not. The discipline of the future councils is not there. Hasn't been in for 20 years.
Yeah, good response. So I'll just respectfully respond and you say well we... And I'm not putting words in your mouth but you make it sound like we blew five million dollars extra on the police department or we blew an extra three million dollars on the fire department. My argument is the costs go up and our public is sitting here coming up to public comment telling us that we still don't have the resources in those departments to address the basics So I'm not saying don't spend any money on streets. I've never said that, not one time have I said that. What I've said is we have to have the flexibility because I guarantee you the writing's on the wall. We have experience, the cost in the police department goes up if we want full staffing. If we wanna change the ratio of per one officer per 1,000 people, that is gonna cost us something.
We can argue about well, we spent a lot of money but what do we have to show for? Well, in COVID, we had 30 officers. Maybe even a little less that we didn't want to talk about. Because of a lot of issues, we didn't have funding. In the late 2010s, we didn't have enough funding and crime went through the roof. We can all look at numbers now and see crime is going down in many different areas. Homicides, domestic violence, car thefts...
That cost is going to continue to grow. Other cities are going to give raises, other cities are gonna try to poach from our department. So I'm just saying a council deserves to have revenue to address some of these needs and we can fix the streets and former council should've done whatever but we don't have a good answer to say hey chief what are you gonna do to make sure that no one digs in a trashcan? We don't have an answer for that it's gonna cost us money Shoplifting?
If there's a car crash, that's a good time to shoplift maybe. Why? Because we don't have enough resources to go and address all of the little needs that we have. So from my perspective, there's a challenge to get 66% of people to vote for a tax in for whatever reason. We have a chance to pass a general tax or should've had a chance because it only takes 50% of people And if the people decide like, hey streets. They're still important but not as important as keeping some safety and I want to make sure that we don't lose that a council should have that flexibility so I'm again agree to disagree.
You know, one of the reasons that I'm asking so many questions is because of the increases again. If agenda item 13 was in place at 12 it would definitely impact my decision on this tax measure because if we're going to be giving money out completely The fact that we fixed the streets, so maybe you can give me a little rebuttal on this because I guess you know we're running out of money. You're good with math.
What do we do here to put some controls in to make sure instead of the yes that's expected to come forward because of this water fund loan and they keep going back and forth so that we can do some sort of a lease-back agreement to pay interest or something? It should have been done before this point, before they took it from the water. How do we control our expenses is all I'm asking. I'm not trying to mix them both up, but it's money globally that's being expended from our taxpayers and they're watching us.
They're watching us right now to see what we do. Everybody would like to have our roads and our alleys good, but I'm going to tell you this one bothers me item number 13. It bothers me a lot if the agenda items were reversed it would impact my decision on this road tax because if this goes through That's just more money that's being taken. And there is no end in sight, because it says here incremental increases will continue to rise from solid waste. The state mandates will continue to rise. We're over here feeding a dead horse because we want the landfill so bad but it's not self-sustainable. So I just wanted to make that point as far as expenditures.
Do you want to make a motion that we take this item after 13 and postpone this until it's year 13? I think you'd be surprised with the global thought process I've had with this next one. I would
love to see some sort of controls, some sort of
restraint for the benefit of the taxpayers so that we know we're doing our
best to try and make sure the money goes where it needs to go. Let me check with the city attorney can we do this through this motion here?
2:36 – 2:5127 turns
Yeah, we just pause this item and hold item 13. Then we'll come back to item 12.
Just asking for a little help here so we can make sure we're
transparent. I have a question for the city attorney. Now, we've already entertained public comment in a discussion on this item. So again, just to clarify, we can pause this? Does the public get a chance because we're going to re-update and unpause this discussion? Does the public get a chance to be involved in updated public comment? Because a council member has said that one of the items is affecting his vote or his perspective on this item.
We can
do that.
We could do public comment again. And my intention is not to waste time, guys. It's for transparency.
Yeah, make your motion.
Thank you.
The mayor is free to open public comment again. Right.
Yeah, no problem. Thank you. Make your motion? Yeah. Was the motion made or was it accepted, Jeff, that we reverse item 13 to item 12? Push your button. OK. Sorry. Push your button. I was asking if my verbiage was correct. So it's rotating
those positions. It's more like just pausing this item. Going to 13 and then coming back.
So I made my motion, is anybody else going to do that? I'll give you a second on that one.
Thank you. Go ahead and vote. Passes 4-1 with the Council Member Ball voting no. Can we take a 5 minute break? 10 minute break? 5 to 10 minute break? Would that be okay? All right. Back in five to 10
minutes. Projected operating results and cash reserves from that study with what actually happened, and the second part of it is to develop some scenarios where we can restore the credit worthiness of the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund and the purpose for restoring the credit worthiness of the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund is so that it can take advantage of an opportunity that it has to refinance the money that it borrowed from the Water Fund. So this presentation is going to be in six parts.
I'm going to talk a little bit about the background, talk about the current rate adjustment plan that you've approved already, talk about the projected versus actual operating results, the rate adjustment options, comparing rates to other jurisdictions and some concluding remarks. So the city, as you know has certain financial producer obligations regarding to the solid waste utility.
The city is required to make sure that the solid waste utility is financially self supporting that it has adequate cash reserves and sufficient debt coverage ratios all these things are essential To achieving operational stability, maintaining essential infrastructure and preserving the city's ability to finance major capital expenditures which are often part of the solid waste industry.
But as you are probably aware from reading the staff report, the current condition of the solid waste fund is not good. It has negative cash balances in each of the last two fiscal years and even with the rate adjustments that are approved now It's projected to have negative cash balances at the end of fiscal 26 and at the end of 27. So it's not going to have a positive cash balance until the end of fiscal 2028 under the current plan.
And this even with relying on the loan from the Water Fund, it's still going to have negative cash balances. It also has a history of recurring annual shortfalls. All of these things have combined together to reduce the credit worthiness of the solid waste utility. So in other words, if the solid waste utility was a person it would have a very low FICO score.
This is part two of the presentation. I just want to two slides here to go through the current rate adjustment plan. These are the most common collection rates and this shows the history of the rates, the rate that's in effect right now is the one you see in the third column there for a customer with a 65 gallon cart they're currently paying $48.89. And that is scheduled to be increased by 15% on July 1st of this year, and then another 3% on July 1st of 2027.
And the rate adjustment scenarios that we're talking about tonight all assume that we're going to continue with the 15% increase that's scheduled for July 1st this year. And all the scenarios begin with July 1 or And they would supplant the 3% rate increase that's already scheduled for that date.
Before you leave that chart, just to put this in context so I understand, I want to make sure I interpret it because it will carry through my interpretation is that the first three Well, you don't have them. You have them different on other charts but you have the 65 and again 95 and then somewhere later you have a category that's 65 and 90 I think it's like a combined if they
have
two
okay oh
okay my interpretation is those three categories carry 50% of the revenue is that correct?
Yeah, it's about right. The residential and commercial your total collection revenue from collection services is about $11 million. Six of that is residential. About five is commercial.
Okay. I just want to have that kind of scope in my mind.
Thank you. So on the kind of a similar idea, this is the landfill rates. These are the rates that are currently approved to be adjusted at the landfill and what this shows is that during fiscal 2026, the year that we're in, the rate for landfill is $110 per ton. That's scheduled to go up $5 in July 1st of this year and another $5 on July 1st So this is part three of the presentation and what this is, I want to talk a little bit about the projected versus actual revenues, expenses, capital expenses that were projected in the last rate study compared with what actually happened. So the way this table works is from top to bottom it shows the activity in the cash account for the four years that ended July 1st, I'm sorry June 30th 2025 so it's fiscal 25, 24, 23 and 22.
