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.0:01 – 0:0910 turns
Hello, hello. 633. Lompoc City Council meeting October 6th, 2026. Open session roll call please.
Roll call, called by City Clerk
Show transcript
Report on action closed session.
Mayor, the City Council met in closed session to discuss the one labor negotiations item on the agenda. There was a discussion of the item and the council gave direction to staff but there was no reportable action taken.
Lord smooth out the path of those who serve you And cling to truth. Bless our police, bless our firefighters, direct staff and city workers and grant these faithful servants impact and success in what they do. Lord provide opportunities for grace and mercy to those who confess their mistakes and weaknesses. Protect lovers of righteousness with your unstoppable power.
There's hope in you alone. There's wholeness in you alone. Because you are the salve for our souls. We rest in you, amen.
Please remain standing until the President begins. 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.
We had a couple of presentations elsewhere. Council Member Ball, did you want to read yours in? What you did?
Let's see. Sorry. Pull it up right now. Our internet is slow. Let's see, where is this at here?
Yes that's me. Okay on September 17th 2026 I had the honor of presenting a certificate of recognition to Fidel Villanueva, Maribel Landeros and Heather Woolsey in honor of receiving the 2026 Healthy Lompoc Coalition Partner Award.
Good deal. On October 5th 2026 I wasn't there but I did present them To present Certificate of Recognition to Maisie Brown and Violin Solario in honor of being a citizen of the 83rd Session of the American Legion Auxiliary California Girl State at the University of California at Riverside. And now, we get a presentation to SPCAG for the 60th anniversary. How many people know what SPCAG is? Santa Barbara County Association of Governments?
Okay yeah, very important. Very important for our community. Pass-through agency from Israel, grant funding to keep our main streets and roads and stuff together, and the lane in the train right? Whiting of the 101, whole nine yards. So join me at the podium Thank you. It's interesting how, I've asked them actually to attend more often so they can do presentations. They also help us with our airport land use plan and what are some of the good ones you guys? We're doing a Lompoc Valley study coming up. Yeah, the Lompoc Valley study that's triggering of what a lot is happening at Vandenberg, at the main gate that's happening over there. So they're the agency that helps connect the dots with our asphalt So it's, yeah, Measure A. That's a big one.
Measure D before that so it's important and Lompoc was one of the beginning partners 60 years ago in putting this together where the whole community works together to also get revenues for grant funding so we can actually enhance what's going on. And we'll read this proclamation, whereas for six years local governments throughout Santa Barbara County have worked together through a regional partnership to address shared challenges and advanced solutions that cross jurisdictional boundaries. And whereas the city of Lompoc joins Santa Barbara and the cities of Carpinteria, Guadalupe, Santa Barbara and Santa Maria to establish the Santa Barbara County and Cities Area Planning Council which held its first organizational meeting on October 26th 1966 beginning a regional partnership that continues today.
And whereas created during a period of significant growth and change the organization evolved alongside the region it serves assuming important state and federal transportation planning and funding responsibilities And in 1990, become the independent public agency known as the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments or SBCAG. And whereas today SBCAG brings together the five members of Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors and representatives for each of the county's eight incorporated cities, Builton, Carp, Goleta, Guadalupe.
Lompoc, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and Solvang to coordinate on issues affecting the region as a whole. And whereas through regional planning funding advocacy and partnership including locally controlled transportation investments approved by county voters through Measure D in 1989, Measure A in 2008. SPCAG has helped advance highways, local streets and roads, public transit, passenger rail, bicycle and pedestrian connections and other improvements throughout Santa Barbara County while leveraging state and federal resources.
And whereas while Santa Barbara County has changed considerably over six decades, the principle at the heart of SPCAG remains consistent. Some challenges extend beyond jurisdictional boundaries and communities can accomplish more by working together. And now therefore I, James Mosby, Mayor of the City of Lompoc, hereby commemorate the 60th anniversary of SPCAG as the City of Lompoc is a founding member of its regional partnership recognized six decades of collaborating with other cities in the county center to address shared regional needs.
Yeah, people realize how important this really is. And I suggest if you ever get a chance to come to the meeting watch a meeting Get involved in it a lot of the changes that happen can take time But they're worth waiting for and it's one of the ways that we do connect a lot of the major projects as You started out with the third lane down in South County and now it's a billion dollar project correct It's now become a billion dollar project. But to be able to coordinate it without the group and the coordination of everybody, it would not be the project it is so.
Sorry kids come on down.
0:09 – 0:1622 turns
Thank you Mayor Mosby, members of the Council for this recognition. I'm Sarkis Kotchak, Director of Programming with the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments. Lompoc has a special place in our agency's history when the organization was formed in 1966 as the Santa Barbara County Cities Area Planning Council then Lompoc City Councilman Robert McClure was elected as first chair So Lompoc not only was one of our founding members, but a Lompoc leader helped lead this regional partnership from the beginning. So thank you for that.
And 60 years later the same idea of communities working together continues here in the Lompoc Valley. We're excited to soon begin the Lompoc Valley Transportation Needs Study In partnership with the city, the county of Santa Barbara and Vandenberg Space Force Base. So this study will look at how people move throughout the valley including Lompoc, Vandenberg Space Force Base, Vandenberg Village and Mission Hills along key connections on highways 1 and 246. So as the mayor mentioned as we embark on that study they'll be coming to our board with updates and updates to your council so we look forward to your input.
So while we look at what is working, there are going to be needs and improvements that can make the valley safer and easier to get around by car, transit, bike or on foot. We look to start that study in 2027 with opportunities for input. And so that's the kind of partnership that is at work in your neighbor... That kind of partnership is also worked in your neighboring communities as well. In Santa Maria and Orca, we're actually working on a State Route 135 study in partnership with the County, City of Santa Maria and Caltrans to look at what the long-term needs are there. And then in Santinez Valley, we're working with the cities of Solvang Along with the St. Denis Band of Chumash Indians on the St. Denis Valley Trail Project. So these are different projects serving different communities with different needs, but they reflect the same idea that brought our local governments together 60 years ago.
Some things simply work better when we work together. So on behalf of our board and staff, we would like to thank you for this recognition and for Lompoc's 60 years of partnership.
Thank you,
Mayor. I want to reiterate what SBCAG just said that they secured a grant for us to study our traffic here and it was a $400,000 grant and we super appreciate that. It's important. I wanted to invite everybody to attend a special meeting for Parks and Rec Commission next Tuesday, October 13th at 7. This will focus on our second community workshop gathering information to guide and plan improvements for Ryan Park, Johns Bonneville Park And it's essential for us to get that input from the community. It helps us secure the grant and we'll get more points, and it's better for us. So if you're involved in the parks, we encourage you to come on out.
Additionally I wanted to let everybody know that – I know it's a little bit early for the Christmas parade but it will be December Friday the 4th, and the theme this year will be Light Up The Holidays. And the applications for that are due to the Rec Department by November 16th. I'd like to invite everybody to submit their awards for this year's pumpkin contest at the library. This is a popular contest, you can drop off acceptable pumpkin carbons from the 14th to the 20th. Voting will be the 21st through 28th and the 29th they'll pick the winners and encourage everybody to come on out and do that.
Additionally they're going to have the Costume Bingo Contest return next Friday, October 16th. If you're interested you need to be in costume at the library at 5pm and this is a great event with a lot of turnout. Also want to take a moment to let everybody know that this week is National Public Power Week. We'll be celebrating it this week from October 4th through the 10th, where there's over 2,000 community power agencies that provide electricity for over 49 million and the City of Lompoc is award winner for the American Public Power Association Reliable public power providers, diamond award. So I'm really proud of the electric division and I wanted to thank them for everything they do to get our power staying up and operational.
Finally want to let everybody know that we'll be having an award banquet for our employees will be closed City Hall in the library from 11 to 2 on October 15th We only do it every other year so it's a good opportunity for us to recognize the people that have done number of years and done an outstanding job And that's all I have for now sir
Question for you, we have the skate park breaking ground. What day is that going to be?
I
think it was October 12th.
That's what you told me before, October 12th?
Yes, October 12 is the date that we're shooting for. And
then we had another groundbreaking coming as well.
The stage, yeah, we'll work on the stage. What are we waiting on Mario?
Our windmills will be in a few weeks so we didn't want to start the construction until that was onsite
We've got a stage coming and the long-awaited $5 million in that skate park, correct?
Yeah.
Long awaited skate project so...
Quick question, Council Member Bridge. So the stage will be started what's the projected finish
date?
It's
on
contract
it's... I'm not trying to
get you to memorize the date but we're gonna have it done by Flower
Festival. Yes, it'll be done by Flower Festival.
0:16 – 0:2315 turns
So before I move on to public comment, there's some new people in here and after some of the activities at last meeting I'm going to ask the city attorney to read California Penal Code 403 into the record just as the first warning for public.
Yes, Mayor. California Penal Code section 403 is the penal code section that makes it a misdemeanor crime to disturb a public meeting and that section reads every person who without authority of law willfully disturbs or breaks up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character is guilty of a misdemeanor
Okay, thank you. So we'll post a public comment on consent calendar. Consent calendar only, we have seven items on consent calendar. So number one, we have the approval of minutes from June 16th 2026 meeting. Number two is approval and ratification of expenditures for payroll August 28 for $2.18 million and a payroll September 11th 2016 2.2 million about your register August 24.
through 28th, 2026 of $2.89 million and a voucher register August 31st, 2026 September 4th for $1.4 million and a voucher register September 7th through 11th, 2026 for $987,000. Number three is adoption of resolution number 6851 parentheses 26 to close City Hall and suspend certain field operations December 28th to December 31st Number four is approval of amendment to Memorandum of Understanding of Public Risk Innovation Solutions and Management for Participating in the PRISM Health Program.
Number five is adoption of updated 2026 City Council meeting calendar. Number six, continuation of ballot drop boxes on city property and city hall and library parking areas. Approval of license agreement with the County of Santa Barbara. And number seven is award of a contract purchase order to Winter Chevrolet in amount of $394,000 for six new 2027 Chevy Silverado EV 5WT extended range work truck pickups for the water parks and rec Urban forestry streets and transit divisions.
Any of you on the council wish to pull any of those items? I had a quick question on number seven, and that is the Chevy Silverados. If you could come just with some quick questions and maybe you can explain why we're buying Seventy some-odd thousand dollar pickup trucks. Thank goodness we didn't get those other ones, but Fill us in real fast if you could
okay real fast December 2nd you approved Council approves We could get seven 2026 f150 lightnings December 15th of 2025 Ford discontinued them so That was plan a we had to go with plan B Just so everybody understands The ACF is Advanced Clean Fleets. That's through CARB and we have to follow that mandate. That being said, right now we have to purchase 50% of all our vehicles have to be EV. 2030 it goes to 100%.
So we are trying to be very strategic about what we do. I have become departments Like biggest thorn, biggest nightmare because they want vehicles now and we have to really think about what we're doing. So we've taken a lot of thought into this and what we're presenting is what we feel is best so we can try and purchase the vehicles we need. It ramped up in 2030 to 100%. We don't know between now and 2030 Where this is going to play out, you know. Come 2030 they could change it and be hybrids we don't know so we're just kind of doing what were mandated in the least.
I guess grabbing the low-hanging fruit that we can to follow the mandate, and then I can purchase the equipment that departments really need. We need bucket trucks. We need service trucks. We need things like internal combustion so if I get the electric vehicles, I can get those departments the vehicles they need. It's not an easy mandate to follow. Every vehicle that we get, we have to think about charging. We have two beam chargers right now.
We're currently trying to assess where we can put other chargers so we're looking at all of that. The trucks are due to be delivered probably early February. Maybe March, so they give us time to try and figure out some charging solutions. What we're looking at would be probably a level two charger to start out with. So we're really trying to be thinking about all of this.
And I'm going to answer any other questions that you do have.
You got mine. I just
wanted
the public to understand why we're doing what we're doing and I appreciate you...
Yeah it's not easy. I would love to buy the departments all the equipment they want, and I can't do that. I have to be very strategic about what we do. So we're going to try and do this, and then try and just every single vehicle think about not only now but the next 10 years. So really trying to think this through. That's why it's taken so long to come back before you guys because I didn't want to rush this.
And like I said, I hear from the departments constantly When can I order my vehicle?
Thank you. That's Robert Woolley, Fleet and Facilities Maintenance Manager. Anybody else have any other questions? I had a quick one maybe to the City Manager. I'm good with you. Nobody else for you. Thank
you.
I am trying to get you out in anthropology at the end. We did that to you last time right? Number five, not having a council meeting November 3rd. Is that going to put us in a pinch on items you have on the calendar? Are you going to be able to get through or what do you think? Yeah
we can just chalk these stuff around and there will be no problem.
You've got a lot of stuff on our
list. We do. Are
you going to give me a towing service agreement?
0:23 – 0:2911 turns
I think we'll be fine. You think we'll be fine? Load up the next one before and after.
Council Member Ball, you had a
question? I was just going to say since it is canceled, I assume Mr. Starbuck and myself at least weren't going to be here. It is election day so we're hoping people focus on voting. That's why we canceled it.
It's not canceled yet but that's your request. I just want to make sure the staff is able to meet what they need to get done. I support Council Member Starbuck's request to
cancel November 3rd.
Okay, I see nobody rise. Do we have anybody on phone or internet for public comment on consent calendar?
There is no public comment via phones or Teams.
Okay and nobody rising for comment on that. We will close that take it back for a motion on consent calendar.
Now go ahead and move on to consent.
Second. First by Starbucks seconded by Ball. Go ahead vote. Net passes barely 5-0. All right, staff presentation announcements request presentations for Lompoc Police Department with input and direction from the City Council regarding number one, the use of drone as a first responder
Well good evening Council, Mayor. We'll start with the Drona's First Responder program. We're going to bring up the transparency page for the Police Department website. So if you go to our website for the Lompoc Police Department, you will see at the bottom of the page these two icons. The flock safety is our transparency page for the ALPR cameras and the one to the right is the Drona's first responder transparency page So what I wanted to do, and if you could change the date at the top to start date.
There you go. So you can see that you can go through the different dates and change and see what activity was taking place with the drone as first responder. So in this case from July 31st to present, the drone has been deployed 250 Twenty-five calls for service. We had an 84% reduction in response time, the drone was that quick to get on scene for these calls for service that it responded to.
We had 144 subjects located because of the drone and an average response time of 98.1 seconds. There were 10 calls cleared without patrol resources. And of the calls, those 225 calls it was on scene first 61% of the time. To the right you can actually see the pie chart that breaks down the type of calls that the drone responds to. So as part of our transparency to the community and the use of this technology we have this up there for everyone to see and navigate on their own.
If we can go to the flights tab now? As a part of this program we also put up on the website The flight paths that the drone took in responding to those calls of service. So if you cursor down, you can see that all of the flights that it responded to and the exact path that it took to get there. And then at the very bottom, to go back in that date range, you'll see the different pages that you can navigate to be able to see what we're doing.
So it is our opinion that the program has been very successful for the police department and what I'm going to show to you now in just a minute is a seven-minute video of one of the calls for service that the drone responded to. So, the way that we have this program set up is that the pilot actually hears the call for service coming in and in the video that you're about to watch The drone pilot heard the call coming in and was able to launch the drone and fly to the location before the officers even got dispatched.
And in the course of doing that, the pilot was able to locate the suspects in this investigation. We have a clearance for calls for service unable to locate or gone on arrival And if you listen to our radio traffic, sometimes you'll hear that. That typically means that when the officer gets dispatched, gets on scene and starts looking for somebody and can't find them, the person was gone on arrival or they were unable to locate that suspect.
So we are seeing a decline in a drop in gone-on-arrival, unable to locate because the drone is so quick to get on scene. So if you could please play that video? You're going to hear some radio traffic. It'll be quiet in the beginning, but you'll hear when the dispatcher actually puts a radio call out. It's up top of the police department where the drones are housed and as the pilot navigates to the call location which is Home Depot he will approach and as he gets closer with the drone he'll start manipulating the camera to be able to start looking for the suspects
0:29 – 0:3616 turns
Are you guys still using your conventional drone? Is this taking the place of those?
Yeah, they can be used by the staff if there's a need and the pilot is not available. We do have officers that are certified by the FAA as pilots that they do take them out on patrol with them so if they need to use it for whatever reason, they can. It's within the
policy. But this has probably taken what, 90%?
This is probably the majority of the work when it comes to the drones now. So you can see the hospital coming into view and then Home Depot right behind it. So this is a reported theft by two suspects, you'll hear the descriptions in the radio traffic. This is true.
POD 22, 54. POD 22 and POD 25, stop listing just occur at Home Depot. RP is following the suspects now at Industrial and 9th.
Okay, copy. 64, 1-2. 64 Airport. Standby.
Fox 22, it's a white male adult in his 50s wearing a black shirt walking with a female. They took over $300 worth of merchandise. Air Force, go ahead.
Do you have the females on a police shift? Would it be in flight first? Air Force, this is 4-1.2. Where are they at right now? We're locking up the full stack off of 7th.
So what you're seeing here is that the suspects have now separated and the male half has gone to the south side of the building. The pilot manipulates... They're
both still making their way towards 7th.
