City Council — June 24, 2026

I would like to call the June 24th, 2026 meeting of the Camarillo City Council, Camarillo Sanitary District, Camarillo Library Board and successor agency to order if the city clerk would do roll please.

Councilman Santangelo? Here. Vice Mayor Martinez Bravo? Here. Council Member Kildee?

Here

Council Member Tremblay? Here Mayor Tennyson?

Here And with that, Madam City Attorney if you could read the closed session items.

Yes thank you Mayor we have two items on closed session a conference with legal counsel existing litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.9 D1 which is the OPV coalition versus Fox Canyon groundwater management agency and a second item under anticipated litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.9D Thank you. We will now recess to closed session.

We will start momentarily as soon I would like to reconvene the Camarillo City Council meeting June 24th, 2026 and ask the city clerk to call roll.

Councilmember Santangelo?

Here.

Vice Mayor Martinez-Bravo? Here. Council Member Kildee? Here Council Member Tremblay? Here Mayor Tennyson?

here in Camarillo, and so good evening. I have a few comments that I'm going to get through in these next 2 minutes 45 seconds. One, I think it's next month that we're going to start being legally required to have both People being able to make public comments using Zoom again, and also there being automatic subtitles when people are speaking due to like state laws. I guess, I think Brown Act but anyway, I'm glad that is going to be a thing.

And then the second matter of business is is once again, you are not doing anywhere near enough to stop the ICE terror on our city. So far as of Monday this Monday 501 people have been kidnapped from Camarillo by ICE for all of Ventura County that number is 1048 people I'm here to talk about the number of people who have been kidnapped by ICE and in the whole 805 area code which is Ventura County, Santa Barbara County, St. Louis Obispo County, the number of people who have been kidnapped by ICE as Yeah, that's a lot of people who've been kidnapped by ICE.

And again this City Council really hasn't done anything to you know even like you know tell VCSO which the city contracts with to at minimum stop protecting ICE vehicles and bothering people who are literally doing their constitutional duty of recording ICE activity. Again, I still don't agree with the Flock Allport cameras being in place. The whopping 25 of them in comparison Oxnar which is multiple times their size has only 19.

Again ICE has the data taken by these Flock Allport cameras and I noticed that also on the agenda is Basically deciding how much the city manager and the City Council, etc. are paid going forward The flock stuff it's taking up a lot of money you have to be more physically responsible than that Thank You have a nice day

Thank You Spencer

Juliana Martinez

Welcome

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Juliana

Martinez.

I'm a resident of Camarillo and I have three young boys that I raised here at home. I wanted to bring some attention to one of the homes that I live near that we're Calling the party house, it's 85 Crestview Avenue. I live a block or so over from this gentleman's house even though I attended last week's meeting and he was told to stop throwing parties. He continued to host back-to-back-to back parties all the way even on Sunday I have been in contact with the sheriff's department. They do go out there.

There's not much that they can do except cite him, which really amounts to nothing. Especially when he's making so much money off of these parties that he's throwing and I'm just coming here to give you some ideas of what has happened outside of my house. So we have party guests and staff that will stay past the party drinking smoking Drugs, alcohol. I've seen someone get arrested on the side of my house. The windows from my children's bedroom can watch all of this and it just keeps us up and I'm looking for some kind of relief. Hoping to come here today to bring attention to the matter to see what the City of Camarillo can do to help us out. Thank you.

Thank you.

Sid Harth Medrotra

Welcome, sir. Thank you, Mayor and good afternoon Council. I come here as you can see with two matters in hand to lay before you. The first is easily dealt with. Over the past 30 years Camarillo and indeed all of California has done away with smoking in public even around civic buildings And I have no doubt we can do away with air pollution of other kinds, such as internal combustion engines and others by the same means if we only begin soon.