So in the first column, it says projected. That's what we thought in the last rate study as of July 1st 2021, the city or the utility had $3.7 million. Even then we were projecting a shortfall over that period of time because the first couple of years there was already a shortfall but the shortfall we were projecting was 3,549,000. We assumed there would be a loan from the Water Fund. At the time, we thought the Landfill Stormwater Project was going to cost $6.2 million.
So with all those changes, we had projected that the cash balance as of June 30th 2025 is going to get positive $1,861,000. What actually happened is instead of a $3,549,000 shortfall the shortfall was much greater than expected. $6,189,000. We borrowed about the same amount of money as we projected. The landfill stormwater project instead of costing 6.2 it ended up costing 7.9 million.
So what actually happened at the end of that four year period is instead of cash being a positive $1,861,000 it's actually a negative $1.623,000. So there's a couple numbers I want you to pay attention to or that you're going to see on a subsequent table, and that's on the surplus in the shortfall. I'm going to drill down into that a little bit. But the other big one to remember is 1.7 million on landfill stormwater. So if you look at that change column, there's a negative 2,641.
Okay. So that's how much worse it was, this shortfall. So I'm going to drill down into that and what this chart shows is that of that 2 million 641 difference between what was projected and what was actual so we projected a loss of 3 million 549 the actual loss was 6 million 189 which was 2 million 641 worse but what this shows is that The lion's share of that change in the shortfall was due to operating expenditures which were greater than expected. So when we projected the revenues, we thought it was going to be $42,889 came in at $42 768. It's only off by three-tenths of a percent. So operating expenditures is the big story on why the shortfall was greater than expected.
Pay attention to the lines of 3549, 6189. That's going to show up on the next chart which kind of breaks down what that $2,520,000 is. So this shows that the biggest categories were salary and benefits along with the equipment rent both at the landfill and in the collection operations. Just to recap all those, the projected versus actual, the capital of the landfill stormwater came in $1.7 million more than expected.
Salary and benefits about 1.6 million more than expected and that's because there was an additional driver and heavy equipment operator. There were some vacant positions that we didn't expect to be filled that were filled And then also, there's an increase in recyclables processing cost. So there used to be a processing where we would take the recyclables to HSS and Santa Maria and pay them $65 a tonne. And now those recyclables are being taken down to the Tahequs landfill for $110 a tonne.
So not only are you paying more per tonne to have your recycles processed, you're driving them farther away which takes more time and money. Another big factor was health insurance premiums increased. And then also fleet costs, just the cost of maintaining the grinding machine, the equipment, scrapers and things out at the landfill as well as the collection vehicles increased significantly.
So this is part... Part next. Part 4. So there's four slides here and they're going to be similar, so I want to kind of explain the format and then I'll go through each slide on the left is the rate adjustments are so this this particular table here is the one we looked at earlier that councilmember bridge had a question about so you can see in there the $48.89 and that scheduled to go with no change to 56 thank you.
So, on the left is the rates on the right shows the big picture. And this is kind of a snapshot of the financial health of the solid waste enterprise fund. So the red bars are expenses that green bars or revenues. The blue bars is your long term debt. And then that green dotted line at the bottom, that's your cash reserve. So you can see and the yellow line is a target amount and the yellow line is equal to 25% of your operating expenditures And then the pink line at the end is your debt surface coverage ratio. So you can see here these negative cash balances, so the negative cash balance that I spoke about in the earlier slide at the end of June 30th 2025, you can see that on the chart it's below zero.
So 1.3 instead of 1.8 but that's it, that's that represents that negative cash balance there and you're almost getting to break even cash wise which is still about $100,000 short at the end of fiscal 2027 and then it increases from there. That's under the current rate adjustment plan that you have.
If I draw a line in time now, is that accurate to all the overruns or is this what the plan was?
This includes all the overruns so the overrun happened through 2025 and that's reflected in the actual numbers there. So through 2025 is actual when we get to 2026 were making projections. We kind of know what 2026 is going to be like And then out into the future we're projecting inflation and things like that. Does that answer your
question? I think so, but you're saying that the revenue is going to exceed under the present plan. It is. Revenues are going to exceed expenses. Yes it is. So do you have any kind of confidence in that based on your past historical experience?
Well, as much confidence I can have. You know, I was confident last time and basically no, I mean you do with the things that are known and measurable at the time under the circumstance you have it's like any budget right? You make the best estimates that you can and you hope that you're right And that's the same situation now. We've spent a lot of time estimating what we think inflation is going to be, what drivers we need, what capital expenditures we have, debt interest things like that so...
So since we know that for example health rate went up more than we thought Has this future plan incorporated items like that?
2:51 – 3:0027 turns
It has, yes it has. So for example the fleet cost has gone way up right so when we make these projections we start with what we know so now we know that the fleet costs are way up so that's where these projections are starting same with labor same with recycling and then we know what capital expenditures that were planned that are approved in the budget.
Annual debt costs, are you putting in here for the repayment of the 7.1 million? 26, 27, how much did you have put in there?
Going from memory I think it's about 1.8, 1.9 million in debt service and then it goes down as you pay it off and certain loans are paid off.
What about the 7.2 million? A lot of what we're doing here is trying to show ourselves to be in the black so that we can qualify to do the lease-lease buyback. But how much are you paying on that
7.1 million debt service? Just going from memory, I think the annual debt service on that was going to be about 700,000. And that's it. You also have
the 300,000 buy in because they wanted 300,00 up front to buy in two to three hundred thousand, I think was what they referenced last time. So it's like a million dollars. of that debt service and the buy-in? That's
included in the payment, yeah. That's included in the borrowed amount.
You have $700,000 in payment and $300,000 for them to give the loan, the guys right here? Yeah, we
took $7.1 million, amortized it up, and we got $700,000. If the $300,00 is included in that 7.1 then it is included. It
isn't.
The
$700,000 wasn't in the 7.1. That would have been an upfront
payment. But the $7.1 million that you're financing? Yeah. If part of what you're financing, that $300,000 is going to go to K&N or if that's...if that $300,000 you're talking about is included in the amount that you financed?
I think the points you had to pay up front.
Well,
but if it's
included...I don't think it was in. If it's included in a loan amount then it is. Yeah.
I don't think it was. Anyhow, the way I saw that he presented before but there's also an important area that you left out that was causing The problem that was the R.O.W. that went away, the right of way which was a big shift and that was increasing to solid waste here 25-26 just the ROW itself was 807 and 26-27 it's gone to 921. So it went up a little bit during that time
so what happened? It
wasn't 680 before
The ROW is like in August of last year's when they put the brakes on that. So it is included in the actual amounts through 2025, June 30th 2025 but now that we know we're not going to have to pay that we've incorporated that savings into the future projections does that make sense? The next three slides are going to be very similar to this, but they're going to be different scenarios.
The first scenario and they all have to do with replacing the rate adjustment starting in July 1st of 2027. So Scenario one so under this scenario instead of a 3% increase on July 1st of 2027, there would be a one time 15% increase. And what that would mean for a rate payer with a let me go back under the well just make sure I got this right. Yeah, I want to bring your attention to the $57 and 91 cents.