Pilot manipulates a drone to maintain observations on this site. Confirming
on industrial. Okay, so they've left the building but they're both making their way towards 7th? Copy. No approaching sevens off the tetanus. So
the suspect's now approaching the 76th alleyway. The male half, female still on the street.
Heading north of the 76th Alley. 64423, 10-8. 10-81? 10-1. Nose film alley, 7-6, 3-1-4. Low volume. Nose protein, 8-4, in between the alley of 7-2-6. X-ray 1 is 10-7, out with 1.
So what you saw
there was a
0:36 – 0:4115 turns
A typical call for service that had the officers, you heard when the officers were dispatched. You heard when they went on scene 1097 Those people would have been long gone from Home Depot, two or three blocks away. And we probably would not have been able to find them in this case because of the drone and because of their ability to do what they can do. They were able to coach the officers into the area where the suspects were and we were able to take them into custody without incident. So this is a hugely successful program. And as your chief of police I was not a fan has grown up first responder until I started to really get into it.
and see the benefit to our community in that. We're having a great success with the program, I expect it to continue to grow and be well worth the money that the city is spending on it right now. Questions?
Is there anything in this technology, drone whether it's by flock or anyone else that's different than having a sheriff's helicopter with technology?
Cost. I mean if you were to ask the Sheriff's Department how much it costs to maintain an helicopter just to be able to fly plus the cost of the pilots, this city would never be able to afford that.
Thank you. Councilor Bridge.
On the trip from the police station to the initial incident report, is that a choice to be man-operated?
In this case, this was one of the first launches of the program. So the way that the system works, the Aerodome product has to connect to our CAD, Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management. We have to work with both companies to make that bridge so that we can get the GPS location of the call for service to the Aerodome product. And at the time this call came in, we had not had that connection yet. But in the future, well as it stands right now, the pilot makes a decision to launch and sends the drone into the air. The GPS is already in it and it's flying to the scene.
Automated?
Other than response time, of course, in launching and stuff. You already had drone technology. I think the really improvement here is you're mapping it, you're guiding the transparency with the public with this. Thank you.
The officers that were responding to the calls, we're having to go respond to the call and then if the drone was needed they'd have to launch after they already arrived on scene. In the case in the situation that we're in now because we have the drones first responder as you saw in that video he The pilot was on scene before the call even went out to the officer. So we're able to better respond to calls for service, especially those high-risk situations where we need actionable intelligence as soon as we can get it. The other thing I'd like you to keep in mind is in many cases, it's an overwatch environment where if I have a single officer on a traffic stop, a high risk traffic stop while we're waiting for other people to respond because of the quickness of the drone, be over the top of that officer dealing with individuals during traffic stops.
In one case, one of our officers was in a situation and conducted a traffic stop and the suspect in that case tried to discard a meth pipe and the drone picked up on everything so we're able to coach the officers to everything. I've learned a lot since getting into this program and I think that for our community, this is a game changer. And it's going to make us as a police department to better serve our community.
I got a call the other day and there was some confusion. I guess there's another person who's running drones out of the airport? And they were very, they were thinking it was PD. I went on your site and I didn't see you guys flying them. But maybe the city manager real fast because he could help with some of that confusion over in the Walmart area. I guess the guy launches them out of there or something and they're thinking it's your guys but they
aren't. Yeah so for our system, Sergeant Magillan is here. He's a supervisor of the drone program but there are geofences built around the airport that our drone can't fly into those areas unless we get prior approval from the FAA to do that. I think
we have a tenant out there that's flying. We do have
a
company that we lease one of the hangars to, they are deploying drones, they're registered and all that, and what they're doing is going up and down the coast looking for smugglers and illegal activity.
You had some public concern thinking that... And it's him launching out there so hopefully the people understand yours are all mapped? You never fly that out of there without being mapped or...?
Yeah it could take I don't know what the average time is, Sergeant Magill.
0:42 – 1:067 turns
It's 24 hours from the time that we fly to the time it gets posted onto our portal.
Yeah but you're not launching without it being ID'd right? The trip is. Transparency sake that's pretty darn
fast. That's the purpose of the website. We want everybody to look at it and be familiar with it and there's nothing for us to hide. The
question, you said initially you had hesitation or reservations about any sort of drone stuff and then something changed. Can you walk me through that? Yeah
so I'm an old school cop. Using some of this technology, I look at it and go well what's the real benefit to us other than it's cool right? And this is definitely cool. But when you see the stats that we're putting up already in the first 90 days of this program and the response times to getting to calls for service and getting that actionable intelligence out to the officers quickly, that's invaluable And the potential for us to de-escalate situations and slow down my police officers if they're going to a hot call, in other words Code 3.
If the drone gets there quickly and sees that there is not a risk to life that would require us to respond Code 3 we can immediately slow the units down in their high speed response to the call for service so on a safety level it kind of opened my eyes to a lot The benefits it does bring to us and just seeing what I showed everybody here tonight, we would never have seen who those suspects were in that case. They would have been long gone.
So the officers probably aren't happy with it because they clear calls with gone on arrival unable to locate no paperwork. Those are gonna go away because this drone is making it easier for us to find people.
All right, carry on with the next one. Automated License Plate Reader
At the Council's request we put together a presentation on automated license plate readers. YLPD uses automatic license plate reader technology it's a focused investigation tool for vehicles connected to crimes missing persons and public safety alerts thank you ALPRs have been around for many years and they help officers move from a vague vehicle description, which we get when we're talking to victims' witnesses, to basically an investigative lead. And that's what this is. It's a piece of evidence, a potential lead in a criminal investigation.
It helps us to recover stolen vehicles and stolen plates, locate vehicles associated with missing persons alerts, identify suspects or victim vehicles tied to specific criminal cases and create say a reviewable record of searches alerts and follow-ups. That was quick. You're gonna have to do it manually. Guys get that? All the way back to the beginning again.
Go back one just to make sure. Yeah, keep going. Is that it? All right. So this is the inventory that the police department and the city has. I want everybody to understand that there is a trailer that the city purchased that is funded through the Parks and Rec's to help with some of their events. We do have access to that if we need it for criminal investigations or issues that were dealing within the community But currently the police department or the City of Lompoc with automatic license plate reader cameras, we have 10.
And those you'll see at the end of the presentation my goal with those was to place them at all the points of entry and exit in the city and one in the middle of the city. So these are just catching vehicles coming in, license plates that are coming in that are potentially associated with criminal activity or leaving Which helps us give a direction of travel if they're leaving to other agencies, if we're involved in those investigations.
There are 38 CalPERS which surround Santa Barbara County Housing Authority facilities. At their request and their funding, they had those installed and give us access to those. And then obviously we have DRONA's first responder but there are other cameras in the city. Home Depot has put them up around their facility. They give us access to them but they're not our cameras. And there are some housing areas that I think believe, I don't know the names yet. That are also doing it on their own. So it is obviously giving us access to data as those vehicles pass through and get photographed taking up a license plate. Next slide.
What is an ALPR camera? What does it capture? It's a point in time vehicle event, not a person's identity. License plate images and plate characters from the rear of the vehicle, not the front of the vehicle. The vehicle make model body type color invisible features. The state that the plate was issued out of. The type. You can read all that yourself. And examples of visible features like a roof rack, toolbox, stickers trailer or any damage. Next slide.
So I think it's really important that everybody understand these are not video cameras. These are still photograph cameras, and ALPRs are just focused still images of a license plate and a vehicle giving descriptions that are searchable. There are within the system the ability to create alerts So if the Lompoc Police Department is looking for a vehicle associated in a criminal act, we can place an alert. And if that license plate shows up somewhere in the city or with another city within the state of California that we're allowed to have access to, it will alert us and let us know where it's at.
The video trailer, it is a video camera system but it also has still photographs It's a different retention privacy policy on that. And we only deploy it under any, whenever we deploy that it has to be done under the rules and the laws of the state of California. This has been pretty useful for major events and specific types of investigations. And I'll share one of those with you at the end or shortly.
And Drona's first responder, we just went through all that. So this is a separate aviation policy. All of our pilots are FAA certified. We use it for situational awareness or actionable intelligence as you heard me say earlier. There are evidence handling requirements that apply to this but this is not the same as an automated license plate reader. Next slide.
I want to stop the confusion when it comes to these cameras right? What flock license plate readers do and don't do. They do not use facial recognition, they do not identify drivers passengers race gender or other demographic traits. It does not contain DMV names addresses social security numbers or driver records it does not predict crime or assign a risk score to the vehicle And searches are based on vehicle details and documented investigative reasons.
Who owns the data? We as a City of Lompoc own the data. FLOC provides that infrastructure to us, they do not sell our data and every search requires a documented reason and it is logged for review and audit. LPD will retain ALPR data only for the period authorized by policy, contract and the law. Let's go back one. So recently FLOC has changed their ability to access and do searches.
And a perfect example in this is I was going to take and search the system for my police vehicle to show the public and the council what the actual photograph looks like that is taken by the cameras. But when I logged into Flock, it wouldn't allow me to do that because you have to have a crime so I couldn't search for my own city vehicle. So you'll see a photo later on that's AI generated because I wanted to show the public what the general look is of that photograph And we also with those changes that they made recently for all the new customers coming into FLOC and using ALPR, they now have a seven-day retention policy for those new customers. We are currently on a 30 day retention policy and that's hugely valuable to stay at 30 days as a chief of police.
That is my recommendation to this council It may take more than seven days for us to get the case through to the detectives, to be able to do the searching that they may or may not need. So if you were to require us to change that timing it could affect our ability to investigate so just keep that in mind. Generates a flock alert. Alerts come from official sources or authorized agency hot lists, reported stolen vehicles, missing persons, agency hot lists and wanted vehicles. Next slide.
Searches must be connected to an authorized law enforcement purpose. Stolen vehicle, suspect vehicle, victim vehicle et cetera. The user must document or the officer must document the reason for the search. The offense type, the case and incident number. Access records should include date and time, query terms, user identity and agency affiliation and search purposes.
Every search is reviewable in an audit and can be researched by management. No searches for personal curiosity, favor civil disputes or non-criminal purposes, no immigration enforcement or reproductive care searches. as prohibited by law, specifically the state of California. And no anonymous browsing or just checking searches. No sharing outside of authorized channels with approved agreements in California law. Next slide.
The Lompoc Police Department controls our access to our data. FLOC does not decide who receives LPD data. Any sharing must comply with our policy, Approved Agreements in California Law. California law restricts us From sharing or transferring of ALPR information, customer agencies decide whether and how to share. Sharing is not automatic nationwide access. LPD does not share its data nationwide or with federal agencies. It just doesn't happen. Next slide.
Here are the California ALPR requirements. ALPR operators and users must have a public usage and privacy policy We must have security and safeguards, reasonable operation, administrative technical and physical safeguards on this topic. When we first got into this I as a manager, I think we started when I was a captain and then I became chief, I recognized that it is very important that we maintain this data in a secure environment and that we have checks and balance system into who has access to it So unlike other departments in the state of California who give their patrol officers access to this information, we do not.
For a patrol officer to get this information they either have to make a request over the radio to the dispatcher or they have to go to their sergeant, their supervisor and request it from their sergeant and then the only other people above that to do the searches is potentially management or our detectives so the patrol officer driving the police car around the community does not have the ability to search this on their own. There has to be a documented request either through their supervisor or through dispatch.
Access logging, search records must document access details and purpose and public agencies must allow public comment before implementing any ALPR program which we did do previously. So let's talk about constitutional use The courts in the country have consistently upheld the use of point-in-time license plate images taken from public roadways. Specifically, the Ninth Circuit in California has said that a license plate is knowingly exposed to public view. Police officers can lawfully observe and record that plate while a vehicle travels on a public roadway.
Using technology to automate that observation ordinarily does not transform the observation itself into a Fourth Amendment cert. I've cited a number of federal case laws up there for you as a council if you wanted to take a look at those, but they are all consistent. This is not a Fourth Amendment violation. People are in public, their license plates are in public and this can be done. It's no different than me putting a police officer out on the radio at a corner running license plates trying to find a stolen vehicle.
So here are some of our results. 76 stolen vehicles recovered, 54 arrests made and most importantly almost $1.5 million in estimated recovered vehicle value to our community. Now if you think about that if you have hypothetically a single mom working two jobs with a car that gets stolen out of one of our alleyways she's probably not going to be able to go to work So our ability, which is one of the most important things we can do as a police department is to return a stolen piece of property back to a victim.
We're able to better do that with this kind of technology and so I think that's really important to remember that we're able to ultimately return property to victims because we now have this technology available to us. Next slide? Additional evidence recovered, 168 grams of methamphetamine and 5.9 grams of fentanyl which is a tremendous amount of fentanyl. ALPR alerts are not the evidence by themselves.
They are leads that help officers locate a vehicle and develop a lawful investigation. It's it's a single piece of evidence In and of itself does not solve a crime. It does not rise to the level of a search warrant on that single piece of evidence, but once you combine it with other pieces of evidence we may raise that threshold with a judge so it's very very valuable in a lot of different investigations. Next slide.
Here's just a number of different offenses that we've been able to use this technology on. Next slide. Let's talk about an actual case here in Lompoc. So we had a theft from one of our local businesses where the suspects, multiple suspects got into a vehicle and left Lompoc after committing the theft. The system was able to capture the license plate and description of the vehicle. We put that out to the local agencies. Santa Maria PD located that very same vehicle in a parking area outside of one of their business areas, one of their strip malls, and ultimately was able to take the suspects into custody and recover all of the stolen property from Lompoc.
The vehicle information helped connect the suspects to multiple thefts up and down the state of California. So what was happening, this was a Venezuela I think theft crew that was traveling up and down the coast of California stopping at multiple cities committing the same theft. It was a huge case in the end and it all started here in Lompoc because of the cameras. That's just one example of it, but officers still had to conduct the stop, the investigation, their recovery, the arrest and booking under standard legal requirements. So remember what I said? It is a single piece of evidence in a case. Next slide.
Again, we talked about this. Command staff, supervisor, detectives and dispatchers are who has access to the system. Next slide. So I talked about the AI photo that I had to generate because I couldn't log in to Flock and run my own vehicle but this is what it basically presents to you as a police officer. It shows you the rear of the vehicle, gives you a breakdown of the license plate, the location, the camera that it was captured on, the vehicle description And the screen capture to the right is where the cameras are located in our city. And our cameras are all on the outside of the city at all points of entry and exit, the rest of those cameras are either privately owned or county housing cameras as I described earlier. Next slide?
Okay so on the transparency page We'll actually go to that. Yeah, let's go to it right now. So again if you go to our homepage for the Lompoc Police Department. Click on Flock Safety. You'll get connected to this page and some cursor down So in this you'll see that there were four hundred and a thirty day period of time from today, there were 478 alerts. 458 are potential stolen plates.
Potential. What the officers have to do is take this information and confirm the plate through the state system to make sure it's accurate. They don't just act on this alone. There were 20 stolen vehicles that passed through our cameras that we have in our system in the last 30 days. The data retention is set to 30, and you can see our cameras are at 48. And there were 129, 824 plates in that 30-day time frame that passed through the cameras.
To the right of that, you see number of searches. We're 125 searches done for criminal investigations by our staff. And what I want everybody to understand, 125 searches means that there's a victim behind the reason my cops are doing those searches. They're not doing it because they're bored. They're doing it because we have a victim and that's why we need to continue to have access to technology like that.
Let's go back to the presentation and I'll wrap it up. So this is a screen capture, I did this presentation before I went on the Honor Flight trip back in September so it was from 24 that's why you see the different numbers let's go to the next slide. Alright so that was the end of the presentation so what I want to do is talk to the council right now and just read something that I think is important So modern policing increasingly relies upon technology to accomplish tasks officers have historically performed manually.
The question for policy makers is not whether the police should use technology, but whether a particular technology provides sufficient public safety value to justify its use and whether reasonable safeguards can address the risks it poses. So an example for me would be body-worn cameras. There were a lot of concerns from the community when we launched body-worn cameras about the privacy, the videos that the officers were grabbing on their cameras and we've had no incident in this police department since we went live on body-worn cameras where that data was shared anywhere or released anywhere without court action I think that CalPERS should be addressed in the same manner.
This is hugely valuable to a police department like ours. Many of you have heard me talk about staffing, and it's not the council's fault that we don't have more police officers. It's the funding resources we as a city have to be able to pay for those officers and the general fund. This technology, the drone technology are force multipliers to this small police department.
And without this technology you make it very difficult if you choose to go down that road in our ability to help those victims behind all those searches that you saw. So as your Chief of Police, it is my recommendation that we continue to engage in this technology. We have set guardrails up internally in the police department that if somebody was to step out of line not only would we know about it with the audits that we do but we would take action against that individual should they cross the line.
And we've had no issues with that whatsoever. FLOC's database, their data has never been hacked, their network. In the cases that you've heard people talk about or maybe read online or seen on the internet, typically it's a vulnerability by the agency that was using their technology not FLOC itself. So in the packages that I provided everybody in this presentation you also have From the major county sheriffs of America, last week they put out an automated license plate recognition technology myth and facts to help guide. So I hope that you've researched that.