Thus far for the first matter. I repeat, by the same means. The second matter is, as Spencer has already said, the so-called Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency has been using this county as their own personal hunting ground for a year now. The number quoted already has been increased by six this very evening. It is now 2,192 perhaps more people abducted for no fault of their own and banished from this country leaving us Poorer, financially and otherwise.

All this for no good reason. ICE has become in effect an autoimmune disease in the body of this nation. The same body attacking itself in search of a non-existent enemy to punish other parts of that body for threats they do not pose. We are appealing to you Council for protection from this We are appealing to you for our own safety and security, more compromised by this agency than by anything they could possibly defend us from.

More ruined by the same. We are asking you to do your due diligence to put an end to this military occupation which has sent so many of us shivering to our beds. Thank you.

David Moorman.

Welcome.

Go ahead, Lydia. I haven't spoken yet so my time hasn't started yet. All

right? Hold the microphone closer please. There you

go. First of all, I'm putting all of Everybody on the city council, I'm putting you on notice right now that if for any way something happens to me because of those flock cameras that are in the city, I am holding each one of you personally responsible. Because I've actually seen and read articles online that this is a movement that's starting I just want to point out a few things.

Americans really have had enough of this mass surveillance, I know it's not going to stop It's going to continue. That's why all the data centers are being built as they are, but they're not just holding all of our Goyslop and Facebook posts and videos. It's not that at all. I've seen reports where they're actually building robots, mass robots in some of those data centers. Whether it's true or not, I don't know, The Flock Camera is an artificial intelligence automated license plate reader.

And there's over 90,000 Flock Cameras across 6,000 communities in the United States and they read 20 billion license plates a month The ultimate goal is to get us out of our cars and I understand that. That's why you've seen in the news pick apart places across the country have just mysteriously burned up So now people that want to be able to fix their old 96 pickup truck that runs this great, they're going to have issues.

It's already coming down to the point I've seen where the state of California and other states are going to make owning cars like this illegal They're going to even do that for cars like mine, which is a very low mileage 2012 Toyota Camry. But you see what is happening in this country. You see manufacturers Ford, Toyota, Dodge General Motors, they are making cars to where you cannot even work on a car like that unless you have proprietary software to work on that vehicle. And what they're trying to do is get us all herded into cities and I do say...

Thank you sir your time's up.

Okay well

thank you Madam Clerk, any more?

No other comments.

Thank you we will move on to council staff and intergovernmental reports I believe we have a report from Mandy and the Camarillo Library

Good evening, Mayor David Tennyson and library trustees. In partnership with the California State Library and California Library Association, Camarillo Public Library received up to $3500 for reimbursement to provide USA 250 Semi-Quincentennial community programming this summer. The USA 250 program shed light on histories, people's stories and political movements related to the Declaration of Independence.

On Sunday July 5th from 11 to 12 p.m., the library will host a colonial music of the Signals Corps. This special musical performance will be provided by the Los Andres Fife and Drums who'll perform signals used during the Revolutionary War while dressed in authentic Virginia militia uniforms. In addition, on Wednesday July 22nd from 11 to 12 p.m., the library will offer a Meet the Presidents program.

Actors will represent presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant and Abraham Lincoln who will discuss their impact on American history in their own words. The library's USA 250 programs are well suited for adults, intergenerational groups, children, teens and families to attend. This concludes my report and I'm happy to address any questions.

Any questions for Mandy? Mr. Kildee?

Yeah, hi Mandy. What's that date again for the presidents again?

The president program is on Wednesday July 22nd.

And what time was that again?

11 to 12 o'clock.

Okay thank you.

Anybody else? Thank You Mandy. Thank you. And now it's time for my fellow council members to go through their calendar. Who would like to go first? Not seeing anyone raise your hand, Mr. Keldee.