The rate you're paying now is that $48.89. It's going to go up to 56 after the 15%. And then right now it's scheduled for $57.91 on July 1st of 2027, so I want to compare the three scenarios to what a rate payer would pay on July 1st of 2027 compared to what you've got now. So that 57.71 is going to be a benchmark in the next three slides. So if that rate, instead of 3%, it goes up to 15%. So instead of $57.91, that customer would pay $64.65. Does that make sense? Yep. Okay.
All right. I just want to give you kind of a real-world benchmark there. And then there would be no increases... So we're going
from big to small with respect to that part?
In these scenarios
from.
Yes, yes the most aggressive so we're calling this accelerated right we had to come up with names of it so this is accelerated. So I think we kind of go quickly from here so the next scenario. Instead of a single 15% increase. We would do an 8% increase on July 1 or 2027, followed by a 7% increase on July 1 or So going back to the benchmark, instead of the $57.91, that customer on July 1st of 2027 would pay $60.72. So they go up three bucks and some change.
And then the last scenario has to do with doing 5%. Instead of the 57.91 I can't read that. So it would go to 59. It would go to 59? Yeah, I can see it. OK. Are
these all assuming the debt service load on the lease buyback?
Yes So those are the three scenarios. And then, so part five of the presentation is comparing your rates to those in other cities. So Lompoc is the dark one at the beginning and then you've got these other cities. This is the 60 gallon rate. This is the 90 gallon rate. This is a commercial rate and we're comparing a 450 gallon rate to a two yard bin. A lot of other cities don't use the tubs, so we're trying to make the volume of waste the same. So there's 202 cubic yards or 202 gallons in a cubic yard. So you've roughly got 2 cubic yards in a 450 gallon tub. We're comparing that to the two-yard bin.
And then here's the comparison of the landfill. You're charging 110, Santa Maria is charging 100, Tejiguas is 196. And then just to conclude, yeah, the financials are extremely weak so you're just projected to break even in 2026 And you're not projected to have a positive cash balance until the end of 2028. Under the current plan, the future results are still expected to fall short of what we had hoped for in 2023. The other thing about this is that the landfill is approaching the end of its useful life. So by having a solid waste utility that is more credit worthy and in a stronger financial position, this gives you more flexibility to deal with issues that may come up as you approach the end You may want to either permit a transfer station, you may want to expand the landfill.
You may want to decide to limit the amount of trash that comes in by excluding certain... like if you wanted to say only people from Lompoc could use the landfill and under that scenario they would extend the life of the landfill. You'd have a little bit more flexibility to do something like that. Strong, decisive action would be viewed positively by lenders who that would potentially loan you money. The moderate and gradual options may still preclude some prospective lenders from wanting to participate.
And the financing needs to occur before June 30th because in order for it to be tax-exempt debt, it has to be done within three years of when you spent the money on the project. And then also just the city's obligations again according to the city's financial advisor, the best way to assure that you get the best financing and more certainty I'm going to ask a question on the condition, the charts. If we just do what we said
3:01 – 3:1022 turns
It shows a slightly good picture. After a
while, yeah.
Well and even this year it's positive revenue right? That's what your chart showed. I even asked that question and you said yes 26 is...
26 you're going to break, you're gonna make $127,000 in 26
years. Is that got the increased cost of the Lease buyback in it? It does. Can somebody tell me, maybe it's the interest rate or what the difference... That lease payback has got to cost more than just paying back the original terms. Can somebody tell me what that delta is? Am I incorrect in my
assumption? Between that and what else?
Okay right now we're paying supposedly back The waterfront. We're supposed to be servicing that debt, and I'll talk in real simple terms. 3% interest and we're serving that
down. I think it might be less than 1%. Whatever it is, yeah, but
I haven't ever been told what the delta is to this new plan is a new plan got an equivalent APR of 10%, or what is because you now have if I'm understanding correctly in this chart which shows slightly positive The new plan, the lease back.
Yes.
And let's just assume for a minute that is $100,000 a year more expensive or a month or
whatever. Well I think I can give you a thumbnail sketch right? So we have it in there at like five and a half percent which is the number that may change when it goes out to the market, I don't know. So the difference between five and a half and say one and a quarter or whatever. We had five and a quarter. Five and a quarter so that's 4%. Right? So 4% times 7 million is like $280,000. Is that what you're looking for?
That's exactly what I'm looking for now and we're paying...I think I heard you say something on the order of $800,000 to service the water loan I believe I heard you say that. Maybe I misheard that. Service the water loan? Yeah, we're supposed to be paying back the $7 million. Are we
servicing that loan? No, the arrangement was to just pay interest only. So in the interest
of- Only paying interest only. So we're suggesting that we're going to take and incur another $800,000 of debt load, debt servicing fees that we' re not paying now This is a To the landfill into the solid waste a million bucks. That's what you're saying, and those numbers are in there
right? It would be more expensive.
So why don't we just go pay a million bucks a year back to the water district live in this bad condition for seven years and be done with this? I don't understand. I'm sorry, I'm not
getting it. The water fund needs more than a million dollars a year in order to build its reserve backup. As mentioned, it's
Well, if you look at the water chart will I show a positive revenue in the water charter? Are you going to next week are you going to come back and say oh we got another one of these that's exactly the same but we've got
to go raise rates. We're having to raise our raised rates for water possibly where it's just starting a cost-of-service study but it's lost like I said 1.1 million and 24 and it lost 2.5 million This
is what Victor was just complaining about. I'm sorry, Councilman Vega was just complaining about it. We're getting this piecemeal stuff and then the next session or the next month we come and say well yeah you know we did this and that but now we've got to get more money. And he's right! I'm getting screamed at by everybody too. My household is not real happy now because my wife is not happy.
So, happy wife, happy life, right? I do not understand why we would take and not just put the million dollars that you have in that chart and suffer with a low credit rating for two years and put $2 million into the water fund and then $3 million and then in five years we would be Not only that, what's completely missing out of this in my opinion, probably naive. I see no cost savings portion of this study.
It's like it's a foregone thing. We're just going to raise prices. What kind of effort has been done to reduce costs? So right there, I just showed you a way to save at least 1% because every year we pay back $1 million If we're servicing at 1%, that will go away. I'll get off my soapbox, I'm sorry.
Let me show you something that wasn't presented or I spent a little time today. We were told before to... You know, we couldn't find the money because it'd be like looking in the couch for change but I think there's some opportunities that we have here that we can give water some money. We don't have to go raise them and the primary reason for raising these rates is so that we can qualify to get the loan on the lease-lease buyback. And if you look at the scenarios, we're soon going to be well above our 90 day reserve policy.
Our revenue is going to far exceed what we even allowed ourselves to do. Sure, could we find a place to spend the money? I'm sure they could. But I think some of the options that we had out there is because the ROW went away The right-of-way maintenance, which is about a million a year that we're rolling up to as per the court systems. So let me define some other money talked with some time of the city manager to search some of these accounts. That's why I have this here and you've got copies of that in front of you that was delivered in your mailbox as well. But if you look at an account... And say here, let me just give you something quick and fast, a way to get the $7 million back Not all of it to the water, but I'm going to give you something as a springboard here.
If you continue an interfront loan from the Water Department of $2 million, and then there's other accounts here that we can dip into to get another 5 million, account number 429. And it's a street improvement fee cash. There's $3.1 million in that account. And if you come up here to the restricted number, count number 424. Restricted cash government building reserve 4.281.