And I'm available for questions.
1:06 – 1:1116 turns
Council Member Bridget? I'm sure I'm going to show my ignorance here. So you talked about searches, which leads me to believe that it's a pull system not a push system. So I had perhaps the naive misunderstanding that if my car was stolen and I appropriately reported it And you believe me, you would log it in as a stolen vehicle and my image was that now all these cameras are out there looking for that license plate.
And when it's seen, you get alerted. Is that how it happens or?
That's one of the ways it happens. Remember we talked about hot lists so we can add a stolen vehicle to a hot list for the City of Lompoc. Now should that license plate pop up somewhere that is agreed to share their cameras with us, we would get notification. Or if it was within our network, we would know exactly where it popped up.
So it would automatically become available? And then across other jurisdictions you guys have some kind of link that shares that?
There is an agreement that we can share within the boundaries of the state of California. We do not share outside of the state of California and we do not share federally
So if my car gets stolen and you have an agreement with Santa Maria, you would ship off or somehow that information gets shared. And then if that car is seen by an ALPR in Santa Maria they would get alerted or
you? In this scenario that you just shared what would happen as the officer responds, the officer takes the information on your stolen vehicle, you sign the CHP 180 We won't take action until the victim signs that, because the truth of the matter is that could end up in a pursuit. It could end up in a shooting and we want to make sure that we're dealing with a legitimate investigation.
But you sign it, more than likely what I would expect is one of my officers would request through dispatch that they do a query into the system to see where the most recent hit on the license plate was if it passed through one of the cameras. The camera system itself does not follow you around. It's just wherever it's faced, if it passes, it captures and then it's logged for 30 days so if it just happened 20 minutes before we hopefully would catch it at one of the cameras leaving the city if it was leaving the city And then we could put a request out through the CHP and the Sheriff's Department that, We just took a stolen. Here's the information on the car. We captured it on a flock camera leaving the city on Highway 1 headed to Santa Barbara.
That's it.
Okay. My next question has to do with the Housing Authority. Are they those cameras ours? They paid for them and put them in and then turned them over?
So yeah sorry I didn't mean interrupt you. I think now, correct me if I'm wrong, that we pay up front they reimburse us. Is that correct? Yeah. So Bob Cross just confirmed that we're paying for those upfront, they're reimbursing us for it just to make the use of them a little bit more beneficial. Not even beneficial, the process of payment easier right? But they are their cameras, they pay for them, they just share the data with us.
Just like Home Depot does. Home Depot has cameras, Home Depot has stairs. That's kind
of a distinction without a difference so
they're in the system? They're in the system.
Okay and then my last question was you had multiple statistics that you showed us such as the number of stolen vehicles that you've recovered is that a log that you keep
Well I think in the, we could, when we take a police report it goes into our system and we're able to search and keep track of it. But we don't necessarily keep a log of every vehicle that we recover but in preparation for this I tasked the staff with telling me hey how many have we recovered? What was the dollar value that approximately- So they went
out and
searched- They searched all that in our computer systems to put that together.
Okay Well, the system makes me nervous. I'll tell you that right up front but I also think there's probably nothing as vile as stealing somebody's car because you're stealing their livelihood. I agree. And then they had an insult to injury we take it to a tow yard and charge them thousands of
dollars to get it back out so... I think it's good to be nervous. I do. I think it smart to be nervous You know we have to police this. We have to make sure that we're protecting, that we as a Police Department are protecting your personal data right? But if you think about it when we as Police Department go out and make contact with somebody were taking your Thank you.
1:12 – 1:2121 turns
Thank you, Chief. Thank you for the presentation. Obviously this has been top of mind for so many people and I've wrestled with this even with my own wife who argued about this. So I have a couple questions for you. I personally have no doubt that we have appropriate guardrails or that our staff only the appropriate people are gaining access and so forth but there are some things that concern me and I just want to talk about those with you.
Can you go to that slide that had the number of pictures taken? of September 24th. The thing I've been wrestling with is at the bigger picture level, outside of your control. The company that puts this on or the web of interconnectivity between departments and this technology. I'm just starting to do the math in my head and so if I took that number and I said well you know extrapolate that over a year that's in Lompoc it's a million-and-a-half pictures taken of cars driving around.
That in and of itself had just a number But then I start to think about, okay, well Santa Maria has some block cameras, bigger population. That's probably a couple million pictures there. I don't know. I'm feeling nervous in the sense that are we and again I understand the benefits of these things but are we tiptoeing into a situation where of course we all have location settings on our phone? We probably didn't turn that off. Every time we walk into business they probably took our picture But at what point are we losing some of those freedoms to just go about without knowing somebody's recorded our movement? And so I think that's a legitimate question. I think a lot of people, sans politics is wrestling with that. I
understand
that. So again from my perspective, I think there's it would be easy just to say you know throw it out find something else or do nothing Obviously it's played an impact here, so there is a cost associated with getting rid of that technology. But the thing I'm wrestling with and I talked to you about this, I just worry that in five or ten years technology keeps moving.
Well that's one of the reasons I brought in the idea, the analogy to our body-worn cameras Right? Your personal information is being recorded on that body worn camera. We've had almost five years now. Never been an issue, right? I would also...
Can I ask you a quick question about that and sorry to put you on the spot. If we're talking specifically about the body-worn camera, do you send that footage out to someone else to use software to do anything with that or do you guys do all of that?
We do most of it ourselves. The tool is built to give us the ability. We also have a third party tool that we can redact and do it ourselves. We don't send it out. The only place that we send typically to is if it's a PRA, if it fits the requirements of the Public Records Agriculture or the DA's office.
All fair points. I think if I may push back, something that's different is that you have full control of those body cams and what happens there. Those aren't necessarily connected to body cams in the next town over. Body cams 100 miles away. It's an independent system that you're running here in this department using some sort of software, I'm sure. Talk to me about FLOC though.
I support the drones. I think that's great technology. Helicopter in the sky? Gosh, maybe that's great. But on the FLOC camera side,
So there are agreements between the agencies to be able to share the data, right? I don't know the specific details of every agreement but what I share with you is that the system that they've built requires them to put in a legal reason for the search. It doesn't matter if you're from Lompoc or Santa Maria, right? You have to have a legal reason to be able to search that database
Is there a chance that, and again I'm not saying this happens in our department, but is there a chance that in a different department somebody with lower standards could access our, they could give you a reason. Doesn't mean they're showing you a warrant to access that reason, they're just giving you a reason. Is that perhaps an area that's vulnerable where somebody technically in some other department could?
In fairness, I would never back myself into a wall to say it's not possible But I think that every possibility, every opportunity to prevent that from happening with this technology is being implemented and constantly being reviewed to make sure that doesn't happen. Again, I don't have a magic ball to say that it won't or that it will but I would tell you We will do everything in our power to make sure that does not happen.
And I'll be honest with you, I don't question that. I think the issue that I'm having is I'm questioning the technology that is by this company and other companies do similar things as well. But to train AI we talked about this to train AI which benefits this program. This is a lot of data no there's no way up room full of people could look through 131,000 pictures It would never happen. You have to rely on some software, and I'm assuming that the software that is given or as a part of the package with these Flock cameras is controlled by Flock.
The only reason I'm saying that I might have an issue is that they're building AI to enhance their ability to provide service as a company. And I worry that the number one thing that they need to train their AI or any company that's trying to stand up AI as a technology is that data. And while there could be guardrails and you could say, absolutely we don't share it. We don't do this. We don't do any of this stuff.
I have this sinking feeling that the people that created the software might just have access to all the data. I don't have a way to prove that, but there are a lot of questions in the community about that.
What I would recommend if that's a concern that you have, we can reach out to FLOC and have them come back and talk specifically about that. I wouldn't dare go down that road. I don't know enough about the internal workings of the FLOC company to say what they are doing with AI and what they are not doing with AI, and it would be irresponsible for me to do that. I will tell you that I think with everything that's been happening recently in the changes that FLOCC has made into their systems and just the ability like I shared, I couldn't even search my own police car Because I didn't have a criminal, I didn't have a crime to put into that and a case number to associate it to.
And it doesn't give me the option just to say, gee whiz, I want to do it for gee whiz purposes. So I had to walk away from that and come up with another way of being able to show you what it would look like if you were doing a search. So, I think it's like any other, like I told you before in that little thing I read earlier, I think for the council, you have to weigh the technology And how you feel about it and what it's doing.
And what the value is to this community in our, your police department's ability to investigate crimes. And as I said like you see in that slide right there 87 searches as of the 24th of September Those are all associated with criminal acts, victims. And it's our ability to try and solve those crimes and hold people accountable for those crimes.
Last question and then I'd love to hear from the public because I know that's why they're here, most of them. What happens if or when or if state government or courts and I know you list a lot of courts but there could be a new decision tomorrow next week that says well spring court decides it's It's taking freedoms away. It's infringing on people's rights. How do you as a department pivot if this technology is taken away?
Even
if we didn't do it, but courts say you can't use that anymore.
We will never break the law to enforce the law. So if the courts came down and said you either have to have a search warrant or this technology just is no longer available, we wouldn't be able to use it. It's just not going to happen that way. We will not break the law to enforce the law.
I appreciate that answer. I appreciate you hearing me out, I have my own opinions that I'm still wrestling with on this but what we brought in in 2023 was A much stripped down, easy to pallet version of this. It has grown in its power and it is concerning a few of us but I know that it helps in some ways
so
I'll
leave it at that. As your chief, I would say it's hugely valuable and I would hate to see my investigators, my officers lose access to something that is making a difference in many victims' lives honestly.
I appreciate that perspective. Thank you.
1:21 – 1:2621 turns
Question for you, what would it take for you to get a third party person to approve the search?
Wait, I don't understand a third party person?
Independent, that's outside of PD like a judge. You pull a warrant, you get a search warrant to search the cameras.
Well I think the first thing that would have to happen is the courts would have to say That it is a protected by the Fourth Amendment that we wouldn't be able to assert. We wouldn't be able to have access because of the Fourth Amendment, in other words now it rises to the level of a search
warrant. So what if we had in our policy that you had to go to a judge to get a warrant to access your data? I think the problem I'm having is, I get it, you guys have got checks and balance in there making sure doesn't happen I trust you guys, but a lot of the public is questioned about what's going on. They've seen it and what I'm looking at is the way to take out and one more step that shows that. You can get the data on our phone, but you have to get a warrant to do that. If you want access where our phone has been, you need to pull a warrant and you can find out where our phones been pinging from.
I guess my question for you Mr. Mayor is why? Why do we have to go to that level?
Because I think the public isn't trusting right now.
Open view of a street where a camera has been placed. It's in your home, it's in your work, it's in your office so it rises to a much higher level of personal information.
So I'll answer that. So it's not just one picture you're taking. It is systematic surveillance of your actions through the day and it might be from this point to this point at this point and I'm at this place every Every day at 5 o'clock I go to this place. And it has the ability with that, what I'm forecasting is not like the stand single cameras you had out there. When you access the flock it's able to go through their patterns. So it's not just one shot but its potential patterns. I think it's a great tool don't get me wrong But I think it can be in a position and the public feels as well that there's abuse that can arise from not saying you guys are doing it.
I'm saying is to try to take that out of it at all, and as if you had 87 searches up there he called the judge up and say I'm looking for this vehicle Can I access my data points and go through there? Is there a complexity with not, you couldn't do something like
that? I don't see the courts getting involved on that level because it means... I
wasn't asking about the courts. I'm talking through our policy here.
You
can't get a warrant if we said you have to get a warrant to access, you
can't do that? Correct. What I'm trying to say to you is that the judges are going to look at this. There's no reason for a warrant. You can search whatever you want. That's through that's another party that's making sure that this is a legitimate search because they're the ones filling in the fields. They're putting the case number and everything about the vehicle in, or they're going to their sergeant. Each one of those is a third party internally of the police department to get that information from the database.
I get it but if you had the independent one that's outside Lompoc PD, I think the public would feel much more comfortable with this. That's the complexity of it.
I would say that because Lompoc Police Department has had zero violations in regards to using this data and having access to the data, it just isn't
necessary. And I'm not saying that you had any of these. I'm trying to see what's going on throughout the whole country. It might be happening in the future or something so we don't step in it down the road if you have that third party. So you're telling me even if we said your policy was that you had to get a warrant to access the data, you couldn't do that? A judge would say tough luck, we don' care. Well
the judge would say you don't need a warrant
But if we said you did, what would that
do? Yeah.
I think under the law as it stands right now, if PD went to a judge and said can we have a search warrant to search our flock system, the judge would say this is not a search. The courts have determined this is not a search, it's publicly available information because it's a license plate in a car going down a public street I think where your question gets very interesting is if the city were to adopt an ordinance or a law that said, we're going to be more restrictive than the federal constitution. We are going to say that in Lompoc, a law enforcement agency does need to have a warrant approved by a judge to do a flock search.
I think there's a possibility that we could do that as a city, but that's definitely something I would want to look into and research. It would be the same thing as the Congress adopting a law at the national level saying that a search warrant is always needed for XYZ type of activity. They can adopt that law in Congress even if the Constitution does not require the warrant for the searches.
The local law can be more restrictive than the Constitution basically.
1:26 – 1:3323 turns
In talking to a number of people, this is their concern. And I'm trying to get to a point so that we can get to the public accepting what you're doing. I think your tool has a phenomenal ability. I was talking to a mayor of a local town. They were able to go out and find somebody who was actively raping somebody in a vehicle. So it has phenomenal abilities but also has a potential To really overstep its boundaries, and it's not from the single camera is this systematic surveillance component that goes along with it.
And that is more than just a vehicle went by you now studying people's actions in routinely we know that this is here every day or other day. in the methodology. Currently right now, yeah you're not at that point but you see how have you advanced now from three or four years ago and I'm just trying to get a little ahead of the curve and trying to ease some of the tensions of a lot of the public.
Well on that topic i think if you look at some of the case law that I presented in the slide presentation one of those case laws says that uh that the entire flock network does not rise to the level of the fourth amendment and it is not a surge That people knowingly drive their vehicles in open spaces, open to the view of the public. I think that this police department and I understand what you're saying and I understand that there's been problems in other areas around the country. What I'm trying to not have happen to your police department is have a broad brush painted on us saying well because they did it in New York, you're potentially going to do it here.
Uh I think that we have the guardrails in place and the staff understand that uh This is not to happen, that to add additional layers when they're not required at the state law level or the federal level is just putting an unnecessary burden on the police department and slowing down the scenario that you just described that one of the other cities was able to do because they could search that without getting a search warrant. They found that person still in the vehicle with the victim.
So what you're doing is preventing us from doing that because now we have to spend the time writing a search warrant Locating a judge to sign that warrant, getting it approved before we can go out and do anything and find out where that vehicle's been.
From what I understand it could take as little as a couple of minutes? To pull...to get a warrant?
No, no. You
should
talk to my
office about this. So I gotcha! I'm trying to figure it out. What do you do on a Saturday night? What do you right now on a Saturday
night? Four to six hours probably is the average. Four to six hours? Yeah.
On a Saturday night?
Yep.
We gotta get some more judges.
It's just that you have to make sure that the warrant is written. That
it's not going to be
challenged in
court. I get ya, I'm just trying to get to the point and talking to another public out there. I
hear exactly what you're saying Mr. Mayor. I don't want to take your tools from you. I hear what the public are saying. I've met with some of the people in the community. Our job is to protect our community. It isn't just physical, it's also their personal information. And this police department takes that very seriously and I think we've been very successful at it. So, any other questions?
That's my job to ask more questions. Yeah don't go too far Council Member Ball then we're going to go to the public and I'm gonna separate this one from this one from the other one. We'll let you do that last one because these guys want
I appreciate everything that you said. I still have an issue that you can be absolutely perfect here in Lompoc. We have a great staff, all hardworking, playing by the rules, staying within the guardrails but because of the connectivity to so many other places where we don't have control over their policies or their access or what they could make up and say this is a legitimate request. That has me concerned.
Well, I think that other agencies much like the Lompoc Police Department because of that risk have policies and procedures in place that if an employee were to step out of line and do something like that, the investigation would start with us be handed off and then that person would be held accountable for their poor decision making. Okay, is that it?
Don't go way too far we're gonna get some public comment on this item. Before you guys jump up how many people wishing to speak on this item? I want to give you guys each two minutes so we don't run out of time. You guys deal with two minutes? We'd be here all night, we've got a long way to go. Two minutes. You've got two minutes.
Well flock sucks but what I'm here today to do too is I already came once to invite you guys to our Spanish forum called El Foro del Pueblo. Can I hand the seats to
you?
Again, I am dropping off another letter as an invitation. A couple of you guys or one of you is requiring special treatment. Nobody's getting a special treatment in this forum. Everybody's going to be treated equally. Everybody's going to get the same amount of time. Our community members have been working extremely hard and spent a lot of hours coming up with those questions. They will be asking the questions also tonight.