I'll start it off. Not a whole lot, on Monday June 15th I went to public safety and emergency preparedness committee meeting and also i just want to let the public know that camera ranch foundation community events or maybe some of my colleagues talk about this but Tomorrow night they have a throwback Thursday from five to eight o'clock at the ranch and if anybody has not had an opportunity to go there, they're a lot of fun. So if you're available try to make it. And that's all I have. Thank You Mr. Tremblay

Thanks Mister mayor for meetings attended on June 15. The O P V a major account holders meeting. June 16 our special meeting of the City Council on June 18 fox Canyon groundwater management authority or agency I'm sorry fiscal committee on Who many in the audience will recall was a long time Camarillo resident prior to his death, a longtime member of the Cuyahoga's Municipal Water District Board and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California board. And Steve, in my view single-handedly did more to raise consciousness of water issues in our geographic area of Cayagas than just about anybody who was an outstanding director. This project is named the Steve Blois Emergency Generators Project.

Many of you may not know that during recent fires when there was a five-day public safety power shutoff, Cayagas utilized those generators to make sure we could all have water and turn on our taps, and that was directly attributable to Steve Bloyce's foresight. We lost him recently passed away I guess about a year and a half ago so it's really fitting that Cayagas dedicated these facilities to him he did a wonderful job On June yesterday, the Cass Education Foundation meeting and then today I had a Fox Canyon GMA board meeting.

And just ditto to what Mr. Kildee said relative to the Camarillo Ranch Foundation events. Thanks to all our volunteers at the Camarillo Ranch Foundation and it's that throwback Thursday tomorrow night so...and that starts their events for the summer. Thank you. That's it. Susan?

Thank you. On June 16th, I attended the special closed session meeting for the OPV litigation. June 18th, Economic Development and Land Use Committee. June 18th also the CPA Executive Committee and June 22nd the Investment Committee. I attended remotely and that's all I have.

Vice Mayor?

Thank you. June 15th I attended the public safety and preparedness committee with council member killed June 16th attended a closed session meeting in June 18th, I attended the economic development and land use committee with council member Santangelo and just a reminder that this Saturday with all these fun summer things happening. This Thank you.

Mine's gonna be short, June 16th along with the rest of council I attended a closed session on OPV and on June 18th I had a VCOG admin committee meeting and that's all I'm going to report. Madam Clerk are there any comments on the consent agenda?

No comments.

Are there any questions from Council? Is there a motion?

I'll

second. We have a motion and a second, please call the roll.

That passes unanimously

Mr. City Manager was there anything you wanted to say in particular about item S on the consent calendar which we just approved

Thank you, Mayor. This request came in working with the Historical Society. They currently are remodeling and have been and raising significant amounts of funds for this item in front of you this evening. It's a city property but it's a wonderful cause and they do great work there so they are going to be making improvements to their facility and a potential future pump station location for the

water district. Thank you, and I notice members of the board of Pleasant Valley Historical Society hopefully are happy with tonight's action and thank you for being here Next up we will go to item T, the Oversized Vehicle Parking Restriction Amendment. And I believe Mr. Klotzl our Public Works Director is going to take this one on.

Yes thank you Mayor and City Council members. This item is to consider an ordinance to amend Municipal Code section 11.20.220 which pertains to oversized vehicle parking restrictions Currently, the Municipal Code prohibits the parking of oversized vehicles between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Mondays through Fridays within the shaded areas shown on the map. That's a part of the current ordinance.

The code does provide for permits to be issued for the temporary parking of oversized vehicles during restricted hours. Public health and safety concerns continue due to the ongoing adverse impacts from on-street parking of large trucks and recreational vehicles throughout many areas of the city. The on-street parking of oversized vehicles reduces visibility for vehicles entering and exiting driveways, it degrades the general appearance of their residential or business environment, and can pose serious public health risks and mixed waste accumulations that are detrimental to the general welfare and safety of the public using the streets and sidewalks.

There has been an increase in parking of oversized vehicles and recreational vehicles after 5 p.m., and on weekends, across all areas of the city. This has negatively impacted driver visibility at driveways and contributed to the degradation of safety and environmental conditions in affected businesses and residential areas. An amendment to the current parking restrictions is recommended to address these ongoing concerns.