So here's money that's been sitting around for a significant amount of time and we can take five out of those two combined to get five out of there. We've got our seven. We don't have to do the lease-lease buyback which says $200,000 to $300,000 off the top It also saves, is about three and a half million dollars in interest that we were paying on the lease buyback as estimated by the guys who came here before.
And we can keep this in-house. We can charge ourself a half or 1%. You probably get higher than that somewhere on the money and borrow internally from ourselves. We did it with the Interfund transfer with the water but here's your relatively simple solution that we could do We can keep going forward with the rates as they are right now we're turning the corner.
You're up 126,000 in revenue. I think one number that wasn't put in here is I think you guys wrote off about a million dollars during COVID for accounts receivable. There was kind of a one-time expense out somewhere in there about three years ago. I remember Council Member Starbuck was asking about it, but they wrote off about four million dollars that day in that one meeting and there's about a million of solid waste. But those are one time expenses that are going out of there.
They turned the corner with you staying status quo as you're going forward. I ran this idea by the city manager, sorry Mr. Crosby spent a lot of time on other things but I did get to go back to you to run it through there. I did mention short with the consultant on that but I think we have something there maybe City Manager can answer if that's something that could be a solution that way internally
3:10 – 3:2211 turns
Those are options. I think I'd like to come back with a proposal on how we repay those Money's back. When I look at the $4.3 million, that's money that was put as a restriction from council to replace our police department fire station or police station or city hall. We're earning probably closer to 3%. I'd hate to see it because there's not...money is not really going in. That's for the $300,000. We'll give it
back.
But we could come back with some proposals on how that could look on paper.
When you come back with that, I would very much like to see a documentation on restricted funds. Because we now are right in the middle of what I've been asking for for months as to which the funds are restricted and what's the source document of the restrictions because Mayor Mosby is suggesting that we take funds out of these perhaps restricted funds And as I say, I've been asking for months to please give me a list of the sources of the restrictions on these.
Yeah, I can answer the 424 restriction. That was a restriction put on by council.
So that's what you call a natural or nature restriction? Which my digging in says a bunch of these are which said we
did that to ourselves. Yes, I can't answer the 429. I'd have to do some more research on that one.
You know, Mr. Mayor, if I could answer that? Yes, go ahead. If you don't mind. Aside from this, this is good news if we can do this because we need to be self-sustainable. One of the issues I have is we're always increasing but we're never stabilizing anything. We're always spending but we never give anybody any confidence that we can do anything other than raise rates and part of all this Is there some questions that need to be asked about some of the advice we're being given and I know I'm going off on a tangent here, but some of the accounting methodologies you know when we are approached.
Wages and benefits. Okay, according to the consultant they have some sort of figure they're using for wages and benefits as it goes through time, and then we get advice on what we can afford or what we can't afford. And are those benefits you know I mean. Their methodology here, what percentage is revenue? What percentage is expense that they're looking at so that we don't get ourselves in a credit pinch. We should never be in this position. We should never be here where our credit rating is so poor that we have to take out a loan Or we have to raise all these rates just to qualify for a loan, which is going to take us time at $700,000 a year interest rate.
Aren't we better than that? Because somebody actually hasn't been watching the ball or hasn't been giving us advice. I can tell you every one of us has been trying to be fiscally responsible But I can tell you in what we listen to as far as negotiations and things that come up. As to our credit worthiness or our reserve policy, OK? So I wanted to mention that there's a lot of things here. Just like fleet, they're saying the depreciation for our vehicles. Where is the depreciation schedule supposed to be used for this thing that basically phases vehicles out and expenses it out to a point where we're not over here faced with having to buy a brand new fire truck or brand new everything without anything in the bank, OK. There's nothing there.
All of a sudden, we get hit with we got to buy That's not sound financial advice. So anyway, I wanted to make that point. It's really good news, Mr. Mayor. If you could elaborate on this thing that can be done if these are restricted funds and we restricted them, we can unrestrict them. And again with the city attorney, we have the power to take off the restrictions since we had the power to put it back on. Is that correct sir?
Some of these funds?
Yes, if it's a restriction imposed by the City Council.
Thank you sir and I guess with the restriction on reserves also since these are restricted funds the reserve policy how flexible is this and where we red flag to wear these reserves? This reserve policy actually affects our credit rating as has been stated right now that we have to shore up the whole boat in order to qualify for another loan You know, it's kind of like are these reserve limits set to maintain our creditworthiness or are they just there because we just picked a number to say 20% or 25%. I'm sure there's a methodology to that. There's a method to their madness.
If it was 15%, we should know that if it's 20% or if it was 25%, I just think...I'm concerned with our credit rating. Thank you. Councillor Boehme?
Okay. What's the old saying? Fool me once, fool me twice, shame on me etc., right? So I remember when we had some of these rate increases come before us 22 and 23. And again no fault, I have no blame on staff it's impossible to speculate perfectly project what's going to happen. It's just a fact so I get that there's inflated costs On the landfill. I totally understand those things, but and again, I trust AI a little bit so I just ran some of this stuff through you some of the charts that you put together there's no question on the accuracy of the charts, but I did my own comparison breaking it down. You know, and you did some of that in general sense about comparing our costs with other cities.
And it just comes down to the fact that if we raise our rates, what you guys are asking for even across the three scenarios at the residential level. We're going to be among the highest if not the highest except for Santa Barbara because they have an extra little fee. For residents 65 gallon and 95 gallon container Lompoc will be the most expensive except for Santa Barbara in the whole county as far as cities go.
So again, that's just generally speaking. So this brings me back to a question. One of the things we've always, it's always excited me about utilities in Lompoc and this is a very general layman's approach is that we should offer value because we have the utility and if that value does not exist and we're actually charging more because of whatever happened then for me it goes to a bigger picture question Is it worth even having this utility?
Because I guarantee you, these rates go up whatever these numbers are. There's not going to be a scenario where we just drop them back down. Costs will continue to be inflated. So again my and I measured what happens to the commercial 450-gallon containers? Yes, you've got to do the equations with yards because most people do yards and we do gallons et cetera.
You're accurate in all of those things but we maintain at the commercial level a competitive price for trash We do. But you had mentioned that, I don't know it was six million for residents or five or six versus you know so it's about 50 roughly 5050 give or take. So with these increases we're going to put the majority of these increases on the back of the residents they are the ones that are gonna take the hit here with that.
And I tend to agree. Again, maybe it's fancy math and I'm just not smart enough my calculator only has nine numbers and everyone else is special equations but I am concerned that again that takes away the luster of us having our own utility and I'm worried That we're going to do some gimmicky trick. It's not a gimmick, I get it. We've got to finance and pay something back but I tend to lean if we do have any other method to use funds that we already have and not increase our cost and just again maybe our FICO score for the landfill or the solid waste takes a hit for some time But we're going to be known as the highest rate for trash service in the county, save Santa Barbara.
And that's the City of Lompoc. So to me, sorry, is this utility in its current condition and I know there's things that we could never speculate or project about, is it becoming a millstone? So my little brain, I'm wondering should we be zooming out and talking way more quickly about the landfill and keeping it open for 10 years or five years or 20 years? Because my fear is like well if we under projected what's not our fault. It just things happen. What if the state has more mandates other things? We have to keep paying for it.
