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.0:12 – 0:189 turns
Roll call, called by City Clerk
Show transcript
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled, click to expand
Thank you, moving on to item number four approval of the agenda.
I'll make a motion to approve.
I hear your motion second.
Second.
A motion and a second all in favor? Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay, motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
Moving on to item number five, presentations. Proclaiming Childhood Cancer Awareness Month, item number 5A. Proclaiming Childhood Cancer Awareness Month September 2026. Whereas during childhood cancer awareness month we honor the hundreds of thousands of children who have faced or continue to face the devastating challenges of cancer And we stand with the families who have experienced the heartbreaking loss of a child. And whereas childhood cancer remains one of the most difficult challenges facing children and families, affecting not only young patients but also parents, siblings, educators, caregivers and entire communities.
And whereas significant progress has been made in the treatment of childhood cancer resulting in improved survival rates and better outcomes for many children. While continued research and investment are essential to developing more effective treatments, and ultimately finding cures. And whereas childhood children battling cancer demonstrate extraordinary courage and resilience as they face treatments, hospital visits, recovery, and the disruption of everyday childhood experiences. such as school, friendships, sports and play. And whereas Childhood Cancer Awareness Month provides an opportunity to raise awareness about the impact of childhood cancer, recognize the importance of research and access to quality care and support organizations and individuals working to improve outcomes for children and their families.
And whereas the City of Fillmore recognizes the importance of supporting families in our own community who are affected by the Childhood Cancer and appreciates the compassion shown by healthcare professionals, caregivers, teachers, volunteers, nonprofits and community members who provide assistance and encouragement during difficult times. And whereas we honor the brave children who are currently fighting cancer remember those whose lives were taken too soon and celebrate childhood cancer survivors Whose strength and perseverance inspire us all.
And whereas the City of Fillmore encourages its residents to learn more about childhood cancer, support affected families, participate in awareness efforts, and contribute to the ongoing research for better treatments and cures. Now therefore I, Albert Mendez, Mayor of the City of Fillmore do hereby proclaim September 2026 as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month and the City of Fillmore encouraged All residents to join us in honoring children and families affected by childhood cancer, and supporting efforts to raise awareness and advance research, and ultimately end childhood cancer.
Thank you.
And moving on to item 5B, proclaiming Constitution Day and Citizenship Day September 17th, 2026. Proclaiming Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, September 17th, 2026. Whereas for more than two centuries the United States Constitution has served as the foundation of our nation's government providing a framework for self-government and establishing principles that continue to guide our democracy. And whereas the constitution was crafted through compromise and collaboration bringing together states and communities with differing It is a great honor and privilege for me to be able to speak on behalf of the United States of America. The United States of America has a long-standing interest to form a united nation whose government derives its power from the people, and whereas Constitution Day and Citizenship Day observed annually on September 17 commemorates While celebrating the enduring principles of our Constitution, we also recognize that many of the rights and freedoms enshrined in it were denied to large portions of our population for generations.
And whereas we honor the countless Americans throughout our history whose leadership courage and sacrifices have helped our nation move closer to realizing its founding ideals of equality freedom justice and opportunity for all And whereas the City of Fillmore recognizes that our democracy is strengthened by an informed, engaged and active citizenry and encourages residents to understand their constitutional rights and responsibilities.
And participate in the civic life of our community. And whereas Constitution Day and Citizenship Day provide an opportunity for the residents of Fillmore to reflect upon the principles of our constitution, and recommit ourselves to the ideals of liberty, equality, and opportunity, and representative government. Now, therefore I Albert Mendez the mayor of the City of Fillmore do hereby proclaim September 17th 2026 as Constitution Day and Citizenship Day in the city of Fillmore and encourage all residents to recognize the importance occasion by learning about our constitution celebrating the responsibilities and privileges privilege of citizenship and participating in the civic life of our community.
Thank you Moving on to 5C, Proclaiming Latino Heritage Month September 15th through October 15th, 2026. Whereas the City of Fillmore recognizes and celebrates the rich history, culture, traditions and contributions of Latino communities. And whose heritage is deeply woven into the fabric and identity of our community. And whereas Latino residents, families, workers, business owners and educators, students, veterans, community leaders and public servants have made significant contributions to the vitality, prosperity and quality of life in Fillmore and continue to strengthen our community through their leadership, service, dedication and vision. And whereas Latino Heritage Month observed annually from September 15th through October 15th provides an opportunity to recognize and celebrate the histories cultures traditions and accomplishments of people whose ancestors came from Spain Mexico and the Caribbean Central America, South America and other Spanish speaking communities.