A brief overview of the proposed ordinance includes the fact that it aligns local definitions with state law by adopting the California Health and Safety Code and Vehicle Code definition of recreational vehicle for consistency and legal clarity. It standardizes regulations by applying the same rules to recreational vehicles and oversized vehicles, ensuring uniform and equitable enforcement.

The proposed revision addresses around-the-clock safety concerns citywide through extending the parking restrictions to all hours and on all city streets to reduce traffic hazards, visibility obstructions and pedestrian safety risks at all times of day. It also streamlines the permit administration by expanding permit authority to include the city manager or designee improving efficiency and responsiveness for residents seeking accommodations through the permit process.

The proposed ordinance strengthens the program's integrity through clear, transparent criteria for permit decisions and a formal process with written notice to ensure fairness in due process. It also ensures consistency in enforcement by formalizing the parking citation process consistent with how other municipal parking violations are handled And another element is updating the fines to reflect regional standards, adjusting the violation fine from $35 to $100 bringing Camarillo in line with neighboring Ventura County cities and reflecting current enforcement norms.

The recommendation before City Council is to move forward with an ordinance to amend the municipal code as described and as listed here and in the agenda report that concludes the presentation and available for questions.

Any questions from Council? Mr. Kildee.

Yeah, Dave maybe this might be an errant question but when will this be enforced and how will we enforce this potential ordinance?

Councilmember Kildee, if the ordinance passes it will be enforced in a number of ways. It will be proactively as we conduct outreach through our Project HOPE program. If we get reports from citizen complaints about parking where line-of-sight issues are causing public safety concerns there are other instances where some of the oversized vehicles like RVs have their slides out while they're parked on the side of the road that creates other dangerous safety concerns for us and line-of-sight issues, we would enforce it in those kind of situations as well. So it could be proactively as Project HOPE is out in the public dealing with some of our homeless population. It could be reactively or as our patrol people are driving around conducting patrol operations if they see an oversized vehicle parking that's creating a safety hazard they would address it as well

And our Project HOPE team is actively engaging those individuals currently and will continue to do that in the future, and explain to them What potential services are available and keep on top of this issue. And I know we've been working on this for several years, but it's an ongoing situation and we're picking up our game if you will on how to try to alleviate some of this. I didn't know if you wanted to expand on that? I don't know if

there's a homeless person in Camarillo or not, but feel free. Within a day or 2, they're meeting them. They're talking to them. They're finding out what their story is. They're finding out what their needs are and they're trying to connect them to services either here in Camarillo or somewhere in the county of Ventura where services are offered so our Project HOPE team is top-notch. They know who everybody is here that's homeless and they are constantly working to get them the services they need.

I appreciate that and it does not go unnoticed

Any other questions? Madam Clerk, any public comments?

No comments.

Council discussion? Seeing none, do we have a motion? I'll move

to

staff recommendation. We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk?

That passes unanimously

Thank you. We will move on to item U, consideration of an ordinance regarding compensation for members of the City Council and I believe our city attorney is going to run with this one.

Yes, thank you Mayor. So the item before you relates to a consideration for compensation changes for the City Council. This is authorized pursuant to Government Code Section 36516. It does set permissible salary levels for council members of general law cities such as Camarillo. Increases under this ordinance can be set at either 5% or based on a CPI not to exceed 10%.

These adjustments need to be approved prior to a municipal election, and then they become effective starting a new term for a council member. Currently, the City Council's monthly salary is $1,620.56. In addition, the council's practice has been to typically divide the increase that you have considered over two years. You'll see that there is a chart that provides you some historical background of the increases since 2015.

Just as an additional point, increases in compensation may be considered to align with a rising cost of living, increasing demands of public service. Compensation increases can also help ensure that qualified individuals are attracted to and can remain in elected positions supporting effective governance. I'm available to answer any questions you may have.