There's been a lot of things going on in our community that are horrible. Today alone, our network received only 25 reports of possible immigration enforcement activity across the northern Santa Barbara County from Los Alamos to Guadalupe and today I personally responded to one of those calls. I arrived at an abandoned vehicle along Highway 246 The vehicle was left open. Personal belongings were still inside. We later received information from the manager of the winery where the occupants worked. According to the information provided to us, four workers had gone to work at 4 a.m.
in the morning after finishing their shift around noon. They stopped at a liquor store to get something to drink during this heat. When they left, they believed they were being followed. Before they could even make it back to Lompoc, they were stopped. Three of the men, three of them were taken. These aren't strangers, they are members of our community. One of those men is a father. His child requires regular medical treatment at UCLA. Tonight that family doesn't need a political debate, they need their father home.
And I need everyone sitting up there to understand what it feels like from where we are standing. Our community is scared, people are afraid to drive to work, families are wondering whether their loved ones are coming home. Children-
1:33 – 1:398 turns
Okay, your public comment is up. This is about public comment on the items we just discussed. You'll have oral time for three more minutes, oral communications after this. Public comment on the item we just discussed.
I'd like to discuss the presentation the Chief of Police just made.
That's what's on the discussion,
thank you. That's what I'm focusing on. What I'm very interested in is not flock cameras. I want to know how many closed circuit video cameras the Lompoc Police Department runs in our city other than flock cameras? I know that this is done I'd like to know where those cameras are and how many there are of that. Thank you.
Again, public comment on the staff presentation. Two minutes.
Council Mayor, my issue isn't whether flock cameras can help solve crimes. I'm sure it's a great tool. Police departments existed a long time before FLOC, and they solved crimes then too. Colombo didn't use a FLOC camera and he did pretty good. Of course they can solve a crime. The question is whether we actually thought carefully enough about what we've invited into the community. FLOCC is cloud-based. The information doesn't sit inside Lompoc police department. It lives on a server in Georgia.
It's part of a larger network and other enforcement agencies can potentially access it. So we're not talking about cameras just watching us on Lompoc streets, that data can find itself far outside our city limits. There is the question again of who the cameras are looking at? We've looked at where these cameras are located and a lot of them are pointed towards some of Lompoc's lower income neighborhoods. That ought to make us stop and think because this isn't about just where people live, it's about who lives there. And if you're poor and you live in one of those neighborhoods, you're more likely to be living in an area where your movements are being captured and recorded every day, day-in and day-out. We need to be honest about that and we should not create a situation Where people who have fewer economic resources end up being subjected to more surveillance just because they live in a particular part of town.
One thing that really bothers me is we don't know where this technology is going, as the mayor said. AI and machine learning are changing quickly. The systems can be very different in five years than they are today. Software can be updated. New back-end analytics can be added. And those changes may not require city council's approval. That could just be done in an upload.
So what I would like to ask is for Council to drop flock and end the agreement with Hesbarco, and ask Hesbarco to take that $100,000 a year investment and put it into community-based violence intervention programs, targeted youth programs, and maybe our own Lompoc Police Department's community outreach work. Thanks.
Those guys are new here. We're not clapping, we don't boo, we don't clap all that just you can go ahead and do your jazz fingers or other like that but
Good evening Council, Mayor. Mosby I wanted to give you credit one of my biggest concerns is the tracking multiple pattern type thing so thank you for bringing that up. There's a lot of things to touch on and we've only got two minutes at this point. I really just had thoughts about the Chiefs presentation here because my concern is... You said yourself well I don't even know what they do with all the AI stuff isn't that a problem?
Right? That's what you said, okay. A lot of us don't. I think that's part of the problem. It's a third-party program that houses all this data, has access to it whenever they want and they're just putting up the cameras for free. When things are for free like we are the product, right? That's the saying, okay? All that information, that's why they come put the cameras up for free. They want the data! They're keeping it. They're doing whatever they want with it.
Think about Uber when it started in San Francisco back in the day. Cab rides were like dirt cheap, it was the coolest thing. People were riding around town for basically free and then they start jacking up the prices. You don't think Flock's gonna do something like that too? Sure everything's free right now but when are they going to start charging you a monthly service fee?
There's just so many aspects to this that have not been considered and for you to just not even know what they do with all the AI stuff is concerning I just don't like that answer You talk about body cameras being a concern and we haven't had any issues with those. The body cameras are for us! That's not, that's not for like you guys and us to feel unsure about. That's so we feel safe when you guys come police us.
Nobody here is against body cameras. It's completely different than what we're talking about here. Not comparable. We only got five seconds left but need to end the contract and think of something else.
1:39 – 1:453 turns
Mayor, City Council and I want to thank Chief Martin for his presentation. Wait a second. The chief has told us that the police department controls the data. Okay, but what does that actually mean? I think we've gotten a good picture of what that means in his mind via his presentation. My personal thought is that if that were a Lompoc only controlled, tightly controlled and not accessible outside of our police community I could feel comfortable with that control.
As it is again as has been mentioned all this data is held in a cloud database which can be accessed by others outside of this Police Department SB 34 puts the responsibility on the public agency using APL, ALPR technology requiring the agency's usage and privacy policy to be posted prominently on its website. And when I first went digging for that, I didn't find it but I see that it is now up there and we thank you for that effort.
Lompoc's CalPERS policy itself was buried in hundreds of pages into a huge policy manual and when the city finally added that transparency link, it does send us to a website hosted by FLOC. And there is our concern. The data sits on the FLOC data cloud system. So where is Lompoc's own ALPR privacy policy? Where is the city's explanation in plain sight of how this data is collected, used, shared and protected. And again Chief Martin you did mention that tonight
Good evening, Council. My name is Shauna Stilwell. I'm not going to use my notes tonight. I am just going to address what was said here. I really would also like to ask that along with your clarification that you offered to us earlier this evening, I would appreciate a clarification on the Brown Act and how using positions of power to intimidate the community is a violation for this dais.
Moving on to the flock situation, it really shows the privilege from you Mr. Bridge that you think the most vile thing someone can do is steal someone's car. Meanwhile, I'm looking at a girl being gang raped by seven men and force fed dope off their dicks is a regular occurrence. What we are worried about here is that we are literally becoming idiocracy. Have you seen the movie?
It's great. You should watch it. We are not worried about the cops. We are worried about the data. We do not want our bodies, we do not want our information gathered and sold and kept by some other entity that is a for-profit business. When capitalism has reached the stage that you've invented everything, you have made everything, and there's nothing more to buy, where are we at?
They are commodifying us. No more! We're not worried about the still pictures of the license plates, we're worried about the data storage and what they are going to do mining our data. Please stop them. Be responsible. Be the good leadership that you keep saying
Good evening City Council members. My name is Erika and I'm with CAWS, and also a Lompoc community member. First, I'd like to address the comment made earlier around comparing body cams on officers to the flock cameras. Body cams were implemented for the protection of us people of color for the horrendous behavioral pattern that occurred and unfortunately still occurs from police officers to our communities. It was a matter of increasing police accountability and enhance the safety of our people.
Flawed cameras enhance the group's ability to further surveil in cameras funded within housing authority, continuing to criminalize people of color. We are putting advanced technology with an ill-advised assumption that the people handling it are to be trusted and trusted to follow the rules when we have seen time and time again officers escalating instead of deescalating situations being poorly trained to engage in community in a peaceful manner.
Instead of funds for technology, why not reallocate it to the people who do know how to protect community such as those on the ground? We're so caught up in surveilling community we should focus on how do we protect them from the violence. Violence that just occurred yesterday. Law enforcement is so quick to say that's not within their work to protect but they're quick to surveil and arrest Why not protect our community when the actual situation calls upon?
If the police won't do it and aren't trained to actually protect people before the harm happens, not after the fact, then really what is the purpose? Do not renew the contract. Instead reallocate those funds to departments and people who actually serve the community and to the people who need to protect themselves from what's come and what is coming. Thank you.
1:45 – 1:515 turns
Hello Council, my name is Danny Diaz. I'm just going to go ahead and mention a few things here. So, I did read an article that in Oklahoma A judge did rule that FLOC does violate the Fourth Amendment, so if you have Google obviously go ahead and look it up. That's already happened with FLOC. I live in that ghetto area where you see a lot of crackheads just walking around, so I'm renting for now until I buy. So every time I leave, I do see the FLOCC cameras, there's a massage place right there, Flawed camera to the left, to the right. Everywhere.
So I feel like it's an invasion of my privacy and I'm not a criminal. I'm not anybody who is on the streets walking like crazy so... To be living in that area? It's concerning for me. My mom goes to work. I go to work every day there's a snap, snap, snap of me. You guys can search that. One thing that did concern me about this too is you can go all the way back And probably create a case, I know we've been discussing here that you don't do that. You need permission for that but yes it's happened in different cities so it's a slippery slope with this. I mean 1984 should give you the answer of what's coming. I mean it's here already. It's a police state. So and then everything that's happening in this country is just strange. I don't know if anybody feels weird, it's like we're living a dream or something.
Is this real? Everything...I mean it's crazy! Like what Trump just said and then just Everybody getting taken, like in Santa Maria I think they snatched eight people. I mean it's just...I don't even know what's going on right now so I think that's how the entire country is feeling and adding to this it's not really helping if we keep it. I mean you're getting here your public is telling you we should not move forward with this and like my shirt says I mean if you do move forward with it eventually people are gonna start taking these things down.
My name is Gabriel Espinoza. I am 21 years old and have lived in Lompoc for almost my entire life. I am strongly against the continuation of the current use of the ALPRs or any future installations of this technology. I do not believe that these are installed for the safety of our community, but rather to allow warrantless spying of our populace. I don't personally trust law enforcement or other forms of government to handle this data properly in regards to cyber security or judgment on what a valid search is. And even if I did, the creation of such a system is an issue in itself.
If the data exists bad actors can access it legally as intended or illegally via a data breach and use it to stalk people. You may be of the belief that you won't be a target of a cyber attack but with the creation of this data you create great incentive to be targeted. The largest companies in the world It's a matter of when and not if. If it is accessed via such an attack, they won't require a reason to search for whatever they wish. The installation of these in the first place is disgraceful and their continued use makes me disappointed in this city's judgment.
A final note I have is that if this is truly for safety why is it only in downtown Lompoc and not the Upper Vandenberg Village area? I thank you for your time.
Hello, my name is David Lopez. I'm a Lompoc High School senior and I'm with CAWS. Apologies for any stuttering this is my first public comment. I was a bit nervous but um...I wanted to talk about the topic of flock clamors in Lompoc it's definitely a relevant thing right now Many community members, I and myself included were unaware of their installment. And I just feel like this should be a bit more discussed with the community as it's very like...I feel like it's important to let the community know that these cameras are being installed Going on to that, I also just want to talk about the data being collected and the rampant growth of AI in the future giving this data to AI and other things like that. I think I am a bit concerned. I do want to stay in Lompoc and I see a great future in Lompoc one day but I just ask that we do not renew the contract with Block.
Thank you guys for your attention and time
You did a good job.
Okay, hello my name's Angie I'm a policy advocate with CAUSE. I'm going to keep it really short. We're asking City Council to listen to the community and not renew flock camera contract like one of the speakers said it's not about if but when. I think we need more information and just you know we saw that there were only 100 searches but the amount of plates that were captured were over 100,000 so Where is that data? You know, we're only searching 100 but where is that? Who has that? I think we need more information and I just think that we should find other alternatives. Thank you.
1:51 – 1:563 turns
Hi. I thought of a question that I haven't heard anybody else ask. Most of the cameras are put up by Lompoc police But all those other cameras, what contract do they have with Flock? Where is their data going? You guys need to take control of all of the cameras, not just the police department's cameras. There are so many more of them! Doesn't the city have some kind of control over what the housing department is doing? What the county is doing? They all have their own cameras in here and their data...
Is it safe like the police department says? We don't know, but their cameras are there. Can any of us just start putting cameras along the street and collecting the data and selling it to whoever wants it? You have to take control of it because it's our lives and literally every minute of our lives are being captured on these cameras. Thank you.
Hello Council, Suzy Riley. I want to talk about SB 34 and the data compliance document that came from Attorney General Bonta in 2023 that lists exactly what police departments need to do to provide policies to the public and other aspects So they provide a template on the AG guidance that is basically fill in the blank. That tells the city, the police department what to add to their policy and I'm not seeing this from our local policies from our police department so question about that? And then when I go into, so basically the policy is supposed to be conspicuously placed on the front web page on the homepage of the police department website. But when I go there And conspicuously is a special word from the state meaning, and I know this because I ran the IT department at Lompoc Unified and we were audited by the state and they told us exactly how to do it.
And I'm sure that it's the same thing for city websites too. So basically it needs to have the policy name and then the subject of what it is. So it would be CalPERS, maybe data policy and I'm not seeing that so when I look on our website from the police department I see the title. I see their mission statement. I see bulletins, looks like they had a pickleball tournament. That's awesome.
I'm seeing annual reports from 25 to 22. Then I see an icon that's called Flock Safety that the chief showed that leads to the Flock website. Not a policy. That's a website from Flock. Then there is something about the drone, it looks like another icon
You said the most vile crime is stealing a car? Crazy, bro. When researching this whole flock issue I started thinking about the people at the core of it. So I surveyed 200 Lompoc High School students. 63% opposed the cameras. 61.5% said that they don't make them feel safer. 85.5 percent called them a breach of privacy and 90% did not know that there were over 10 cameras near our school Think about the world that we already live in. Our phones know where we are, websites track what we do, cameras watch our streets and at what point do we say enough?
We keep hearing about what flock cameras can do. They can help investigate a stolen car, they can help locate a suspect. But we are treating the symptoms of the disease. Why is the crime happening in the first place? What about poverty, addiction, mental health, homelessness? A camera can tell you where somebody went. It cannot tell you why they ended up there.
And now we're talking about a police drone that can respond virtually anywhere in Lompoc in about 90 seconds. And it sounds great until it isn't, until technology fails, until policies change, until the people who are controlling the technology aren't the people who we trust today. Technologies change, administrations change, people change but their surveillance infrastructure stays.
Flawed cameras cannot cure poverty, they cannot treat addiction. They cannot provide mental health care. They cannot give someone a job. Let's stop watching people's problems and let's start solving them. Thank you.
1:56 – 2:0816 turns
Good evening Councilmembers, members of the community. My name is Ruth Gary and I'm a resident of Lompoc. I want to start by acknowledging something important. ALPR's Flock Cameras and the Drone as First Responder can and do help law enforcement solve crimes. They can help locate missing people, stolen vehicles, and assist law enforcement with active investigations.
But a technology that can be useful can also still cause deep harm to innocent members of the community, especially when your privacy and your rights get trampled on for public safety. Watching that drone footage earlier actually made me feel sick. It's essentially voyeurism. Law enforcement reliance on surveillance technology should never operate on an assumption that mistakes and misuse will never happen. Because eventually they will, and they do.
There are several ways FLOC gets it wrong. First, license plates are misread. A zero instead of an O. A B instead of an 8. Sometimes license plates are wrongly added to a hot list or they're not even removed timely. And occasionally the data is inaccurate, but the wrong conclusions have been drawn. I have a list of eight cases where innocent people were pulled over and detained at gunpoint, at times arrested in jail due to incorrect APLR hit lists, but because my time's limited I'm going to keep moving on. These are not harmless mistakes. They have life-altering impacts. An incorrect alert means an innocent person gets pulled over, detained, questioned, accused, sometimes wrongfully arrested, jailed. The Institution of Justice has been documenting and recording the hundreds of incidents which you can go and find the stories there.
Another major issue is when they're working perfectly there's another problem, misuse. I'm going to run out of time but basically the people behind the technology are entrusted with public
Anybody else? We got somebody. Teams, phone?
There is no public comment via phones or teams. All
right. Seeing nobody else will close public comment on that and bring it back to the Council. What's that? Yeah, we got that. We're obviously going to do that after that. See if anybody has something to say. Something to line up with. If we have options to do something, what do you guys want to do?
Council Member Bull. Chief, just out of curiosity, the number of cameras that we have in Lompoc, why couldn't we get away with having just a couple at our entrance and exits? What does having so many cameras in the inner city accomplish
The cameras that the housing authority put up has affected the crime in their community as much as the people are claiming it's not. It has, and we can follow-up with that and give you some statistics on that. The cameras that the City of Lompoc pays for – and it does pay for, they were not free – are posted at entries and exits of the city, as I explained earlier.
In regards to the cameras that are paid for and activated by private companies and or property managers, that's their private business and property to do what they like. We don't control that. You know I think that we've taken a responsible approach to this. We haven't overwhelmed the city with hundreds of cameras. We just tried to be able to address When crimes are committed in the community and if suspects flee our community or are fleeing from another city into our community, we have some resource to be able to do it. We haven't gone over the top with our county.
Thank you for that. I have more comments but I'll let the rest of Council.
I am reading something somebody just sent me about Tulsa case where a federal judge in Oklahoma ruled that police violated the Fourth Amendment by searching flock and other license plate reader data without a warrant, accessing more than 50 records of a driver's movements across multiple states over a month. So there is something you'd address on it?
Well I would just say what's the status of the case? Is it currently being adjudicated? Has it been finalized as a decision has been made?