And whereas the history of Fillmore is enriched by generations of Latino families whose contributions to agriculture business education public service arts culture and community life have helped shape the city we know today. And whereas the City of Fillmore values the diversity of its residents recognizes that our community is stronger when every individual and family has the opportunity to participate contribute and thrive And whereas Latino Heritage Month is an opportunity for all Fillmore residents to learn and appreciate the experiences of Latino communities, celebrate our shared history, and recognize that many ways of Latino culture and traditions enrich the cultural life of our city.
And whereas the City of Fillmore remains committed to fostering a welcoming, inclusive, and respectful community where all residents are treated with dignity and where diversity is recognized as a source of strength And whereas this month. And every month, we honor the countless contributions of Latino residents and families to the Fillmore community and celebrate their continuing role in building a vibrant future for generations to come. Now therefore I Albert Mendez Mayor of the City of Fillmore do hereby proclaim September 15th through October 15th 2026 as Latino Heritage Month in the city of Fillmore and encourage all residents to celebrate the rich heritage history culture and contributions of our Latino community
Moving on to item 5D, proclaiming POW-MIA recognition day September 18th 2026. Proclaiming POW MIA recognition date whereas on POW slash MIA recognition day we honor the service courage and sacrifice of the members of the United States Armed Forces who went to war to defend our safety and freedoms but never returned home And whereas thousands of American service members remain unaccounted for from conflicts throughout our nation's history, including World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War. And the war in Afghanistan. And whereas some service members were taken as prisoners of war and never returned to their families, while others remain missing in action and their whereabouts remain unknown. And whereas we honor the brave Americans by keeping their memories alive, by recognizing the profound sacrifices made by them and their families.
And whereas the families are missing and unaccounted for service members have demonstrated extraordinary strength and perseverance in the continued efforts to seek answers and bring their loved ones home. And whereas POW MIA Recognition Day was established in 1979 following the advocacy of families of missing Vietnam War service members, providing our nation with an annual opportunity to remember those who have not returned and reaffirm our commitment to accounting for them.
And whereas the city of Fillmore recognizes the importance of honoring our nation's veterans, active duty military personnel, prisoners of war and those missing in action and the families who have carried their memories and sacrifices across generations. And whereas the City of Fillmore joins communities throughout California and the nation in displaying the POW MIA flag and remembering the service
members who remain unaccounted for, reaffirming the solemn promise you are not forgotten. Now therefore I Albert Mendez, Mayor of the City of Fillmore Do hereby proclaim September 18th, 2026 as POW MIA Recognition Day in the City of Fillmore. Encourage all residents to pause and remember the service and sacrifice of our prisoners-of-war those missing in action and their families.
Moving on to item 5E Proclaiming Preparedness Month September 26 Whereas the City of Fillmore is committed to protecting the health, safety and well-being of all residences businesses and visitors. And whereas the emergencies and natural disasters including wildfires earthquakes floods and extreme weather can strike at any time without warning. And whereas individual and community preparedness significantly reduces the loss of life property damage and recovery time following a disaster.
And whereas the State of California and communities nationwide recognize September as Preparedness Month to encourage all people to take proactive steps such as making an emergency plan, building an emergency supply kit and staying informed. And whereas every household school Business and agency shares the responsibility to be prepared and to look out for one another when a disaster strikes. And now, therefore be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Fillmore does hereby proclaim September 2026 as Preparedness Month and urges all residents, local businesses, schools, community organizations to take proactive steps toward emergency preparedness and join in building a safer, stronger, and more resilient community by making an Emergency Plan today.
Thank you. Okay, now
moving on to item six public comments So Before we begin public comment, I want to explain how this section of the meeting works. Each speaker will have three minutes to address the council under the Brown Act. The council is generally prohibited from discussing or acting on items that are not on tonight's agenda. This means that while we welcome and value your comments, council members will not be able to respond and follow up or ask follow-up questions or engage in back and forth dialogue during this time.
We are listening carefully and your comments become part of the public record. If your comment relates to an item not in tonight's agenda, state law allows us a brief response to clarify factual matters or refer the item to future consideration but no substantive discussion or decision can happen tonight. With that we'll begin the public comment. We do have public comments but they are for items on the agenda. Is there anybody online?
That has any public comment?
No one online.
Okay, thank you So then
moving on to item number seven City Council reports recommendations comments committee commission and board reports Council Member Garnica.
Okay, just a couple of items for me. So today actually I participated in the Los Vets of Fillmore and Piru we have an monthly luncheon. For those of you who are not familiar with the organization basically it's Veterans, any veterans of any branch of the service we get together from Fillmore or Piru. We get together and have lunch at El Pescador here in town. It's the first, I believe it's the first or second Tuesday of each month. So anyone out there if you're a veteran and you'd like to get together with other veterans, it's a growing organization. Today we had a record of 45 veterans I'd like In any of the branches, please feel free to join us.
The president is Danny Golson and then Ernie Villegas if you know Ernie he's also one of the officers of the club. It's just a great time it's there's not a lot of structure to it we're just really socializing and talking about what our families are up to and occasionally talk about our time in service so participate in that today that was great
John, I just want to ask a question. Is there a flyer? Just as individuals we could share.