What happens when we're more expensive than Santa Barbara? Well then, I mean again why do we have this utility? Maybe it's cheaper for us to look at contracting it out to someone else. So I'm not necessarily agreeing fully but I think these are very valid questions and you know me, I don't agree with this group very often but I do have some of these like very simple questions. Like if I understand from your perspective what has to happen for us to become solvent, that's all, you didn't do anything wrong But, no you didn't and I appreciate that. A lot of hard work into that. Bob you didn't do anything wrong either.
We didn't know it was going to be 1.7 or more than what we speculated with costs. That stuff happens all the time. Well, what happens when it's another thing that we didn't expect or another thing that we didn't expect? And then on top of that, we're servicing a loan at a higher interest rate than maybe in the creative way that we could have used monies we already had in the bank.
Maybe that's impossible but I think those are valid questions for you guys to come back to us and say look hey, you absolutely cannot pull from reserves over here to answer that hard question. And at this moment, I don't feel educated and I'm doing my own math here and figuring this stuff out and doing comparisons So again, maybe we should be hesitant to just say well the rate increase answers the question and then we get a better credit score.
That's good for someone in the office perhaps but for the average resident they have to keep looking across the river to another city where it's cheaper and that's just another reason to complain about a lack of cost efficiency in Lompoc and that worries me long term. Does that make sense? So again, I don't have a perfect answer. I think it's valid to go and see could we use some of the monies we have somewhere else that's been sitting there for some time to pay or to help us. That interest rate from the water fund, I know they need the money. I get that. Totally get that.
Perhaps they shouldn't have been so generous in giving the loan with those silly terms, right, considering the challenge that we have right now. But I am concerned about some of this complexity that we're adding on. And that much cost to service something? That doesn't seem to end up well, except ah! We get a chance to get a better credit score in that department. So maybe I'm missing something but from my perspective why should Lompoc be the most expensive place to be a resident for your solid waste?
Maybe it's no one's fault but this is the choice that we're left with and that concerns me
3:22 – 3:295 turns
Let me go to public comment. Do we have a public comment? Come on down.
Nick Gonzales, resident of Lompoc. I think the devil's in the details here. I've heard numerous occasions the internal promotion of We Get Accounting Awards Your counting is absolutely useless if it can't point these items out sooner than later. I don't know if you have to get more updated reports, if the systems have to be reporting Greater than quarterly, greater than semi-annually. I don't know what it is but some of these items like you have a very general vehicle rent 1.2 million, equipment rent 1.1. I would be asking for the details of these numbers. Are these going to move into the future? Were they one time expenses? You have negative decreased items. What was that? Was it depreciation that was finally taken out because a truck would...
There's so much numbers here that you actually need to get down dirty in the detail and determine what they really are. Salaries and benefits are completely discretional. Somebody has a decision to say, yes we're going to hire, no we're not going to hire. Not saying that it's not justified, I'm just saying it's a discretionary item. At some point when that decision is made, that should be reported in how it impacts the bottom line moving forward.
You can't operate and avoid where you let these lags extend out. And obviously, that's what we're doing now, right? They're seeing it. They're coming back. But it's only been a couple of years since you did your last one. And it's coming up inadequate. And then I'll say this, remember the mortgage crisis debacle? Where everything crashed. Interest only loans that came up with balloon payments and big principles that had to be paid at some point in time or your debt just sprung out of control.
So I think you need to start restricting more funds and not making them unrestricted. You need to restrict your reserve funds, you need to restrict your replacement cost funds, you need to restrict funds for depreciation. And these funds need to be operated independently of each other. You're horse trading with public dollars here. It might be a solution if it's the solution that makes this process a little less impactful to the resident, great. But at the end of the day I think you have some more house cleaning to do besides just fixing this problem. I think you have to start looking at these funds working independently of each other and stop horse trading within them and start restricting what funds can be used for so that you have a more stable balance sheet.
Thank you.
I wish I was a smart guy like you, sir. And the best thing I do is pray, right? That's what I do. When I don't know what's going on, I pray and I've been praying. And just listening to this whole situation and hearing how we're trying to get it to move forward. And I would like to suggest that we consider having an industrial engineer who works for the city of Lompoc.
What is an industrial engineer? Well, an industrial engineer optimized complex processes systems organizations by integrating people materials machines energy to eliminate waste and increase productivity They look at process improvement, system design and optimization, data analysis, quality control, cost management. That's what this gentleman was doing for us as a consultant.
But what I would like to suggest is we get a smart guy like this who would work for our city instead of having a lot of consultants out there that are looking at different processes that we have in our city We'll have a team that we pay for as a city employee who works actually in our favor. And I'm not saying you're not working in our favor, because you got to stay employed and you're doing a great job.
I'm suggesting that we have our own industrial engineer. That way you don't have to be the smart guys, community doesn't have to be the smart guys We hire a smart guy, like a guy like this.
What's your name sir? David.
Like a guy like David and we put him on the payroll and we say hey David what do you need as an industrial team to look at our processes and we might need to actually re-baseline some things that we got going on so that you can't totally do a full baseline because we need to operate but you can take system by system by system and begin to optimize it. And then we share the wealth among the city of all the different departments.
I know how that really works because most departments have their own exclusive, this is me and I don't want to share my money but see we got to change that philosophy. Everyone in the city is working for the city so if we had an industrial engineer who was empowered To look at all our systems and say, we can do better here. We can do better here. We can take money from this organization, fix this organization, and begin to rebaseline our city.
And then be able to say, OK, this is how we move forward. So it's the city's money not the department's money. So someone will lose for a little while. Someone will gain for awhile. But that's what an industrial engineer would do. Thank you.
3:29 – 3:353 turns
All right, Greg Gideon again. Adding an industrial engineer is a waste of resources because it's just like our temporary building official who gets paid by their title. How much is that going to cost us? I'd rather spend money on a consultant right here you pay him his money he's done and gone. You hire an employee you're not going to be able to get rid of them okay and they're gonna be stuck here you're gonna be paying for costing this money So, the big problem here is this rate increase and everything is just a bump in the road right now. The big issue is when this landfill is full and it closes then what are you going to do because then it's really expensive? Okay so there is a solution and the solution is you've got a rail yard here okay you find somebody They take trash.
Back east, they load train cars up with trash. You can have a transfer station, load the cars up, find somebody that takes it, they take it somewhere across country and they burn it to make energy. So, I think the city council and whoever's involved needs to start looking at that process. Even though let's say that's 10 or 15 years down the road when this dump closes, but that's a viable option.
All we got to do is just dump it into a rail car and it goes away. You don't have landfill expense, you don't have all the employee expenses and all the benefits and everything that goes with that. It's just the whole burden of everything keeps getting more expensive maintenance everything else. The state of California is the big hindrance because they mandate that you have to recycle so much of your trash, and now it was going to Santa Maria for what 65 a ton?
And now it goes to Tahigas for a ridiculous price. Everybody in construction around this whole area, San Ynez whatever you bring your trash to Lompoc because it's the cheapest. So Lompoc is making money off of other areas because people bring their trash here because your rate is low. I've done it. I've done jobs in San Ynez and I ship my stuff To Lompoc, because it's easier. If you hire Marborg to take your trash away it goes to Tahigas cost you twice as much.
So I think part of this is looking way ahead in the future let's figure out a way to just eliminate all that expense completely. You know inquire make some inquiries where can we take our trash? Hell, give it to Nevada or someplace. There's people out there that will take this stuff because it's a business. It's a money-making business. Right now in the city of Lompoc we're losing money by shipping recycles to Tahecus?