Any questions from Council? No questions, Madam Clerk. Any public comments?

No comments. And if I'll just make one comment you'll see in the recommendations that again the permissible amount is 5% to be considered so the ordinance currently has just a blank in there for the percentage so based on what the City Council determines that number will be inserted into

Council discussion. Go ahead, Vice Mayor.

Sure, so thank you very much for this. I was actually going to request to add the following language to the ordinance which is any council member may at their sole discretion decline to receive all or any portion of the salary or salary increased authorized by this ordinance by submitting a written waiver to the city clerk It is my understanding that this is something that we can do but I think it is important for full transparency and to make it cleaner, to have it be a part of the ordinance.

Question for the City Attorney. It's already in policy. Is there any benefit to including it in the ordinance? The city's policy already allows for us to decline

Right, so I mean placing an ordinance again just reiterates what's in a policy. So it's really up to the council you're not going to get any additional authorization for that.

Okay Anything else?

Well in addition to that just my discussion on this item is I was actually hoping that I think that aligning this somewhere to where it's similar to an average over the year, it would ensure compensation, that the compensation keeps up with a cost of living. It also would allow to broaden access to public services although these might be modest inflation adjusted compensations they would help I think it's important to. Ensure that people who are serving on the City Council are not just limited to individuals with independent wealth or a flexible financial circumstances.

I can say that personally, I have had to pay for child care, for example, and so I think it's important And I think that does help to strengthen our democracy when you can have a broader representation instead of just having one set, a group. I talked a little bit about the reduction in financial barriers for future candidates and so I would be in support of it and come up with a number that would Probably around the average which would be like a 3.3, 3.5. Council

Member Santangelo did you want to say something?

Sure, thank you. I feel like we have the same discussion every two years. I'm not sure if it's going to come out any differently this time. I agree with Council Member Martinez-Bravo. I think that it's really important that we take a good look at what we're receiving as compensation Because of the access to public service, Councilmember or Vice Mayor Martinez-Bravo used the example of having to pay for child care.

I have a full time job on top of serving for the council and I frequently have to take days off of work in order to fulfill my city council responsibilities. And so that money helps in those times. And so I don't want money to ever be a barrier for somebody to be able to serve, or be able to be attracted to public service, or be able to be retained in public service.

And I like the idea of aligning it with CPI and I would be in favor of that as well.

Mr. Kildee. Okay, in lieu of what's been said I think I certainly don't want to give us as council members it's a service of love here that we do and I wouldn't want to give us more of an increase than any of our city employees do. Having said that I do think it's important that we somewhat keep up with the rate of inflation, and my suggestion is to do 3% for both years. That's my suggestion this year. We can certainly bring it back to policy and have them talk about whether or not we want to do a full CPI. CPI is running a little bit higher now but it is a little bit of a moving target somewhere around 4%, but I know the Fed's goal is about 3%. So that's my suggestion is that we do a 3% for the two years.

Mr. Tremblay? Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Rachel I have a question for you on the staff report. In the government code provision it says it cannot exceed this is the second bullet an amount equal to inflation since January 1 2024 based on this California CPI not to exceed 10% for each calendar year how does that relate to we're now in 2026 How would you interpret that relative to any action taken for, because we're being asked to take action for the 20, let's see the 27 and 28 calendar years. And I'm inclined to agree with both Martita and Susan and Kevin relative to doing a CPI based increase but I'm thinking that from a simplicity standpoint it would be better to do the three in three But I'm, anyway sorry, I'm digressing. How do you interpret that particular clause?

Well, I know when we've worked with finance to try and determine that as well it's a little difficult because we don't have all the CPI information that you would actually need for the 2026 year so we've not used the CPI method and so we would have to go back and determine how to based on this formula because I believe there's a quarter or there's a period of time that is just we don't have yet And maybe, Mark we kind of emailed on this before that it could be in part because when we bring the item yeah we don't quite have the full period of year before the municipal election.