Yeah, the federal judge ruled. I have another question if i may. Yeah go ahead. I'm just curious so Chief with all respect so what happens if we keep up the cameras that we're paying for but the county makes their own decisions. Ah, we've changed our mind. We've decided we don't want this technology there so obviously that would drop our amount of plot cameras down considerably.
Would change your ability to maybe address some issues but I guess what I'm trying to say is like there's a lot of people having these conversations and it may not even be up to this council. It maybe a higher court or California at the Ninth Circuit changes their mind. Who knows? I just think for me I have my hesitations and reservations about it. I don't question that it's a great technology, but I'm wondering what we do? What our contingency plan is whether we do something or someone else forces us to do something.
Is the police department with or without FLOC still going to be able to provide a decent level of safety and service in this community? Or are you so convinced that had we not put FLOC in We just could not exist as a police department.
No, it will still exist as a police department. That goes without saying. I think that if the housing authority was to pull out of their cameras then those cameras would be removed by flock and not available to us anymore. It is my recommendation to the council that we keep the cameras that we are currently paying for at points of entry and exit because it does help in criminal investigations.
I hear what the public is saying, but there is no example that they can provide me that our city was guilty of violating any of the policies and procedures that we have in place or that the data has been accessed remotely from a third party. So you know, you have a decision to make if the council wanted us to limit Who we shared our cameras with, we could have that discussion. If we just kept it more to Santa Barbara County agencies or Ventura and Santa Barbara and SLO, we could do that.
That is an option that we can take on and discuss but this technology is very valuable to us and it's very valuable in our criminal investigations as one of the speakers got up and said. We did investigate crimes prior to, but I can tell you that a lot of the leads can sometimes take a tremendous amount of time to develop and this is very valuable. It gets us the information quicker.
Does it bother you, and again nothing personal, but does it bother you some of the comments that talked about the sheer quantity of these cameras in some of the inner city areas where of course poverty and lower median income and a lot more diversity exists? Do you want to address that at all?
That was a county housing authority decision. That was not ours. That was something they made the decision to do themselves. I hope the public doesn't take this the wrong way. because we absolutely care about the public. But when it comes to the Flock cameras and your car traveling in front of it, I really don't care until you commit a crime. And once you commit that crime, that's when it's an issue.
It doesn't take pictures of people walking down the street. It does not activate the camera in that way. It has to be a vehicle. For those who are concerned about misinformation on the plate itself That's why they capture a picture of the vehicle. So does that license plate match the vehicle that was reported in this incident or did the license plate change and does it come back to a different vehicle not presented in the photo? That happens quite often.
What I would say in regards to your specific question is we've been able to solve crimes for those communities, The communities you just described because of the cameras. It isn't a camera that's designed for one race or another race, it's about crime and I think we're getting too far off the track when we talk about it. It's about crime.
So I hear that. And again, I think many people have made the point that it's not a question of whether or not the technology helps but what happens in some of the vulnerable areas? And I think for me personally speaking and I can appreciate you saying hey, you don't have anything to worry about. You didn't commit a crime, you're fine. I think a lot of people yeah, it seems reasonable.
But when the goalpost moves for what the definition of what is wrong is and another state defines new rules For example, a woman in a different state may decide to cross lines to deal with her own health issues. But because that is now defined as a crime in a certain state this technology could be used to pursue that person. And in a case where perhaps marijuana is not legal in a certain state and someone crosses state lines and it's legal over there and they go load up and they come back And perhaps they're tracked crossing state lines, and well I guess they've committed a crime.
But again, I feel like this isn't happening that often. And hear me out, it's not. It's very rare. But what happens when it starts to become more and more of a tool that obviously does a lot of good but in certain circumstances it starts to be used for purposes that you and your department would never agree to? But other places in other states don't mind getting in close and over surveilling people.
Nothing against this department, I'm just sharing my concerns about the start of this technology and how quickly it is becoming something that we never, I never, a lot of people didn't imagine.
I think that we could sit here all night and have a discussion about the what-ifs. And I think I could counter every one of your what-if's on a criminal level. That's not going to get us anywhere, it's not going to be helpful. I think that we have to look at it and how it applies to our city, what the risks are, what the benefits are. And I think the benefits outweigh the risk.
I certainly can respect that opinion. I think from my perspective, I'm concerned about the things that you cannot absolutely control. I don't at all question your integrity or the guardrails or the policy or your effort or your team's effort to do the right thing. My concern is about the system. So I thank you for your pushback on me.
2:08 – 2:1614 turns
Good. I have a technical question. I too went out and looked at the distribution and my immediate reaction was that it appeared we thought crime only occurred in poorer neighborhoods, but you shed light on it that those are the housing authorities I'm not sure exactly how to word this, but as a city or as a department could we say we don't want the housing authority flock data streams?
I'm guessing with the ten that we have are that close number. Highway 1, H Street going out of town maybe V towards Pretty quickly you'll get to the 10. Is that a technical approach that would perhaps alleviate this appearance, we'll call it appearance of this or monitoring the economic distressed areas more than? I don't think I saw one in Crestview for example.
I understand how they got there, but from a technical standpoint as a city could we make a decision that no we're not going to do that. We're only going to worry about X?
You could. There's a lot of misunderstanding that we're not up for renewal of our contract and that applies to the Housing Authority as well so there is a tremendous amount of money involved in So I think it would require us to have conversations with the housing authority if the direction from the council was to say we no longer want your cameras in our city.
But they own that property much like a private citizen does, so if they were to say well we're not going to take them down, I guess the other option would be that you could tell us that you don't want those streams coming to us anymore. So then I would say I hope that doesn't cause a victim to be even more victimized in the future when there's been no incident that rises to the level that many people are describing or have described, not only tonight but in the past.
So I recognize that the Housing Authority can put cameras up and probably half the city has ring cameras up that are capturing pictures all the time so I understand that, but perhaps we could decide not to be a party to this segmentation of the population. So what I heard you say is technically we could do that. That's true.
A lot of the Housing Authority cameras are actually in public right away so it could trigger something. I understand the tool and appreciate the tool. The concern I have, again like I said it's a systematic surveillance of innocent people. And I think that's what the public is really concerned about. Some people were data storage and all that. Data is everywhere.
That's my concern. At what limit do we have us to give up all our rights because It's easier to catch the bad person. And I'm trying to find a way to get to that methodology. I don't feel right that I'm being surveilled, and it's okay if I'm not doing anything wrong, it's okay. You take pictures of my plates all day long and all that, as long as I'm not doing anything wrong.
But it's that surveillance and that slippery slope is the concern. And that's why I was trying to get to a position of third party authorization. And in trying to figure out a way to get that, I think the public would feel a lot better if they understand that they were being accessed but there was a third party that was out there that was authorizing that. And I don't think we're going to get something solved tonight. I think definitely the public has a lot more to say, I'm sure there's a lot more people who want it and there's more information coming through. I appreciate what you put through even your data was changing faster than you could type the report and I appreciate that. I did make that request before that the policy got moved to the forward page remember after page 467?
City Manager? Remember that? I made that recommendation, you move the flock policy forward. Is it on the page in the police down there deep on the flock policy? Just
to be clear Mr. Mayor we did have the city attorney review our policy and we're in line with the state of California.
No it's fine! I just wanted it easier accessible. It took me a long time to dig down to find it. That's what I'm getting at. We're not trying to hide anything. This is a thousand-page book we had to read through to find out what's what but... Now, what I'm thinking we need to do is propose an ad hoc committee to get down to the bottom of this that is doable for the people and for you guys to be able to use. I don't want to take this tool from you. I've seen your trailer work.
I've seen a lot of good work that's come from this but again, that slippery slope and the systematic surveillance of innocent people is what my concern is. Just how do we get down to it? I'm sure there's other things that will come up. So propose two people to form an ad hoc, is my motion. Do we need to agendize an ad hoc or can
I think it falls within the range of this agenda
item. Propose an ad hoc and let the public get here, we need a couple more times in meetings with the people to flesh out their concerns on this. I know people who have mentioned it to me are passionate they're not here tonight as well So it's, I'm not, you guys continue what you do as you're doing but let's try to figure something out. So the two people on council who would move forward with an ad hoc committee so we can hear more discussion on this and...
Mayor in order... Sorry? Yes. In order, I just want to remind the Council that in order for an ad hoc to not have to have agendized meetings and all of that, it needs to have a task So the task for this ad hoc could be to bring a report back to council or something
like that. There you go, bring back a report to council is your task.
I just have one quick question. Can an ad hoc only have city council persons?
If you wanted to agendize every meeting then you could add more people but if you do not want to agendize the ad hoc meetings then it can only be two council members.
No, what I was asking could... Members of the public you mean? Yeah. Could we have one or two members of the public with that and cause it to be a... If you wanted
to put those members of the public on the ad hoc then you'd have to comply with the Brown Act and agendize every meeting.
2:16 – 2:2219 turns
I am. Do you want to
be on the
ad hoc?
Just to be clear though, if you create an ad hoc with only two council members those two council members can invite to their meetings whoever they want to invite. Right.
I'm looking for...I'd be on it but I'm trying to find the numbers. I don't have to do that yet. Trying to see if there's anything they'll even carry. I'll make a motion to do that.
Can I make a comment? Yeah, day long. So, I mean, I hear the ad hoc thing and I think that's great but to me that just it seems more of a way and I'm not putting this on you it just seems like a way to slow down the conversation not make some very specific asks and to not keep it out in front and center with the public so from my perspective I don't mind if we had two or three more meetings about this so that the public could we could say here's an idea do we go this way do we get rid of everything I'm sure you've seen the backlog of agenda items and sometimes a couple guys going off in a corner and getting some stuff
done might be valuable.
We'll put it on the agenda. It will be, the next six weeks we'll be talking about it. That's just my
comment. I certainly respect that. I'd just say we're always going to have a...we're always behind on some things. This is You know, this is an important issue to many people across the spectrum. I am curious Chief, you know if we have to thread a really difficult needle here it may be impossible to please everyone but I'd love to learn about options. Okay, you don't get 100% of what you want but something gets reduced or this is an extra layer of protection. I still think the conversation should be had out in the open.
for me personally, but I think there's a lot of nuance here. And I think that perhaps giving you a little bit more time to dig in on some of the way some of the data is handled or perhaps the way the software works. Or I think some of that could be helpful, but I'd love to have that out in the open personally. I
think other communities are coming up with other solutions other than just termination of this too. So there's a lot of conversation going on right now. If nobody else is interested, I won't even bother with the motion on that.
So I'll make a motion for this to come back ASAP as the top priority for this council. And again, to have some more information to dig in perhaps all of us can approach you with very specific questions so that we're not just putting you on the spot here with something that you're not versed in. I'm always happy to meet with you and share my concerns. I hope the rest of Council takes that seriously too but this is an important issue to this community and I have to say I've heard both sides, I hear it at home too. But something that stuck with me is I heard from a lot of young people that just, I mean they were just kids when this stuff popped up and I don't know, I'm fearful that they just start in their youth thinking that they're against something, that their government isn't necessarily supporting them but they're watching them.
I know your arguments, I hear that. But I want us to figure out a way to thread the needle where this community feels a little bit more confident about the police in terms of how it takes care of issues and crime in the community. And I know this is an amazing tool but you're watching me too. You're watching all of it, not you but the cameras are. And if you can't say with certainty you don't know how that data is processed on the back end and we're only trusting a company to tell us it is, I can't get past that personally.
I think to explain myself a little bit more I'm not an AI engineer. It's way out of my wheelhouse. So for me to discuss and explain to the council how the tools operating within their programming is inappropriate, that's what I meant by that comment. I'm not an AI engineer.
And I respect that, and I hope you understand from our perspective that that lock—and it doesn't mean that you're not... You're a tech guy, I know. But this is an over— If we don't have clear answers or a clear understanding of how it works but we're participating in it? That's what the community's concerned about. We just don't know for sure that it's just in some little box at your station.
I think we can definitely reach out to FLOC and have them either present remotely or in person to discuss whatever questions that you may have.
I think that would be helpful at the very least, because to your point we're going to have a lot of questions that I don't think you'll be able to have the answers to.
Okay.
Thank you. So just a motion for an agenda item come back as soon as possible and if we can coordinate some people...
You want the council to present questions to the chief to come back to answer questions or answer the questions that came up here?
What are you asking them to do? I'm just saying let's, obviously you've heard a lot of the questions tonight but again we all may develop additional questions. I'd love for us to approach the chief and talk to him before so that we can actually like have some conversations about this stuff. That when we come out and talk about it in public in front everyone that we're not just chasing our tail, we're actually trying to get to the root of some of these concerns.
That would be my motion.
2:22 – 2:278 turns
Motion and a second the motion. That's your second. Let's go vote. I pass this 5-0. Okay,
let's move on to the next one. I'll just sit here because
it's going to be relatively short. So talking with both of the communities that have made this request from our city, they are requesting that basically there is a temporary pause on any negotiation until after the election so that the City and Councils can make their decisions based on who is in place at the time.
Okay, public comment on that one? Public comment on this item. Pausing. Teams, Zoom, whoever we got. Cell phones.
There is no public comment via phones or teams.
I see nobody rise for this item. We'll close the public comment. Do you guys have any questions, deliberations on that? Thumbs up. Good job, all right? All right now we're going to three minutes of oral communications is general or communications three minutes.
Good evening Mayor and members of City Council and members of the public. My name is Dinah Lockhart, I'm a member of the American Association of University Women Lompoc-Vandenberg And I just wanted to remind everybody that this Thursday, October 8th here at City Hall starting at 530 we are going to have a nonpartisan forum. The forum is sponsored by the AAUW as well as the NAACP Lompoc Santa Maria and also the League of Women Voters of North Santa Barbara County The forum is free, it will be in English, Spanish and Mixteco. It will be available also on Zoom, also available on Tap Channel 23 and it will be available later on YouTube.
So we will have six of the candidates who are running for mayor, also the council person for District 2 and also District 3. So we'll have six candidates here this Thursday beginning at 530. I also wanted to let you know that to help us, we are soliciting questions from the community. We have some already but we would welcome others and the way you can do that is by scanning the QR code on this flyer. I'm going to leave some out front. The flyer is also available in this month's October Lompoc Vision on page 19 there's a QR code So it's very easy to register for the forum. You can also just show up in person this Thursday at 530. We're going to have a meet-and-greet opportunity in the lobby, get to meet the candidates, get some literature and then we're gonna start the actual forum at 6 p.m.
Here at City Hall, so we welcome and encourage everybody to come in person. You can listen to it on zoom in your homes It will be rebroadcast So I just want to let you know that's an opportunity We've heard a lot of energy this evening about the interest of what's going on here at City Hall? We have three positions on this council that will be up for election on November 3rd So I think it's really important for the voters to come out listen and Either here in person or on Zoom. Thank you very much.
Good evening again, Council Mayor Aaron Crocker. I'm just going to make this really quick. We had a lot of people from the public here tonight speaking on something that they are very passionate about, myself included. These are people that are your various constituents, they're people who live in your districts, they're people that may be voting for you. I just...I'm really concerned that two of ya'll are just asleep at the wheel here Victor.
Dirk. Y'all didn't ask a single question! Are we just checked out? Maybe we're short-timing it, okay. Sure. Victor you're up for election man! Ask a question! These people out here may be voting for you give them something! For all the audacity of Steve to still be on the dang council Credit where it's doing is asking questions. Respect for that, appreciate it.
Please ask a question, anything. That's all
2:27 – 2:332 turns
Hi there, my name is John Rakoff, CEO of Path to Achievement which is a local non-profit that helps people with economic disabilities find employment in the community. I've been doing this for 22 years. Path to Achievements has been in operation for two and a half years. I previously worked at other employers providing the same services for 22 years I'm an advocate for people with disabilities, and employers should go above and beyond when hiring people with disabilities. It is not just supposed to be at the bottom of an application saying we are equal opportunity employment with Americans with Disabilities Act. You need to go above and beyond and seek out agencies like mine to find these people with disabilities because they are great employees.
They have higher retention rates, and my program can work with the city for Integrated work crews for city cleanup, park cleanup. Just asking the mayor to when you guys are training people in your hiring department to train them to take ADA and people with disabilities seriously when considering them from employment okay? That's all I have to say. If anybody has any questions for me and my services, you can come to me. I'll still be here at the back of the room. I have a few cards.
Equal opportunity employment is not just a suggestion it is the law. We have work opportunity tax credits that your businesses can take advantage of. A lot of businesses leave money on the table because they're not aware that some of their employees are somebody with a documented disability There are agencies out here that are documenting how long you interview, what questions you ask and if you discriminate within the interview. And if you are not willing to hire people with disabilities then you will be targeted and it will cost your business your bottom line. And your insurance premiums will go up and that's all I got to say. We're here to advocate for people in the community to be hired with disabilities. And that's economic disabilities, people with diabetes.
And if you don't think this concerns you, you can become a person with a disability. You can have a stroke, you could be in a car accident, you could have a major head injury and need services like mine to help you if you're not ready to retire and social security disability is not enough. So my program is here. I have a team, we cover all Santa Barbara County and all cities.
And we are the number one employment service provider for helping people with economic disadvantages find employment in the community. Thank you.
Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Deborah Jewell. I own and live in a small house on 412 North D Street here in Lompoc. Effective October 1st 2026 my sewer bill increased from $46.40 to $167.04 per month. This is exactly a 360% increase this is not acceptable I met briefly with Mayor Mosby at City Hall on September 21, 2026 to discuss this. I have reviewed the software transition ordinance and the staff report.
I requested wastewater billing review from the city utility department. I met with Michael and Rodney in the conservation department to get daily consumption history which breaks down by the hour. He also provided information on how to check for any water leaks. I researched the Proposition 218 and found that the City bypassed doing a comprehensive updated utility rate study before pushing the change through. The City's own Utility Committee had previously recommended one But the city continually delayed doing it and still has not done it. Bob Cross relied on general database math and a conceptual argument.
Bob Cross stated that under the new software, which is Munis, that 70% of utility customers would see a neutral or positive impact while 30 to 40% of customers would see their bills increase. The city prioritized a simpler administrative workflow to reduce manual labor for staff over safeguarding residents from catastrophic bill spikes. What I'm asking you Mayor Mosby and all the council members is this, one put this on a future agenda so it can be discussed.
Two, that a report be provided of all the residents that their sewer bill increased and how many and how much. Three, that an independent in-depth financial impact study be completed. Again I want to say this is not acceptable to me. I could have handled a 17% increase. I know you didn't raise the rates it says it right on the bill but right above that it says we changed the wastewater calculation I know that Jeremy Ball and Victor Vega voted against this change for some of the same reasons that I just mentioned, and I've spoken to other residents that have had significant increase in their sewer bill.
And if I have to go door-to-door and get more research, I will do so.
2:33 – 2:392 turns
Good evening Mayor, City Council. This wasn't planned but that was actually a great lead up to why I'm here. I sit as the Vice Chair of the Lompoc Utility Commission. Tonight's landfill tipping fee item highlights a broader issue that we have. The Municipal Code 2.56.02 states the utility commission shall recommend and act in an advisory capacity of the city council in all matters relating to utilities.
That's not happening. At our meetings we have once a month, we're independent, we're appointed by you and we're supposed to advise you. Well, to advise you we need answers. We have to ask questions, we have to have people there. I've asked for a representative from the different water department, the solid waste department to be at these meetings and I was told no. I was told that this council had the power The mayor had the power to direct the city manager to have somebody from these different departments at these meetings and to have somebody from finance there because there's issues that come up with finances that we don't have the technical expertise but we want to ask questions.
I had questions recently and I was told I had to send an email. and that the utility director would get back to me. That's not a discussion, I can't ask a follow-up question. I can't ask you know well if this is the case then what about this? And you know you're talking about one meeting a month so it takes 90 days to get an answer to a simple question and we're merely asking that these departments have somebody there that can answer our questions you know and that's what we're there for to ask the questions and then advise you So tonight you have the landfill tipping fee. It never came before us. We can't advise you if they don't bring it to us. The utility director, he treats us like a roadblock. He doesn't like us. He doesn't want us there.
We're making his job harder but we're there for you. We are there to advise so that these things don't happen. That citizens can bring their concerns to us And then we can ask those questions, and we can get the answers before rate hikes go in or studies aren't done. We can bring this stuff forward. So I would like to ask this Council to direct the City Manager to have the Utility Director provide somebody from these departments that can attend one meeting a month with us to answer questions, specifically somebody from finance as well because it is a mess trying to understand the utility financing and how the different utilities work and build and different reserves and funds that go on there.
I'm going to talk more later about the tipping fee and my recommendation to the council on that but I think you have to give us Some more.
Hello Mayor, City Council, Karen Hauenstein, Lifetime resident. So I would like to echo what Martin Bender just said. Uh, I've been attending our commission meetings And I'm surprised that they are not also attended by our city manager. They have not been effective because we don't have key people attending our commission meetings, and it frankly makes our city look like it's not being run by professionals.
So please do something about that Mayor and City Council. Earlier in this meeting, we're discussing how our civil rights and our constitution is intersecting with what our community wants about these surveillance cameras. I'm a trained First Amendment auditor. I know all about the legal ins and outs of filming in public Nobody, not one person possesses any reasonable expectation for privacy when they are in public.
That's our constitutional rights. You cannot infringe upon that with what you do resolving these camera issues. And the third issue I want to discuss is what I was talking about today at the County Board of Supervisors meeting, with the politicizing of non-profit agencies that's happened in our county. We have a nonprofit 501c3 agency from Santa Barbara called The Fund for Santa Barbara That agency is operating illegally per federal law.
They are doing absolutely political campaigning, funding political operatives, funding political candidates and they only fund liberals or progressives. Now I wanna expose this to our community Because they happen to be the very same people that are trumping for the land trust of Santa Barbara County and ringing our community with unsustainable, toxic industrial commercial strawberry farming. For the first time in my life.
2:39 – 2:4940 turns
Anything over there? Zoom, phone.
There is no public comment via phone or Teams.
Seeing nobody else we'll close general communications. Bring it back to item number eight appointments. Drum roll please. What do we got?
Let's see. Does it make sense for me to nominate separately
or together? They want to come up and do a speech, or what have we got going on here with these two appointments? You can do both at once. Okay I'd like to nominate... Aren't they going for the same terms? They didn't have the terms written down?
Stacey can you explain what we're trying to do here?
One, Cesar Magana is available to be appointed as a youth member of the Youth Commission and Esteban Magana is available to be appointed as an associate. And there's one youth member term and then there are several associate terms available.
Okay, so thank you for that. I'd like to nominate Cesar Magana for the youth member term that ends in January of 2027 and let's nominate Esteban Magana for one of the associate member terms that ends in January.
Which one are you looking for? The one that expires in 27 or 28?
Well, the youth one says it's in 27. No,
there's two associate members. There's 2 times 2.
That just means there's five vacancies? Is that what you're looking at?
Right, so there's four separate associate member vacancies and two of them are for 2027 and two of them are for 2028. So it's up to you which one you want. Do you know which
one? You fill us in? You guys want to come on up to the podium? Tell us which one you're wanting. Not yet right? Which one do you know if you want 2028 or 2027? One
year or two-year appointment? I heard 2028. What's the two year? January 2027. Make him go, 2028 he's ready to go. So Cesar Magana for the youth ending in 2027, January and then Esteban for associate member ending in January 28th. Right? Alright.
That's
my motion.
There's your motion, I'll second. You guys know you got a big speech to come give right? Alright, go ahead and vote. All right.
Thank you guys for stepping up.
You're in. Unfinished business number nine, consideration of changing landfill tipping fees for those who are not city solid waste collection customers who are not. Mr. Cross, Management Service Director.
Good evening, Council. This was an item that was requested by the mayor back in August. We presented to council. There was quite a bit of discussion and council asked staff to bring it back to council in two months so we're bringing it back. To recap some of the previous conversation here, the city currently charges same rates for all landfill customers Recent discussions have brought up the option of charging a higher rate to customers who are not, or to non-customer people, visitors to landfill. People who are not solid waste collection customers.
The change is based because it's based on the market. It's not based on cost of service so we can Increased landfill fees without a Prop 218 hearing. The rates for collection out of the area is two times the rates, but that's not applied to landfill. That's only related to special pickups out of the normal service area. There is some competition for services at the landfill that has to be considered. People could go to Santa Maria If the rates are increased to the point where that's more effective for them, a 1.5 times rate would put our rates about 64% above the tipping fee of the Santa Maria landfill. We're currently $115 per ton and Santa Maria is 105. We'd go up to 172.50 if the adjustment was made to increase it There are other non-financial impacts that could lead to longer lines at the landfill, with checking IDs.
It could lead to people just bringing city residents in order to get their processes done at the city rate. Software increases that we'd have to do. Some implement, some signage we'd have to do to implement and some training and it could possibly lead to illegal dumping within the city. The financial impacts, any changes would have to apply to commercial and residential customers from coming who are not solid waste customers The top customers for landfill are Marborg, which is about $550,000 per year. And the prison and waste management use it quite significantly too, about $100,000.
The Marborg itself is about 4% of the solid waste fund 20% of the charges to the landfill. A representative from our board was here last meeting who was saying that if we were to implement it, if we announced in January any type of increase and implemented it in July they would continue using the Lompoc Landfill They wouldn't divert to Santa Maria, but they would be passing on those increases to their customers who live out of the area or out of Lompoc.
So they would be doing that probably effective July 1st anyway. We can increase the rates, but there isn't a way to do it without residents having to pay for the additional rates. So I'm available... That's the residents
outside the area?
Yes, right. Non-solid waste customer residence, yes. The individuals as opposed to commercial.
Outside the city limits of Lompoc? Right. It sounds like you raised them, you have to raise us.
Sorry I just mean we can't charge commercial and individuals different rates essentially so...
And this is just for people outside city limits correct?
Correct
yes.
And that's pretty much the report and I'm available for any questions.
Hey Bob, so what does that do to the contracts that Marburg and maybe Waste Management are already in with for the county? How does that affect them when they already have a contract for a certain price?
At least with Marburg, their contract renews in July. So if we give them enough notice they would increase their rates in concert with ours effective July 1st. But if we increased before then They may have to divert to Santa Maria in the meantime until they're able to increase their rates. That's kind of their decision which way the pencil is out.
Do you currently have a contract, does City of Lompoc have a contract with Marburg? No I don't think so. I think that's what he was asking
Yeah, and the other thing that concerns me is the waste rates that you compared with Santa Maria. It sounds like we would be above Santa Maria's per tonnage rate. Is that true?
Yes, we're 115 now and they're at 105 but if we increase to one-and-a-half times it would be 172.50. That's
quite a bit right? It's an increase there yeah.
But
it's still
significantly less than Tahegas correct?
To Higas of over 200.
Well, my issue is we always do comparables with other people just like we do with electric rates with PG&E and it just almost seems a little bit skewed to me that we increase based on someone else all the time You know, it seems like with the cost of service and the service that we do provide. It seems like what's the benefit to our landfill if there is a benefit or to the city's coffers to increase money? Like you said, there are some negatives involved could be longer lines which that might not be a big deal but the dumping of trash and things within the city which would require someone else to do that job or pick up things or whatever is a concern so There's a couple things to consider here Is it worth the increase? Is it worth the risk?
2:49 – 3:0018 turns
I heard you say that Marburg said they would still come here at
that rate. If they would pass the increase on to their customers,
but they would still
come here most likely is advantageous for them too so I would think so but it's not my decision
Councilor
Burwell? Yeah, I was just kind of curious. So I think you kind of answered the question like even at that 1.5 rate they still come here. I was just curious if there was a lower rate where it's like yeah, you know the cost equation of going to Santa Maria, the time it takes to drive, the gas, the whole thing so... To me it's interesting. I'm not sure where council is gonna land on this but... So you're saying that one of our biggest customers Marburg has already said that if it's 172 they'll still show up The consequence is that everyone that's not in the City of Lompoc will see their bill go up, probably dramatically. Correct.
Interesting.
Councilor Vega and then Bridge.
You know I just want to say my piece on this you know we always advocate for rate increases and things that we think were helping. The money in the expenditures it kind of goes hand-in-hand to find out what the benefit is to this monetarily Money-wise, what's going to happen with this extra money if it's going to be extra? And we should be asking these questions. You know what the benefit is not just to increase it.
To increase it, to compare it to something else It's just, they're just words. Unless there is a benefit that we need the money for something or it's going to go towards something I think we can ask better questions instead of just raising rates just to compare it to other things. We go through a lot of things here where we do comparables with other cities and they don't make sense half the time. Sometimes the economy and the benefit to other people is more important than the timing of everything. The timing of everything sometimes is more important What we do just because someone makes a motion, I get it. To get money but I've seen money where we increase things or somebody increases something and Where's that money go guys? You know everybody feels good that they made a motion and they voted for something But I don't think they know what the what's going to be spent on They can't explain it to the people what the benefit is to them.
What's in it for them So I think we just need to think twice about anything We do with rate increases especially at this point in time with the economics the way they are
I'll tell you one thing we can do is pay for that half-million dollar street sweeper we just bought. That's your help, right? You've got two of them, right? One for streets and one for
solid waste,
correct?
Because we're both just curious, maybe in layman's terms. Look, are we considering increases because we as a city in this department want to be rolling in it like we want to have a huge profit margin or are we dealing with some cost increases on expected mandates etc that are affecting this department and because the cost of everything goes up around the world?
Are we, is this a healthy utility or is there an issue that we're trying to address here from your perspective?
No the solid waste utility is not I wouldn't say it's healthy. There's a lot of equipment needs there are there's planning for the future with the transfer center or what we're going to do with the end-of-life of the landfill. I don't know all their needs but I know financially they're running a deficit and they're not meeting you know their reserve requirements
Yeah. Council Member Vega, I mean, I totally hear where you're coming from and I don't think we should ever arbitrarily just raise rates because somebody told us that we should but at the same time, we've gone through our own history as a city in multiple times where we didn't make incremental increases and then we got slapped with the big deal and had to make an awkward adjustment to rates so I definitely hear where you're coming from. Definitely should ask more questions but I think the health of the utility is something that we should be concerned about but my two cents.
Let me tell you where this came about. Years ago, it was written that our solid waste rates for outside the city were two times rate. Water and sewer one-and-a-half times rate. Sometime from 2012 to 2025, it got moved more so the tonnage fee and it was only if we were picking up with our trucks outside The story I was told back in 2012 as a utility commissioner was the reason why people outside the city are paying more to dump in our landfill is because we don't collect property tax from them, which pays for street sweeping. We're not collecting, as in this case here, we had ROW right away where we charge our trash trucks to drive on the streets.
Their trash trucks and the people outside there use our streets go to our landfill, use our landfill And likewise, we don't obviously collect property tax from them. So there's a lot more that we're actually subsidizing the people outside city limits and if we're charging them the same amount as we're paying, the people in Lompoc are subsidized than the people out of town. And that's why solid waste was two times rate and water and wastewater are one-and-a-half times rate. Because nothing's exactly perfect, but that was the methodology and the reason.
Logically we did a long time ago and I don't know how it got read another way and it says the tipping fee is to be the same as inside town as it wasn't. I know as a kid we used to have to identify where we went to the landfill. We used to give our ID at the landfill. And my dad would always tease him out, we brought it from LA because you've got the best landfill in the world.
You know, of course show the thing and we go and dump. But people outside the area were paying more because Lompoc's going to inherit that and the closure of that landfill when they're done dumping there, we're still going to be paying for that to keep that and maintain the gas collection system and multitudes of other things that the rate payers at Lompoc even though that'll be closed so we take our trash somewhere else We're going to be subsidizing everything that's going there.
What you're looking at when the tonnage fee comes down to this 5,000 tons a year come in 5000 people up there $1000 per thousand A ton per family up there, so a year. So you're looking at about a $5 a month increase. You take a ton up and bring it up 50-60 bucks. It's not a huge increase on the people on a monthly rate but at least you're going to generate if you do this about a quarter million to 300 thousand a year in the Marburg contract alone, which is just $400,000-$500,000. The people of Lompoc paid to buy a street sweeper that cleans the streets that the trucks drive down. That's not only the trucks but a lot of people come from out of area and you watch the trailers coming down the roads with stuff falling off and this and that. And we're already picking that up.
I mean, I don't really agree with your story that we're raising the rates here will cause people from Mesa Oaks to come to Lompoc and dump in our city. I don't see that happening. Maybe they're going to go that way but...I don't think that $200,000 number, I don't think that's...I mean if that's the story we should have used it when we raised the rates on the local rate payers. We didn't use that argument there. But that was the reason why this came about is because there was a shifting of what had happened historically in the past.
And I was looking at it and made the motion to line it more so that the rate payers of Lompoc, I believe are subsidizing the rate payers north of us. And I think they should be paying their fair share.
That's where it came about. So I don't think most of that, I have a disagreement with. It's funny you say going with your dad to the dump. I have a lot of really interesting memories of going with my dad to the dump too and pulling out where he lived and I do remember that. And again, and I'm playing this forward perhaps their bill goes up out there and they use a different service maybe down the road City of Lompoc can take that contract. That'd be great too. I'd love to get that revenue back in. All I'm saying is, I do think it's fair. Maybe there's a sweet spot where, OK, are people going to go and dump in your city? Let's try to avoid that.
But if you're not in the city, you're benefiting from our streets and a lot of our other services and what we have to offer. I don't know. I think that's a fair discussion. If it's $5, $10 a month, is that going to make people run downtown to go dump? I don t know. hear from the public.
Council Member Vega,
all due respect to all you guys I get it but I don't buy it okay? The unincorporated areas I get it the lifespan of the landfill I think that's just pie in the sky because you know I've seen companies that have said we're going to close down in five years ten years and they're still there you know to say that we're going to take less waste and extend the life of the landfill So that we can benefit the streets. Lompoc needs a lot more help than Street Sweeper, I'll tell you that right now okay? In my opinion, Lompoc would be better off if the unincorporated areas because they have the same zip code could be looked at as part of Lompoc regardless of their voting skills okay?