It just don't make sense. It costs us money. We're tearing the trucks. You can't drive a garbage truck 50 miles down the highway. To do it efficiently you've got to load it into a big trailer and do it. I know we have a time constraint. One of the reasons why we brought the consultant
back was because The loan and the deadline on paying back the loan and trying to find a way to increase our credit rating so that the lease lease buyback rental thing was going on could even qualify. That was one of the main reasons for doing this. The rate study done before and the rates you guys had implemented three years ago was moving forward to bring us into that. With ROW disappearing, and a couple other variables in there I think you'll see the number return to positive faster than what you had here on the standard page 11.
And I believe if you don't have to have the $300,000 or $200,000 I think the cost of initiating that loan as well will help in that. I think we had a couple other numbers that we had if you weren't paying the, it was about $800,000 a year that we were going to be paying to service the lease-lease buyback and if we do it even at a reduced interest rate, we could maybe save another 150 to 200,000. So half a million a year if we do this ourselves and we don't have to raise the rate because Let me go to Council Member Bridge and then try to make a motion.
Yeah, no you've repeated most of what I kind of did in my little rant it just seems to me like we're just if we can afford to go do a lease back at five percent and avoid you know just avoid that completely and pay ourselves back we should just go pay ourselves back and I think we should make it a standard that any loan we have with ourselves We do more than pay interest. We service the loan, that's a fiduciary responsibility and I have been a fan now for like I say months trying to figure out why we have millions and millions of dollars sitting in restricted funds and we have to go out and borrow money from somebody else.
I don't get that. I have one quick question, do we take Vandenberg Villages I guess does Marburg do? Do they come to our landfill? This fee on page 18, is that the tipping rate they pay in tons or do they have some special deal?
3:35 – 3:4015 turns
Yes, when they bring tons to your landfill they pay $110 a ton. Okay
so I don't know that it probably cost them 50 bucks a load to go to any one of these other places to get their truck and take it there so I think you've got some room there maybe or maybe not but yeah I would not be a fan And if there's some kind of motion that
gets us to point... Let me get Council Member Vega and then I'll try to do something there with the city.
Yeah, I'd like to thank you guys for this discussion and digging deeper to find something that would keep us from having to get an unnecessary loan. I think this creativity is It's wonderful to hear and listen to that we're backing the residents as far as our own utility. Council Member Ball, you're absolutely correct. Everyone is always raving about us owning our own utility. There should be a benefit and people should know there's a benefit to it. The council is always told... We're always told to listen to the professionals and we know it's all speculation and they're doing the best job they can Well, we did listen to professionals and look at where we're at right now. I realize that we must question everything because it is evident that four to five major projects were wrong.
The city solution right now is to hit the residents for these mistakes or possible errors. We have justification to restrict Thank you. Let me ask the city manager again in our discussion, are you able to do this?
Yeah, you can do that. But my concern is if they're paying back the city or they're paying back anybody, my concern is are they going to be able to pay it back? Does that make sense?
Well as we were going to do with the lease-lease buyback, it was backed by the general fund. As I said in that last presentation we had, it was revenue from solid waste and backed by a general fund. So...
I'm just saying that his predictions on where we are As far as revenue over expenditures, it's not going to be any different if we're paying ourselves back or we're paying K&N or anybody. It will be more expensive yes but is it material enough to make a big difference? Are we still going to need to do adjustments to our rates? I can't answer that. According to page
11, we are even paying it back and in fact in a couple of years you're gonna have three million dollars in reserve
Yeah, I mean there's a lot of other concerns if we are going to have to do a transfer station and stuff. That's going to cost money as well so we have a lot of future expenditures that we're gonna need.
Let's take care of this one right now and you need the transfer station. We can talk about that on the road but right now what we're talking about what we've got to do here and I think that we can get there. You can do a transfer station maybe you could go out and bond that one. We could plan a little further ahead kind of why we are where we are right now is because we hit that deadline on the inter-fund transfer. The reason why it was interest only it was going to be a short term And it kind of got away from us and we're down to the wire. And that's kind of why we're stuck where we are right now, and Mr. Cross has helped to clean up a little bit of a mess that we had there in the city manager stepping up too.
But I think in order to get us through this phase and this step that we have to be right now which would then show us to be in the positive We're in the black, so that's when you want to go out and get a loan. You don't want to go get a loan when you're operating in the red. And according to this... In 2027 we will be in the black. I think probably sooner than that we were looking at some other numbers as well there's more ROW that seems that we probably are getting back and a couple other avenues. We need to look at our AR and see where our AR is right now.
I'm pretty sure we can come back.
What it would cost to do the other way, as far as funding through some of our funds.
Do an inter-fund transfer? Can we can we do that?
Yeah you just do a repayment schedule. You could do an inter-fund transfer. Yes yes you can.
So we have enough money here to do that like I say you keep water get water getting five million dollars back would help them with capital projects they need to do. We know them two million and then you have several accounts here that seem... Some of them are just molding here. There's my motion.
I just want to ensure that when you do that plan, that we're servicing any loan with a minimum of 15-year payback or 10-year payback but we're not just paying interest only
3:40 – 3:4938 turns
That would be an interesting principle,
for sure. Council Member Bull? So you can shut me down quick or just afterwards just tell me that it's kind of silly but you got me thinking a little bit and hear me out and it's late I get it. Marburg are they a non-profit business? No. Profitable right okay so they pick up all the trash in Ms. Shields Mesa Oaks Vandenberg Village I understand is that correct?
But I'm just saying in our valley they do. So it gets recorded on the record? They do it in the unincorporated area. Okay, so hear me out and this is again I'm going to throw some layman's terms at you. As they should be because they're privately owned, whatever. So they're making money coming over here picking up trash and then paying whatever our rate is at the dump which is impacting us too because our dump is getting closer to being closed because we take their trash and they must think it's a good deal to take it here right? And because they make money in it pencils out So silly idea.
I'd love to see how we can take money from other things, but maybe we learn it's restricted and we can't do all these things and there are some legal problems with that. And we expanded our system to actually go up there. It's the same argument for annexation, all the property tax goes to the county. We don't get any of it here. So I'm curious like okay well what if we actually serviced those places offered a competitive rate and didn't charge ourselves so much to take it to the dump?
So maybe that's a wild idea but again I've got another company that makes profit taking trash in the Lompoc Valley to our dump And we're in debt. So there's another scenario I might be interested in, I'd be curious. I know that's a bunch of, oh gosh, and more expense and more fleet or whatever. But why wouldn't we even consider it?
I'm sure we could have bid on it. It would be a county contract through Marburg. That's through the county. And if we were to raise our rates for them to come and dump in us, that's kind of whatever the market will bear. We get to the point where we say, we're going to raise rates on this. They say, well, you don't want to come there no more. There is probably something what that market could bear.
You're making my point. I think the only leverage we have in that scenario is to say it's cost prohibitive for them to come and use our dump because they've got to go to Tegas, it's more expensive. They can't raise rates on their clients over here if they're going to keep providing service because it's so expensive. Maybe that gives us a revenue source that we haven't thought about yet. So again, call me crazy. Maybe it doesn't work that way. And maybe city stuff has to always be complicated.
But this is a silly question I'd love to have you guys answer. Maybe it's an easy answer. Thank
you. was two times rate. There's a question of the interpretation of what the pickup is. I did run it by the city attorney and the solid waste superintendent, but I think the intentions of it was that Marburg was probably supposed to be paying twice the weight for tonnage outside than anybody else coming out from outside to the City of Lompoc. I remember in the old days when I was a kid they ID'd you and you just didn't come to the landfill or they got you. Remember that?