But typically cities do like to bring this well before an election so this is usually when you see these items but if that's something you want us to look into If we were to bifurcate 2027 and 2028, let me give you a hypothetical.

But we would leave aside for the second year the ability to shape an ordinance that would provide for CPI. That way, an ordinance could be drafted it would go to our policy committee you take a complete look at it that would set the table I guess for 29 and 30 etc but we could even make those changes for 28 could we not if we bifurcated it?

If you just wanted to do one year, it just needs to be done before so it could just be for 2027 and then that would apply to 27 and 28. And then before your next election when is the so if we have this elections in 2026 so before the next 2028 yes it

wouldn't be until November 2028 but if this were if this wait a minute if this increase were approved when does it take effect?

January 1, 2027.

So it's always on a calendar year basis? I guess what I was trying to figure out is if we did a some certain right now could we come back in the second year beginning January 1 of 2028 and put into place an ordinance that would be more CPI focused. I mean, I hope I'm articulating it right.

Yeah so if you just wanted to do an increase that would apply for 2027 then you could come back and study the other issue to address what you want it to be for 2028 potentially sort of a go forward.

Okay, I mean, I'm ambivalent on this. I happen to agree with Councilmember Kildee relative to the 3% and 3%. But on the other hand, I do agree with you. I think a better basis to do this on a go forward is to put a CPI formula in place. So what I'm suggesting is maybe we ought to consider doing bifurcating it and doing a 3% increase for 2027 Yes, effective January 1, 2027. And during the 2027 year we look at amending the ordinance and then any increase based on CPI could be if we were to adopt something in 2027 any increase in CPI could be in effect for the year 2028.

Before the next election.

Yeah, right?

And then maybe that's when we can figure out how the CPI formula works. I'm most... Honestly, I've not used that in other jurisdictions so we would spend some time to kind of figure out how that works.

Well if you came back to us and said it's not going to work, can't bifurcate it then we could still take an action tonight based on that hypothetical doing a 3% for 2027

Correct. I mean, I know it can work. I'm just saying I haven't looked into it but I know what we can figure that out once you take it to policy.

Question for the City Attorney if we only approve this for 2027 the way I read your memo is that we could not change it for 2028 because it's in an election year? It has to be passed in an election year?

It has to be passed prior to... To be effective it has to be passed Prior to a municipal election and then it goes into effect once your term starts.

So if we only approved an increase for 2027 tonight, we wouldn't have an opportunity to change it for 2028?

Well then you'd be almost in the same boat you are right now because it would be 2020 8 right now, 2026. So before that next election you'd be able to do another consideration again the way you've done it here at the city if you tend to split you've taken one amount and you split it over two years but technically you can just do the one year and then it's three percent and that goes forward until you do another change but you can do it in 2028

Let's say we tried it a different way, because I do think that the inflation amount is an appropriate benchmark. And I think that's where you're coming from Council Member Kildee and I think my colleagues are coming from. Flip it around let's say you were to do 3 and 3 tonight could you come back in 2027 and amend the ordinance so that effective January 1 of 2028 there would be a CPI increase during 2028. Notwithstanding that you would have adopted under that hypothetical, you would have adopted 3% tonight?

Yeah I think in general you're supposed to do it one time but I'd have to go back and look. There is sort of this consideration that you do at one time and not repeat it but I haven't looked at that specifically to be able to respond on that. You could definitely do the three percent for 2027 Look into those different options for the council.

So I know the mayor asked a question, so you're asked the question on this. So you could do a 3% for 2027 but during 2027 come back and revisit this. You could come back and advise us then we could take action in a separate action sometime during 2027 that would be effective for

2020? I think it would actually be in 2028 you would do it.

Yeah,

so... Because we've already done a 2027 increase. So...