More people here ingrained and involved regardless of living within the city limits. So I think we need to be conscious of that, what their contribution is to our economy also these people and they're probably watching so I'd like to at least be fair and I understand the one-and-a-half and two times rate but everybody goes nickel and dime and five dollars here five dollars here look where our utility rates are now because of that mindset there's people out there hurting if any of you are running for election which you are Listen to the economics of people that have to go and spend money. It's not our fault, but the idea is the disposable income is not there.
So it may be a dollar for you or five dollars for somebody else. There are a lot of fixed-income people out there who don't have that extra money. I'm not saying that it's wrong not to increase rates, but I just think timing of it sometimes requires some different consideration.
3:00 – 3:1721 turns
So I think I heard between the lines there's some logistics issues. And so, um...I think there's a significant difference between large trucks running across our streets and small cars or small loads coming from Mission Hills. So, I could probably support the tipping fee per ton rate going up to whatever we all agree to but not only do I think the car rate is kind of doing what Victor's saying forget new really lives in our community And I think it's going to create a burden on the guys who are taking the fees.
They won't have to change their software, they'll know those are the big trucks coming through so might be a minor change but I think they can handle that change a lot easier than trying to Police, did you come from Mission Hills or did you come from Gardenia Street? So I don't support the car one going up to 1.5 but I can support the tipping fee going
up. So process-wise we would bring back a resolution and we can put up the entire rate just so there's more these are just the most common rates there are more I don't know
if you remember, it wasn't long ago they were actually charging by the axle. So a single-axle trailer had a nominal fee and the roofers were hauling all the way from wherever else with these giant wheels on a single axle to come to our landfill to dump for 20 bucks. And they dumped 10 bucks—10 tons on us! It was horrendous what was happening to us.
I'm not fighting the big
stuff. It is 2035, I think is still the number for the closure of the landfill, correct? City Manager? I'm not sure. Director? That's the number I think they're still targeting as 2035 so that number hasn't changed for a number years so it's getting closer. Any other questions before we go to public comment? Yep. Sit down, Mr. Cross and we can catch you from your table down there.
Public comment? You have three minutes on this item.
Before I start, I'd like to ask just Is there a way I could have a few extra minutes because I have a lot of the answers to the questions you're asking right now and I think it would kind of change your perspective that many of you have on this and it would give you a lot of insight into this issue. I can race through it and get through it in three minutes?
Can you go through it, let's see where we are right there and I'll see if I can get council to discuss that.
I support establishing a higher tipping fee for those who are not city solid waste customers. This is not about punishing people outside of the city limits, this is about making sure that Lompoc residents are not supplementing and those who live outside of the city. Every ton of waste outside the city consumes part of our finite city asset. The landfill is not to be expanded or it's going to close like you said 2035 is the current estimate And once that landfill capacity is used, we don't get it back. The financial responsibility doesn't end when it closes. We have a 30-year commitment for environmental studies, maintenance, all kinds of things. We pay that as the City of Lompoc residents.
Vandenberg Village doesn't pay that. They're done and they go somewhere else. There's also a striking disparity in what residents are paying. A 90-gallon trash cart in Vandenberg Village is $43.72 a month, that same cart in Lompoc, $71.43. That's a 63% increase in what we pay as the City of Lompoc resident for our own landfill versus what somebody outside the city pays. They pay less. So I think the basic question here is why Lompoc residents are paying substantially more for solid waste service while also carrying the long term financial responsibility to maintain the landfill?
One argument that I heard was that it could encourage illegal dumping, but we shouldn't make decisions based on potential illegal activities of others. That's something we're going to have to address and fine and catch people in the act of doing it. We can't take in less money. And like you heard earlier, the Solid Waste Department is not doing well financially. This is something that's needed. It's been needed.
So we shouldn't just simply quantify, we need to do these studies. We need to look at the facts you know it's not about punishing those who don't live in Lompoc. It's about making it fair really because they're getting a benefit from us right now and we carry the long-term burden So I'm not suggesting a punitive charge. I'm not suggesting even a 1.5 or 2, I'm suggesting an actual rate study to make it comparable to what the citizens of Lompoc pay so we're all paying the same. We're all carrying that long-term burden with what we're dumping at the landfill because whether it's a ton from us in the city of Lompoc or a ton from somebody outside you know once it's gone it's gone and we don't get that back and we're not expanding so eventually we're gonna have that resource ourselves.
Good? Thank
you. I didn't know we could come up here multiple times. I have a question about the landfill and the rates, if they do go up is any of this money going to be fixing alleyway roads? I live, I have a house over by V&Lemon and I live in the section of houses that have the alleys like four or five alleys but those alleys are terrible They are tore up, they're like driving on the outback. It's nothing filled but rocks. The street cleaners do not go through the alleys and clean them. I don't know if that's a policy or not whether they do that or not. But if we do increase the rates of landfills, the trucks that are picking up the garbage are the ones destroying the roads or destroying at least the alleys because obviously they got to drive in them.
They're big, the heaviest thing that are driving up and down the alley but my alley is terrible. I wish I could put a basketball hoop on my detached garage and have my kids play basketball in the alley. But they can't because the rocks are uneven, there's giant potholes and if we're doing road infrastructure alleys need to be looked at as well okay? Another thing going back to my comment I'm not targeting businesses but let me give you an example of what happened on Monday. I had a client that I took to an interview he had an interview at a gas station I'm not gonna say which one the person that came out the interviewed was probably no older than 21-22 years old My clients are given practice skills before they go into interviews. This person went up to the interview, because this person has a physical visible disability that you cannot pass.
That person had an immediate, the interviewer had an immediate reaction to you can't do this job even though that person I trained advocated for himself that I've worked in stocking even though I'm limited by one arm that I can physically do the job. That person, because he probably hasn't been trained by his manager of how to deal with people with disabilities during the hiring process put his company in Lompoc at big risk. I witnessed it.
I'm going to be a witness to what occurred but it was a two minute interview walked out said you can't do that job now we need people that could physically do that job
We're talking about this item right here. We'll have two more minutes at the end of the meeting,
but
stay on this topic
if you could. I'll come back and talk again. This is an example I'm saying about disability discrimination that is still happening these days.
Item number nine. Anybody else? Item number nine. Anybody on Teams or phones?
There's no public comment via phones or Teams.
All right, we'll close oral communication public comment on item number nine and bring it back to council. So you heard that they're paying significantly more for the 90-gallon can than they are up there. We're subsidizing the actions over there through the commercial process so without further deliberations I'd like to do the one and a half times rate and I'll make the motion on that One and a half times rate, I'll leave it off the car load.
And put it on the other two that you had up there in your chart. Okay? The one-and-a-half times rate so the minimum FAP fee and the tonne fee at one-and-a half times rate. That'd be my motion. I'll leave the car load alone. All right, that's my motion. So this is a motion by Mosby seconded by Bridges. Go ahead vote. It changes color. It's going to come. There it is. And that passes 4-1 with Councilmember Vega voting no.
When did you want that effective? We'll bring a resolution back.
You had the recommendation in here that said it's not going to July 1st, correct? So aligning with your... Is everybody good with that alignment? Yeah. Okay. They gave them long enough time at the place to figure it out. All right, where are we now? New business. Chris, Granite Pleak LLC, Memorandum of Understanding, Out-of-Area Service Agreement for Bodger Meadows.
Hey Lori! You're filling in for Lori today. All right, Jeff Malawi. I
think my name's on
there too. Yeah. I saw it. I can read almost.
Good evening Mayor and Council. City Attorney Jeff Malawi presenting this item. This is about the Bodger Meadows project which is a development project that's being processed by the County of Santa Barbara because currently it is in the county outside city limits, just outside city limits to the west of the city on 65 acres. Consists of 200 single family residences, 140 multifamily apartment units.
As I said the county is currently processing this development application and they are in the middle of doing their CEQA develop preparing their environmental impact report under CEQA Timeline-wise, once the EIR is completed, the County Planning Commission currently is expected to have its hearing on the project in mid 2027. And the Board of Supervisors' hearing is currently expected to be held in late 2027.
Once the project is approved by the county then the annexation process can be initiated by the city or by the applicant To bring the development project into the city limits of the city. That would need to be an application to LAFCO and be approved by LAFCO, and that hearing could be sometime in 2028. The reason that we're here tonight is because it is at a request of the applicant, Granite Peak Lompoc LLC which is the proposed property owner and developer for the site.
In May 2024, the City of Lompoc issued the applicant a will serve letter, canon will serve letter for water and wastewater service that said that the city has adequate capacity to serve the project and that the city will serve the project if the City Council approves an out-of-agency service agreement or if the project is annexed into the city. The county is now doing their EIR for the project, and the county has told the applicant that that letter from Lompoc is not sufficient for the county to analyze utility service by Lompoc in the EIR.
And what the county needs is something more like the MOU that is attached to your staff report That sets forth the terms, or at least a rough outline of what the terms would be if the city were going to serve the project even when it's outside of the city limits. And that the county would, will not move forward with doing the EIR for the project unless they get an MOU like is attached to the staff report from the city.
Or the developer would need to analyze, change its project description to analyze self-service of utilities for the project and that would be Self-service of water, self-service of wastewater. Electricity from PG&E and there would need to be some type of vendor that would provide solid waste pickup for the project. All that would need to be studied and those studies would be expensive for the developer to conduct, to have conducted so that they could be analyzed in the EIR by the county So what the developer is requesting from the city, instead of having to do all those analyses of self-service, is for the city to enter into this MOU that's attached to your staff report which gives a rough outline of what the terms of service would be if the project is approved but not annexed.
It's very important to understand that in this MOU, the city is not guaranteeing that the city is going to provide utility services if the project does not annex. The city is saying Here are the rough terms of what that utility service would be. And the current MOU that's attached to the staff report has a clause that says that the city can terminate that MOU at any time, and so that is what allows the city to still not serve the project if the project is not annexed But at the same time, the county is saying that if we provide this MOU, if we approve this MOU and it's signed by both the city and the applicant, that the county will then move forward with doing the EIR for the project.
So that's what the applicant—the developer—is requesting. Staff's recommendation to decide whether you want to approve this MOU at the applicant's request. The terms of the MOU do say that just like any other Customer of utility services outside the city limits, that the charge for water would be one and a half times what the cities in city limits charge for water would be. The charge for wastewater is one and a half times. Charge for solid waste collection is two times.
And the city does not currently have a resolution that has increased rates for electric for outside of city limits. But again, those are only going to come into play if the project is not annexed and the city decides to approve an out-of-agency service agreement. I think that completes the staff report. I hope I was clear about all of that but I'm available for questions.
3:17 – 3:2324 turns
Council Member Bridge?
So I recognize there's one or two clauses in there seemed to open the door to not approving it. But there's a lot of words in there that could easily, or could be led to believe that we're gonna do an out-of-service agreement. So it feels weak to me and I know I say charged words but there's not a lot of trust in my heart on this topic so I have four positions that I would like to see added to the memo, and I'll just read them here and the council can consider.
No connection to any city utility including construction service until the commission approves annexation. Occupancy conditioned on annexation not merely on a decision because right now I believe It's a decision, and of course the decision could be no annexation. Execution on any out-of-area agreement at the City's sole discretion notwithstanding Section 2B And finally, a required termination for convenience clause in any out-of-area agreement with the same no conduction condition.
And we could afterwards or whatever I can give you a copy of what those words say assuming people agree.
I think your ability to terminate on this page here allows you to terminate at
anytime. I saw that but everywhere else in that contract It leads you to believe that we'll do an out-of-service agreement. I think it's weak. And
then, I think the reason for that is they're being strong armed by the county to manipulate it any way they can. Absolutely. We know right here that we need the property tax. We need there to be Lompoc residents.
I
know
but you're
absolutely right. You're getting strong armed. That clause right there allows us to...
I don't think it's strong enough.
I got an additional idea maybe we can do simultaneously. You'll like that, but let me go to Council Member Vega-Thinball.
Yeah, Jeff, and it looks like it was just a condition that the county put in there because once the IR is developed and they move forward, in the event pre-annexation part they're going to need or maybe afterwards, they will need a regular can and will serve letter from the city. Correct? I mean this is just a frivolous condition that they put in there in order to move forward.
I don't know if I would use the word frivolous but Well, you
know they're putting a roadblock in their way and so I see what it is.
The county is? Yeah the county
is
yes. What we are trying to do is try to work with the applicant to allow the process to keep moving. And at the same time protect the city's interest in not being guaranteed that we have to binding... It's not a binding guarantee.
I think the city would be more than happy to provide water and utilities should they be annexed but that's just my opinion thank you.
Councilor Boehl. Kind of a random question, but kind of at the big picture level. So it sounds like there's county saying unless you do this then we're going to slow down and stop the process. But who is under the pressure of the builder's remedy? And how does that play into this? Again, this property is only being developed because there was an application for builder's remedy right? I mean so where is the county gaining this leverage and am I misunderstanding
The county is gaining this leverage because the EIR has to analyze some type of utility service for the project. So, the county is telling the applicant you can either get this MOU from Lompoc and then you can analyze Lompoc Utility Service in your EIR or you can analyze self-service in the EIR. And at this...either one...the county is fine with either one of those But the self-service option at this point has a lot of expense involved because it would be a lot of cost on the applicant to do several studies that would be required for the EIR if they were to analyze self service. So, the applicant is coming to us and requesting this MOU instead.
Point blank, do you see as representing the City of Lompoc any vulnerabilities in this MOU that expose us Anything?
I have done the legal research and I believe that the clause that is in here, that allows the city to terminate this MOU at any time can be exercised by the city and we can terminate this MOU at any time. Now is that 100% guarantee? No. Is it riskier to sign this than it is to not sign this? It is riskier to sign this than it is to not sign this. But that's the decision that's before the council. This is a request of the applicant and you need to decide if you want to take what I personally believe is a pretty small risk based on my research.
Thank you for that clarity, appreciate it. Has this been run through the county already?
Yes, this has been run through the county and the county is okay with these terms as they stand here.
3:23 – 3:3424 turns
One more question if I may. Yes, please. So just to clarify your words you said we can terminate as a city, we can terminate at any time, check the box but you also had some innuendo past that that suggests there might be loopholes or uncertainty and I'm still not understanding that part of it like we can terminate but what is the but?
I guess nothing in particular, it's just that the fact that we are signing an agreement that says we will provide utility service unless this agreement is terminated. If we don't want to provide utility service why are we going to sign that agreement? It would be safer to not sign it but the applicant is requesting this from us. Thank you.
And the point of fact the county is accepting it so...
Yes.
Any other questions? Yeah, thank you. Jim
Slott
with the landowner
and Jack Bodger our land partner is here also.
I'm just really, I think the city attorney did a good job of presenting the issue here. And so I'm here for questions and context in any detail. I don't really like to see the county as strong arming this. The city, I think what the position they're really in would be the same position if the city was running the environmental review. The fact that we have a consultant that's hired to do the EIR that has to follow CEQA, it's their requirement telling the county I can't do my job, I can't finish this environmental review if I don't know what the out of agency service option looks like. So it's checking a box for them to finish their legal requirement to do the EIR and it's basically show me what that looks like, tell us what that looks like and boom we're done, we've checked the box here is the option if it doesn't get annexed and its still served by the city.
I don't think any buffs that support the project wanted to be built in the county and not annexed. We want it to be annexed. In fact, we're starting on the submittal for the annexation. We're working through the checklist. We're getting that additional information. Most of it already looks like the application we already have with the city planning We have a pre-application going through the Lompoc City Planning Department, so they're reviewing it. This is an additional application that'll start the annexation. So we want it annexed and I think when this out of agency service agreement is in the EIR and it becomes public everybody will see What will happen if the project is built in the county and served by the city via an out-of-agency service agreement?
And that will not be acceptable to the county or LAFCO, that the residents of those units will pay so much more than their neighbors for the same service. So it's a check the box, move on, finish DEIR, and show everybody What happens if you don't annex it? I think it's going to be unacceptable. De LAFCO, so I think that's what it is. It's an agreement to agree in the future and you can terminate it and it just shows the consultant for the EIR what that option looks like.
And I don't think that option is going to be really anything anybody wants to see happen.
I'm very respectful of your opinion. However, what's going to happen here in a year or two years is the county is going to be across the table from us and they're going to be negotiating how much money they get for this to be a city property. That'll be a very hard negotiation and I am sure that This memorandum will be brought up that, hey we could do this. I'm not convinced at all that LAFCO will be a proponent of us being annexed. They've been against us growing for as long as I can remember and a lot of it is the logic does not make any sense.
I respect your opinion because it's a very logical opinion. The trouble is my experience with the county is a lot of times there seems to be a different agenda than logic and so I'm not opposed to the document, I'm not opposed to going forward. I want to see the development. It's fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me and I've been fooled
a couple times so... I hear ya. We found a way to after a couple of failed attempts to annex this land we found a way to guarantee we get approval on a project and they can't turn it down Builders Remedy gives us that, state law preempts. So they can't turn this down- And their
project is exactly the project that got turned down by LAFCO when we took it to them.