So I mean, there was a lot rationale that we protected our landfill as the residents of Lompoc. But I think there's a resolution, I know there's a resolution out there that says outside is just like our water and wastewater is one-and-a-half times rate, solid waste was two times rate. So there's something out there already but when they... That's another story but let me get back to my motion that I'm making here Did you come back with that and maybe funded internally?
And with your payment schedules, your paybacks and your percentages of. Make it work
just to be clarity $5 million. An at least a 15 year payback right?
I would say 15 on it, not that it can't be in early payback at 15. I would say that you hold 2,000,000 in the water right now. We'll see how it trickles out. I mean, I've seen... Yeah, that will get us to where we're at right now is we're under a crunch. We lose that tax exemption if we don't have it done in the three years and this is in front of us right now because the guys didn't want to give us the least-least buyback because our credit rating on this was high enough.
So anyhow, that's my motion. Is that good? Do you need more direction? When do you need... We got, you have time. You have a little bit of time, correct? No, no, because we have even... Loaning to ourselves, we have plenty of time. If we're loaning to ourself, there's not the three-year time limit, correct? For the tax exemption thing?
Right.
Okay. Well it's not way too long.
Too long.
All right. Okay, there's my motion. And I second by Bridge. Let's go ahead and vote. That passes 5-0. Thank you guys for digging hard. Appreciate the numbers. Thank you. All right now we're going to go back to number 12 correct? And we're back to? Back
to 12. Do you feel
better? Not not the Lind Lind lease buyback thing. No, correct We didn't raise the rates yet nothing any more than was already raised before that would be tricky now. Mr Huh? Tricky just I'm not tricky we didn't raise the rates that they were requesting to raise
Let's just hammer through whatever is left because you guys know what I think so We've still got item five and nine to come back to since 1030. So
it's
I Know
you got homework tonight.
I got homework
Yeah The babies are fun All right,
I'm trying. Pass
your bedtime, I know. All right, number 12, back to number 12. So you had a concern on where we were? Who's running the number 12 ship? City Attorney, do you want to come up to the podium? You guys got more questions for him, what we're trying to do? I'd like to
synopsize.
Are you ready for a motion or what are you looking at? Special tax. I'll do one more public comment if you want. Should I do another public comment? Anybody want another public comment? Would that be good? Another one?
I think they all went to bed.
Nobody else wants another public comment. I offered it. Close public comment! I'm going to wait for the city manager to get back though. Do you have any questions for the city attorney where we're going on this? No. Should I wait for the city manager?
You don't need to.
Oh, okay.
You can if you want to.
Alright. You got any questions what we're doing? Let me get Councilmember Paul a question. What you got?
Yeah, I mean, yeah, I think we need to vote on it. I mean, I potentially might write something against it no offense but I just want to know that we have three things timing for that and I don't want to miss my opportunity so
we have three things to come down what we're going to do here right these are three things you wanted city
attorney. Yeah there's three questions that need to be answered by the City Council the one is There's three options for that in the staff report. Another one is whether the City Council wants to designate up to two council members to draft an argument. Let's go
one at a time here, okay?
Sure.
I thought we wanted to find out if we're going to do
it
before we
start saying...
3:49 – 3:5430 turns
If you're going to go that route, then the first decision would be whether to approve the Ordinance 1741 which would submit the special tax to the voters on June 2nd 2026. Special Tax for Repair and Maintenance of City Streets and that would require a four-fifths vote of the Council.
All right there's a motion I'll put on there that has this suggestion here so I've got it first on there looking for a second.
Seconded by Bridge. Let's go ahead and vote. What was the whole, what are we voting on here? I was going to offer my suggestion on an option.
Number one right here adopting ordinance number seven is submitting a temporary special transition use tax to voters. Right here it needs a four-fifth vote right here.
Okay and then we're gonna go to the options. And
then we got other options yes that's the first one so we've got a first and second let's go ahead and vote And that passes 4-1 with Councilor Valvo voting no. Okay, so we get to go to number two because we got four fifths.
Correct.
All right. So number two is adopting Resolution 679726 calling consolidated special municipal election on June 2nd special statewide primary election request the Senator can register our voters to conduct a consolidated election directly city attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure and setting valid arguments. So what else do you need with number two?
So we need to insert into this resolution what we want the question on the ballot to be. And on page four and five of the staff report, there's three options for how we want that question to be worded or the city council could come up with a different option if you wanted to.
Is anybody have a recommendation on the option, along with them. Number two,
me,
you can't remember start
I think option one is the simplest easiest read option.
So your motion to adopt, adopt the resolution with option one.
We don't want to adopt the resolution yet until we get through all three of these. Oh, OK. So we can just vote on that question first. All right.
Let's vote on question one. He's got a motion. Make motion for option one? Make motion. Your pants are too many buttons. So we've got a motion by Starbucks seconded by Bridge. Let us go ahead and vote. And that passes 4-1.
What's the next thing you want to do? The next would be whether the council wants to allow rebuttal arguments, so there will be arguments in favor or against...
I would say no rebuttals Mr. Mayor.
Make your motion.
So we've got a motion by Vega seconded by Bridge.
Could we repeat that motion?
The next one is does the City
Council want to choose
One or two council members to draft a argument in favor of the measure that would be printed. I'd
like to make a motion that Councilman Ball and Councilman Mosby get elected, or selected to prepare a favorable argument.
That's a solid no for me.
You just want to do it?
Well, I'm against it so I'm not writing in
favor. I just think it's important. We're going forward as a council. I recognize you are against this special but we're beyond that now. You have stated your for fixing the roads. You've also suggested that it's going to be difficult to get 66%. I think you have a large base in our community. That you kind of say, yeah, let's do it. And that's how we do it.
So I just respectfully disagree. I don't like the approach. I don't like hamstring in the future of our city's flexibility to take on new challenges that we don't even know what's going to hit us in the face. So, I absolutely do not support it but I'd be more than happy to be on an island to myself to write a good paragraph or two on why we shouldn't do this and this approach is not the right one.
3:54 – 4:0025 turns
We're still
looking for a motion.
If you want to designate someone, if you take no action on this and you don't designate someone then any council member who wants can submit an argument in favor. Can we designate
the city attorney to write one in favor?
No.
Okay. All right I'm going to designate myself as Council Member Vega. Are you with me? Okay all right yeah. All right here's my motion. Seconded by Council Member Vega okay go ahead vote. And that's a pass 4-0-1 with one abstention, Councilman Ball abstained.
Okay. Okay so then the next action would be to adopt the resolution with the changes that you just made which I'll read or I'll summarize.
Oh you needed that change right?
Yes. The first one would be to insert the option 1 question into section number 2 of the resolution, because you chose option 1 question. And second change would be to not permit rebuttals. So we're going to delete section 10 of the resolution and we're going to add the words there. Rebuttal arguments shall not be permitted and any prior resolution authorizing rebuttal arguments is hereby repealed pursuant to Elections Code 9285B.
And then in the blank for the council members that will submit the argument in favor of the measure, we're going to put Mayor Mosby and Council Member Vega. Finally, the one correction was to add a sentence onto the end of Section 4 that says City Council acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code Section 10418.
With those changes, that would adopt everything the council wishes to do tonight.