But I'm thinking about what the... Let's see... Okay, sorry to go down on the weeds on this. No, no. If you did 3% tonight that would be effective January 1 of 2027. That rate would be 3% to the 1620 or that amount That would last through December 31 of 2027. If you wanted to increase that for 2028, Based on that hypothetical, you'd have to come back at some point during 2027. It's almost

like two increases in one year is what I'd be concerned about. I know we'd make it effective the next year but there is this language in here that kind of talks about the 5% You know, each calendar year from the last adjustment. I think that we could probably do that. I just don't want to misadvise on that because again the practice has generally been to split you basically say oh we take the five percent and we split it in some way is what you've done over the years so if we're going to do a one-time increase and then come back the next year. I believe it's permissible, I've just not looked...I don't see the statutes prohibiting it.

But the limit is 5% per year? Correct. Not 5% for the overall two-year period? Right. Okay. I think our

city manager has something to say If I could just make a potential recommendation is that potentially the council could either select a hard number 3 and 3. Now or 3, 3%, and then CPI in the second year and then we can determine the parameters in which that that CPI is determined in the second year is potentially want to put words in your mouth council member but Or you just go with the three and three.

Can that occur under the government code?

Well, it's one or the other right so it's the 5% or the inflation amount. So I guess you could do one year of the 5% and then one year under the 5%, and then the next year do a CPI. We don't know what the number is yet, so we'd have to put that in later so it's clear what the increase is because you don't have the CPI for the future if you're going to do it for 2028.

So as of now we can, it's not I just want to get clarity because I would be in support of this first year 3% and then take it back to study for CPI the following year. And find out what the CPI is? And then we can have that

discussion back. I believe that is possible Yes, I believe that is possible. But I guess I just don't want to say for sure in case I'm wrong but I don't see why not because we're able to split this into two now why can't we then take another ordinance next year to address that other year?

Okay, my turn for comments before you make your motion Vice Mayor. Two years ago I was one of the no votes on this thing it passed three to two. I did decline the increase for those two years. I'm likely to decline at this time but I will not vote against my fellow council members on whatever motion is made this evening. I will support it and With the caveat that I'll probably decline it once again. Now one of the things I would like to say and it's not part of this ordinance tonight, I'd like to look at our vehicle allowance.

of $200 a month because I burned through $200 every 2 weeks with wear and tear and fuel on my car. So, I'd like that to be something we look at going forward increasing the vehicle allowance for council members because of the amount of driving we have to do going to meetings throughout the county not just in Camarillo. So now is there a motion?

I can motion to do that. Okay so I can motion to. I can motion to request to add the language to the ordinance indicating again any council member may at their say at their sole discretion. Declined to receive all or any portion of the salary or salary increase authorized by this ordinance by submitting a written waiver to the city clerk that's Portion of it is to bring it back for it to go to policy committee and then bring that information back.

Is that fine, Rachel? Yeah. I didn't

know also if you wanted to just put that first comment as a recital versus putting it in an ordinance. Just generally those sort of policy things are better placed in a resolution or the recitals versus your ordinance because that's not really the statute portion of it. That's more of just a policy. So if you're open to that but I mean if you want to present it either way

I would be open to that for it to be like in the form. Yeah, we

have recitals here that discuss that and then we can indicate it. Yeah.

I'm fine with that.

So we have a motion do we have a second? I'll second it. Okay. We have a motion a second. I know Mr. Tremblay has something to say.

I want to turn the mic on. Would you consider amending the motion to say that we're sending it back to the city attorney to look at with the intention that beginning for 2028 and in future years, the increase be pegged to consumer price index increases? Yes. I just wanna make sure that there's some clarification regarding the intent.

Yes, I can modify my motion for that.

I just have a quick question before we vote. I believe protocol, at least for me in the past is that

the declination declining this goes through the human resources Director not the city clerk and that's who I've filled out the paperwork with the last two years or so. That's right for clarification it should be through the HR director and not the city clerk.