Yeah but you know the difference is the Builder's Remedy boxes the county into they can't turn down a housing project. The bad thing is we're stuck with Builder's Remedy on 60 acres It's not 100, it's 60. That's what gives us the guaranteed approval. So that's what the project is submitted as, that's what our protection is, that's what they can't turn down and it can't be anything really more than that at this time.
So we found a way to, hopefully third time's the charm, to get a portion of it.
30th time.
Yeah. You know, the fiscal impacts are going to be similar. The property taxes are still assessed at the same whether it's in the city and the county. There is still a huge net gain to the city from property taxes
It's not annexed into the city, there is no net gain at all. Pardon? If it's not annexed into the city, there is no net gain at all. I think we average what 16.8% of the 1% that we have in the county so if it's not annexed then we get zero property tax. Yeah but I mean and there's an argument battle all the way and that finalization of that tax sharing agreement is going to be a big battle
Yeah, the tax-sharing
agreement... Richard Rantz is a classic example.
The tax sharing agreement my understanding is the negotiation part of it is the portion that goes to the general fund of the city of Lompoc but most of the property taxes go to the school district what most of all property taxes go to.
The county I think gets twice what we end up, the school district gets about equal to that and it trickles all the way through the thing but it's still burdening the city with parks and everything else like that so that's why it's so desperately needed to be inside the limits. We're already doing that in north of us already. We are providing so much opportunity without the property tax. So this is Very important that we get that portion of it as well. Who do you think the police and fire is going to respond if that's built out?
The sheriff's not going to come down to serve, it'll be Lompoc. So that's what really needs to be in. We already have so much of the county we're taking care of already.
Yeah, so we need to get through the EIR and we need to get through the county approval process and then LAFCO will act last. And so we can't get to LAFCO and even negotiate that until we get the EIR finished and we get through county planning process. So that's where we're trying to get to this MOU of an out-of-agency service agreement is a check the box so they can move on And get to those steps.
So,
any other questions? You need
some? Got some? Because we're all good. So I just bring it back to the basics Lompoc has, we need housing everyone knows that so we need this. We gotta give it a shot. I guess from my perspective you know obviously we should annex that in the city of Lompoc will be providing all the services as soon as they exit that property they will be driving on City of Lompok streets so it should be ours again you can't guarantee that but I'm hopeful that you maintain That message throughout, it does make more sense and hopefully it pencils out and we can show on paper.
Well we are doing this a little bit backwards I will admit okay? And that's why we're stuck with this LAFCO last but if you know if we had started with the application for annexation first then we would be doing all this EIR after that but We chose to get through the planning, the environmental review using the county and LAFCO ends up being last. So we're doing a little bit backwards. I admit that and I agree with that but that's how we had to do it to get the protection of builder's remedy and eliminate their ability to turn down this project again.
Thank you. So it's a little bit wonky, I agree.
3:34 – 3:4431 turns
Any other questions? Okay, very good.
Thank you.
Did I already do public comment on this one? Did I? Victor tried to trick me. Public comment on this item. This item at number 10. The picture's ready to go. Anything on...
There is no public comment via phones or Teams.
All right. We used to line them out the door on this didn't we Jack? 15, 20 years ago on this one. So I hear what Council Member Bridge says. I ran this by the city attorney and not going to do it simultaneously but I want to come back after with a motion hopefully go through to give us more teeth and protection as well with after we hopefully get this approved in emotion without in that is to bring back at the next meeting. I know we put a little pressure on you But that is an ordinance that says we're not going to provide out of area utilities unless you're part of the city. So put some more teeth in this, the ordinance would be separate outside of the MOU but give us additional teeth to separate that we're not gonna be providing any- City Attorney was?
He said it'd be all right with the MOU, shouldn't conflict with the MOU. I thought you wanted to get done. You want to just keep talking? Somebody get that guy a MyDoll or something, right? All right. So I'll make the motion that we approve... I'm doing it! We approve this. There's a motion to approve staff recommendation. Right? That good for ya? Seconded by Vega. Go ahead and vote.
I'm
going to make a council request here at this time, guys. In that we bring back to the next meeting an ordinance and granted it takes time to file all of that but that ordinance will state that we're not going to provide utilities to properties that aren't annexed inside the city limits Any new ones?
Yeah, that one point I was going to say is that existing will be grandfathered. Yes,
existing is grandfathered in and that's our four
major utilities. And then I can do my absolute best to get it on the next meeting but... But I just realized that November 3rd is canceled.
There's another motion I made, and I need a second on that motion. And that's to give us protection for that clause that says we can discontinue it at any time. The secondary teeth. Motion button? I
thought it was just a council request. It doesn't need a motion. Don't you just need three? Do
I need a council request or motion with this city attorney? What
would you like? You need a council request.
Alright, council request. Can I get some other head nods? Second, second, third. Starbuck, Bridge, Vega. All right. It's trendy man. You got me going, you got me going. All right where are we now? Yes I know you didn't get your Geritol. What's Geritol? Midol one of them, I don't know. All right written communications.
Nothing more than you've already received
Okay, oral communication last two minutes. Two minutes come on down. Oh flock cameras again here we go.
Mayor and Council Members, I'm Steve Frank. I'm the founder and CEO of Pilboudad Ventures. Thanks very much for making time. For those that may not remember we're the guys who using Measure R had got Space Base California approved and that's up at Ken Adam Park and that's a $160 million project-ish about 335,000 visitors about 65,000 school kids I've been away for four months, haven't been able to fly because of a couple hospital issues but some people have been saying you guys have been pretty quiet. You haven't done much. In the summer we sponsored some local tables with the Lompoc Valley Chamber of Commerce and we're also working with the city to do a launch viewing event.
We hired an investment bank out of Houston in the spring, and they've been making some good progress. We're getting some traction. They're talking to family offices, venture capitalists, media entertainment companies, experiential companies. But we sent you a letter on September 11th asking for one more year extension. So that is still pending. We'd like to, if possible, address that at the next meeting. I know it sounds like it's going to get awful full in that meeting but that's what our request is. That's pending before you now. Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you. Avis. Oral communications, last two minutes. See anybody else run to the microphone? Anybody over here on...
There is no public comment via phones or Teams.
We'll close the last two-minute oral communications. Bringing it back to Council comments and meeting reports. Councillor Raoult.
I have a council request. We'll see how that works. Chief Shea. Sorry to put you on the spot. You've been here all day, haven't even had to say anything. Let me ask you point blank. You made a presentation to Council about the status and health of the Lompoc Fire Department a couple months ago. Has anything changed that we should know about? You don't have to tell me about that. My request is for you to come back and update us on the status of the fire department But if nothing has changed since your last presentation, then maybe I should blow it off. My concern is I'm hearing some things that there are still some high pressure issues within the department and I'm sorry to put you on the spot but my council requested me to have you come update us ASAP.
Certainly and happy to do so. I think an update is prudent because things have changed. The dynamics in our staffing remain strained. In fact they probably have gotten worse and I'd be happy to update you on that.
So I think that request has to go through the city manager to request, right? Correct. So request the city manager to...
So City Manager since we've heard from our fire chief that the situation has changed since his last presentation, I was just hopeful we can get an update from him as soon as we can.
And what are you wanting? Because I wasn't here at the night that you asked for the fire to come back for the presentation. We just did one, so I'm not sure what you're trying to get. I mean, I know that we've lost one firefighter. I don't know, Kevin if you want to add to that. We are still trying to work out operational details and how we can address some of the concerns that are coming from us. I don't know if it's a little early for us to give you a presentation on what we're planning on doing to get our operations back up, but it's up to you. I mean, it's up to you. I think the presentation is going to be very similar and might have a little less coverage that we have so it's probably going to be a little worse. I'm not going to lie to you, but we are doing our best to address those issues.
I just think it's a little bit early to come back to council and talk about those without us going through all the steps that we need to go through.
Certainly respect that. I think my issue is, as I just heard our fire chief say, that there has been change since his last presentation. You two may argue about the severity of that change but I'm concerned about it and instead of waiting for a plan, I'd like for us to stay constantly updated on this because I feel like we're dealing with some severe issues in that department. Not blaming anyone.
You guys have ideas, you have plans, things to put in motion. We have a new fire chief here who has ideas as well and his job is to make sure that we understand the health of that department And he's telling me that it's changed since this last presentation, so I want an update.
You can direct us for an update. I would like to direct you to give us an update... I would prefer to actually work through the operational details that we are working on but if you want a presentation of what where we are right now from the chief without us working through a lot of things that we need to work through in order to get some of these problems that we're having worked out. There's legal issues, there's negotiation issues, there's a lot of things that are happening right now and I would prefer that we went through all those to see where we are before we updated the council but it's up to you.
I certainly respect that. I think both of those things can happen simultaneously to be honest with you because what I'm asking for is not the exact answer, not the negotiations, Any of them say, but the health of the department. So I'm not talking about negotiations. I'm not talking about the union. We're talking about the health of this department and their ability to show up in a timely manner to provide service in this community.
And we got a warning from our chief the last time that things were, we were having some issues and now I'm hearing from him that we have more issues. Not blaming anyone. I want to get that
update.
That's it. That's all I want. So, I would look for council support on that.
3:44 – 3:5026 turns
Normally I would support you, but you heard the city manager said he'd like to wait. He's got some variables he's trying to fix out. Right? That's what he said. Yes sir thank you. Well
that's convenient.
Anything else? Council Member Strobach.
For once, I have a couple of things. One of them is I think that we should go ahead and honor Pale Blue Dot's extension request and put that on the agenda for the next meeting in November. There's plenty of time. It's been done several times before to get people to agree to do that. Is it in November?
October. October. Next meeting.
Yeah.
Not November. That's next meeting. Okay. I would go along with it but why don't we just, I mean it's hard to invest. Pale blue dot extension. My suggestion is we go to a two year extension.
Let's discuss it when it comes back on.
Okay one year or two year extension. I'd give you a head nod second on that. Council Member
Bridge for a third on that. Okay appreciate thank you and one other thing. I was sitting here thinking earlier, and Commissioner Bender made a statement up here. Fifteen years ago there was a council member that every time there was an agenda item said has the commission reviewed it? You know one of the simplest things we could do as a council, and it would make it easy on staff once it was established is every item we have on our agenda starts with a recommendation and that recommendation says staff recommends.
So it's always a staff recommendation, it's standard on every item we've looked at thousands of them over the years why don't we incorporate commission recommendation right underneath that? Okay it might take staff a little bit to get used to this but then we do have the recommendation from staff And we have the recommendation from a commission. I think it's a good compromise, it keeps everybody honest and the playing field is leveled again. I mean that's just common sense. Let's take care of the problem and do it.
I would too, I think that's really a good idea because there is no way for us to keep them up on every element and that's why we rely on the
commission. Every agenda item we have has a commission attached to it basically so let's use them.
My only question to the City Attorney is Council request going to make that happen or do we need to do
something? We can bring it back as a discussion item to see if we want to change the policy on that.
It's not going to work if we only meet once a quarter for a commission, okay? So there are some commissions...
Put some bass in your voice. I can't hear you.
He said it will only work if we're only meeting once a
quarter. It's not going to work. Those that meet once a quarter but I think most of them are
all meeting monthly. Whatever! If the agenda item is something to do with the commission, I'm just saying.
We can discuss all those details and logistics in the agenda. Alright.
Very good. Is that it? That's it. Council Member
Vega You're up. A couple things I'd like to address, thanks for staying awake. These were presentations that turned into full loads here. Couple of comments there from the public that said hey why don't you ask a question? Well sometimes I don't because it's easier to listen when staff is giving a good presentation normally what I do is I listen because this is the first time Whether it's cameras or flock came up, this is kind of an ongoing situation. So these guys that act like or somebody that acts like they've never seen it before that's here all the time, it's not true. So to ask questions that are redundant over and over again when the presentation is very clear takes time. So sometimes I'm quiet but I'm listening because I happen to have faith in the police department I happen to think that the presentation and when he, when the police chief is telling me that he has the guardrails up and everything.
Now the other questions are that I don't believe another You To make that clarification, I'm listening. You don't always have to ask a question and you don't have to actually act like you're on your own game show here just to talk, to talk, to talk because we're just repeating what they said. So in many cases I don't want to be that guy so just wanted to make that clear to the public. We're speaking to the public in a way where we're expecting them to be intelligent. Everybody's intelligent out there but we speak differently sometimes up here. Politicians forget. So, I wanted to make that clarification and thanks for sticking with us. Appreciate it.
Council Member Bridge?
Mine's a pretty simple one. I was wondering if we could get a schedule of upcoming rate studies. We have all the utilities and I've lost track of when the solid waste is coming and when water is coming If we could get that, at least a schedule just so I can understand it. Get some support on that please? All right, I think I got three there.
Pardon? Yeah, there's water and wastewater
coming. Yeah, there may be others. I've lost track. I've lost the bubble.
3:50 – 3:5611 turns
Okay, very good. I wanted to... Got a comment letter back from Caltrans about The myth that there was going to be a roundabout proposed at Sweeney Road and Highway 246. So I got a response back, I'll provide it to the clerk and they can go out to the public so they can be amazed about this $7.1 million anticipated roundabout to go with Sweeney Road so they can get pedestrian access out of the county's monster shelter.
Next thing is we did get something from the city attorney today and it's going to be on the next agenda, the next meeting right? And that was the analytics for the rebate. Right? Where Victor got 27 things wrong? Okay never mind. The rebate there was 107 of the rebates that were out there Flaws, mistakes, errors or otherwise. So that document is not a public document out there for people to review and I guess it's coming back so we can decide what to do?
Yeah, that'll be on the next meeting.
Okay very good. I think that's very telling about something that was amazing anyhow. So we have that one, the next thing is for a request for the Utility Commission. I've gone to just about all utility commission meetings and it's pretty discouraging when there's nobody there from staff and we can't have a commission that's advisory to the council if we don't have that.
And I don't know what we can or can't do as far as requesting this city manager to The directors are the supers of these departments representing, but we need to know what the heck's going on at these facilities. And they need a report to the people who own these facilities. Is there something we need to do? You to do your best to get those people there?
I could talk to the utility director. I'm not familiar, I thought they were mainly showing up but I can review that and...
It was a ten minute meeting and we had little or nothing said We used to have the meetings and people would describe what was going on. As a utility commissioner having there, we had conservation, we had Wi-Fi at that time still, and every major four utilities were there along with finance. And the finance was graphing the curves so we actually knew what was going on.
We knew where we were or where we weren't. You graph year over year you can find out what's going on with the money. And you can see when we're in a catastrophe. You might know, but the public needs to know. It's just that the reports are better than they were six months ago? But it's still... I mean, you're overseeing tens of millions of dollars and it's a ten-minute meeting.
Pretty embarrassing. And I don't even know how often it's even noticed. Is the meeting noticed? So the public knows what's going on. It's our PUC, it's our Public Utility Commission and if we could get some more base in the voice so to say, they'd get something going along with that meeting. I mean, Lady Hewlett is very concerned. It would be nice if she was able to get to the commission And then they can advise to us. And she could still come too but I mean, there's significant errors that are going on and we need, we need to step it up. I know COVID things went away and etc etc. Which brings me as well you were gonna appoint somebody? You still have somebody for the committee if not i've got somebody for the commission it's been two years
and you
don't have
anybody on it yet. I do have someone it's very interesting he's received the application he's just had all right
that'd be good two years and get filled All right. And that brings me back to the last item that's in here, so I did a little research on a sewer bill and I'm not going to go into full length of it but one of the parameters that got taken out of that is you used to only be able to go up two units a year of rate increase on a customer. So that's a variable that got out of the gameplay. So when things get a little wonky now and that's when we get people's bills going up, Three hundred and sixty percent. We used to have a little slide on it, they only went up two percent or two units is all they could go up in analyzing this bill here. It's not the only one I'm getting one or two a week. I'm having to bump into somebody like hey what did you do?
And I get it but certain variables are coming to play it's not as smoothed out when it was on a five-year averaging and I think we need to bring that back and bring it back fast about what we did put in this. Mr. Cross, you know what I'm saying? The two-unit limiter?
It was actually four units but I know what you're talking about.
Okay. I was told two so even four would have been nice but can you bring that back at the next meeting so we can see what's going on? Bring that whole presentation that we approved already And along with some of the things that we didn't realize weren't going to go along with this. Can you do that for us? Yeah, I can do that. Okay. I don't know if there's something else in there but we also need to find a way because what I'm finding out right now is if somebody has one month of a spike for some reason It's
3:56 – 3:574 turns
Just to be 100% consistent, that request should go through the city manager as well.
Yeah yeah I'm sorry I was just trying to get him requested. I just wanted to make sure he could do it before I went to the city manager. Mr. City Manager are we okay? He was on his phone and I think he ordered pizza for us. If you want to do a council request we can bring him back. I just wanted to make sure that you'd be able to pull this off. I don't know if
I'd have to talk to Bob or
Bob can answer it for himself, but... I'm learning new things all the time about what all of a sudden didn't happen. So anyhow, I'll just do that. So through the City Manager to Mr. Cross, could you bring that? I've got support here, alright? Okay, we good? Yeah, Trinidad LAFCO and SPCAG and APC... Representing the City of Lompoc. With that we will adjourn until, what are we adjourning to? October 20th at 630 p.m.