So Council Member Vega, is that the motion you made? Yes sir. So he agreed with that and that's his motion as stated by the city attorney. Council Member Starbuck with a second on that. Let's go ahead and vote. Passes 4-1 with Council Member Volg voting no. What else do we need?
That completes the item, so this measure will be on the ballot in June 2026 election. There
you go. On the ballot. Progressing on written communications, correct? Are we good? It says immediately before. So I can do written communications then what? No written communications other than presented?
Nothing more than you've already received.
Okay very good. Okay let's go item number five. What have you got Council Member Rich?
Well, I know we're running late. I just have a couple of quick questions and I thought they might be too complex for sitting in consent. Do I understand correctly that the report says that we have $3.1 million sitting in reserve for road improvement and 1.1 million sitting in reserve for parks? Are they restricted funds?
I should have been clearer on that. Are they restricted by us or
Is it just a natural restriction? You're shaking your hand, those are just natural?
Well these restrictions are imposed by state law. By state
law?
Yes. Whatever we designate them to be used for once they're collected they then have to be used for that.
I just want to clarify what you just said. Whatever we designate them for, once we've designated them they're restricted to that by state law?
Yes.
Do we have the power to undo that designation?
Not once you've collected the funds.
Okay so is there a document that's written up that defines specifically what we... Is it in resolution?
4:00 – 4:0510 turns
I'm not sure if it's a resolution or an ordinance. But yes, when these development impact fees were adopted, I think in 2003? Yeah, 2003.
So if I wanted to know what those were, I would ask and request for information what the restriction document is on those two files. OK. Yes. Thank you. You have a large, and this kind of relates to what we were talking about before I think. There's a large negative in water and a large negative in waste. Are those the same thing? They're just showing up in two funds or is that true that we're negative both those numbers independently?
Does that question make sense?
It does. I'm not 100% certain, but I believe they are separate. They're separate funds. I believe they were for paying off individual bonds for those funds. Okay thank you.
That was based on anticipated growth that didn't happen.
Okay I'm just trying to get clear.
So we raised the rates to cover the difference.
Yeah, I can't make a motion but I would make a motion that we approve item 5 as was listed in consent now that I've had those questions. Okay.
I'm sorry. There's a bridge at Starbuck on the second on the motion let's go ahead and vote 5-0. We're back
in line. And I pulled item 9. Item 9, I'm going to vote no on. I'll just tell you right now and I just felt I owed you. So Lompoc Municipal Code says we're not supposed to write solicitations that stifle competition. I have a broken record that I keep saying I want local guys to be able to compete This one, it was obvious the local guys couldn't compete. We have a qualified person who could do this job in the city.
We did the transit buzzed one and I was told well we're going to have a DBE and the DBE was somebody out of Santa Maria so that money went. We did the landscaping contract and told the local guys couldn't compete based on the bid so now we have one less landscaping company This is a contract that does on-demand tree trimming. We have a guy in the city that does that.
We've written clauses in here that like they have to have a biologist to do wildlife survey, they have to have five years of municipal experience, they have to do a fast pay discount. The evaluation criteria doesn't actually match The emergency response criteria was they had to answer the phone. Now, all we had to have done is make the emergency criteria that they've got to be on site in two hours and we would have helped a local firm. Instead, we said, oh you've got to answer the phone in eight hours or you're noncompliant. They might not have been eight hours.
Inside the contract it actually states the city's committed to increasing small business But there's no criteria for that goal. So ever, you know, I know I'm a broken needle here or broken record and I'm sure you guys are tired of hearing it but I'm going to do this to every contract that comes in here that we don't start finding ways to keep the money in Lompoc.
We have somebody in this town who could've done it and we just why, we wrote the contract in a way So I felt I owed it to the group. If somebody wants to make a motion, you can go forward now.
I'm going to vote four on this is the fact that it's almost a 60% lower contract than the contractor that we had hired annually, just rolled the contract over, rolled the contract over. Went out with an RFP on this one after a couple of years and it came back and says here in the staff report that it was 59% lower in cost than other bidders. Well somebody has done their due diligence on this.
And, you know, 59% lower. I mean granted that you're looking at $577,000 or whatever, a tremendous amount of money but in a two-year cycle it's already been in the budget. It's savings for us so I'm going to make a motion we accept item nine.
4:06 – 4:1114 turns
And that passes 4-1 with Council Member Bridge voting no. Okay, where are we now? I'm trying. Council Comments and Meeting Reports. Councilor Boehl, you want to go first?
Sure, just everyone don't forget if you've got
some free time... Mayor, sorry, I'm sorry. We had another oral communications before we get to the council.
Reverse. I'm going to reduce the time to 30 seconds. Go ahead. Oral communications?
I'd just like to thank you for considering the residents in the last item with the solid waste. You know, I've been here many a times talking about the necessity to look at everything in entirety. As a housing provider now, I have properties where my utilities are more than my property taxes. Is the mortgage next? And I understand that costs are going to go up. It's natural, things happen.
But please be as prudent as possible when you're looking to increase these costs and do what you did tonight. Look at every possibility because at the end in aggregate it really adds up. And eventually you're going to go to a point where you can't just keep increasing. There is an intolerance level that you'll get people to come back. I speak on behalf of a lot of my tenants who, what can we do? What can we do, what can we do?
So thank you again for taking that extra time and consideration and just realize that in aggregate it does make a big impact to people's bottom line. Thank you.
Anybody else? One more time. Last two minutes. All right, sorry about that but close that. Bring it back. Customer Paul apologize.
No stress always want to hear from the public even if we don't like what you say thank you for being here and for sticking with us so late it's important just a reminder this Saturday keep it on your radar it's the Communify 211 event at the Dick DeWeese Center there's a lot of resources A lot of fun stuff happening. Sunny Country is going to be there, a Spanish-speaking radio station is going to be there.
They're providing free haircuts for some folks. Bob I'm not, never mind, just having fun with you. But they're also, for the first 300 people that show up, get a free lunch. So hey, maybe you want to go check something out learn about services in your community. Have some fun. There's going to be entertainment, lots of that so consider it's 11 to three on Saturday. I think that's the seventh.
Communify 211 don't forget. Councilor
Starbuck?
No reports.
Council Member Vega? Thank you, everyone that paid attention tonight. It was a lot of work that was done and most of you people did understand what utility rates can be and just know that the city I believe the staff and consultants everyone is trying really hard tonight we were just trying to maintain a status quo because we were getting so many emails I know I was personally in calls To try and do whatever we could to keep us from having that increase. And I know eventually some things will have to go up, but I'd like to thank staff. I know that they're trying to do their best and even though the rhetoric seems to be that things are going up it's not anyone's personal fault so thank you so much Councillor Bridge.
I just have one council request. I'd like at our next agenda meeting to have a discussion on the measures to improve the efficiency and transparency of the council operations with three items specific, and again, I can't talk about this stuff unless I get it agendized. Is it like updated hierarchical org chart on a periodic basis? Ensure that council items listed on future agendas receive appropriate attention, that's our action items.
And review available council training to enable members to access information within the city's electronic systems in accordance with laws. I think those things are things we've said we need to address at some point and I'd like to talk a little bit about them. But
I need council concurrence to do that. So it's agendized for discussion? Is that what you're asking for? I'll give you a head nod yes on that. Bring it back, we can discuss something.
Okay, I got three.
You have four? I've got four. All right, Councilmembers Starbuck, myself and Councillor Vega. You can provide Stacey with that.