I don't have a flyer for that but we are organizing the Veterans Day parade that's going to happen in November obviously for Veterans Day and so I do have a flyer for that. I have a picture of that I can probably share with whoever needs it but yes I'll see about getting a flyer for next time. Okay, and then the second thing was so we have tomorrow I'm president of the Rotary Club. And tomorrow we're very honored to have Assemblymember Jackie Irwin is going to be speaking at the Rotary Club.
Our regular meeting is on Wednesday. Again, El Pescador, we really like going there at El Pescador at 7am so Jackie Irwin if you are interested at all now understand that the Rotary Club is non-political So what that means is we have limited, so if you're concerned, well Jackie Irwin is ex-party or whatever. We purposely make sure that the topics that are discussed by any politician that comes to speak to us are nonpartisan. So that means that she's going to be limited pretty much to what are affecting the residents of her district, of the assembly district she represents.
If you'd like to come attend and listen to her, please feel free to join us. It's tomorrow morning at 7 AM. Jackie Irwin will be coming to speak about things that are going on at the state level. So that's it. Thank you.
0:18 – 0:286 turns
Okay, thank you very much. I do have a few updates. I do have a few updates, sorry. Okay so last week the Ventura Regional Sanitation District did have our meeting. It was pretty much business as usual. We ratified emissions testing for the toll and landfill flare and as well as our flare over in Oxnard. Let me see here we also one thing That I wanted to point out here that is we actually, we approved and authorized a budget for our attorney.
And this is to explore very interesting. This is to explore potential water rights that the Ventura Regional Sanitation District may have up in I'm pronouncing it right, the Cuyama Valley. So this is a valley that's up sort of past like Highway 33 behind the hills of Santa Barbara going up and it's a valley that is very much large carrot farmers, boathouse farms and others.
The Ventura Regional Sanitation District has an old landfill no longer in use. It's very small but what's happening up in the Cuyama Valley is they are adjudicating water rights And that's really important to know because as we all know, as across our county and across California the adjudication of water rights is very big. If you are a land owner and you have adjudicated water rights to that water in your land, water is gold, as we know in California and elsewhere.
The sanitation district has an interest in exploring whether or not you know what sort of trying to see the cost-benefit analysis really of investing, potentially having to be a part of the adjudication which means courts and potential litigation. There's sort of a pool of the big fish as they say which are the large You know, the large landowners, large ag. But there's also a separate pool for the smaller farmers and the smaller landowners which the Toronto Regional Sanitation District would fall under. It's only about 10 acres that we have up there. Three acres is covered dormant landfill and seven acres is basically barren land in this landfill. So I'm looking forward to seeing sort of, I'll give you an update and see if we wind up moving forward again.
It's it is a cost benefit analysis and we just approved for our lawyer to keep exploring and to kind of come back in a couple of months and let us know sort of the best You know, his opinion really a legal opinion of what our case is moving forward. And this all comes back to why you know why is the Ventura Regional Sanitation District looking at Cuyama Valley and that sort of thing? And what the district has in mind and has been working towards is Making sure that we stay viable, that we stay being the publicly funded landfill and water wastewater service here in Ventura County.
If there were to move over, if Ventura Regional Sanitation District was to no longer exist and move over to private industry, rate payer rates will skyrocket. And so part of our duty here as being part of the sanitation district board is to really explore all the different avenues to make sure that we stay financially viable as a district. I thought that was an interesting area to let you all know about. That's one update on the sanitation district, and also we are continuing to look at other means as well looking at natural gas and other areas so I'll have some more updates too on other possible areas.
I also was part of the Southern California Edison Government Advisory Panel or the GAP and we did have our GAP meeting last week. The topic of the GAP meeting is actually focused on the growing role of data centers as large load customers within the service area. So it wasn't an opinion giver from Edison about data centers, and at the beginning of the conversation there also was They welcomed feedback from those that are on the gap, but it was more of a conversation just about what data centers, how Edison would be working with communities and how they're basically working around discussing data centers, explaining The power needed for the Dana Center. So it's a continuing conversation, there was a lot of concern as you can imagine from a lot of the folks that were on the call and local elected officials throughout Southern California.
And so they said that this is the beginning of this conversation and we're gonna have more of them as we continue. Another small, I guess update and we'll just want to let the public know about this. We'll see if anything winds up coming of it but we were contacted by our Senate Pro Tem Monique Limon's office last week and this end of the year in the Legislative cycle at the end of September is also the time where the supplemental budget comes through the state legislature. And by supplemental budget, meaning the budget was signed by the governor at the end of June I believe but there are trailer bills and there's supplemental things that you know projects Initiatives that the legislatures, legislators across the state are including in supplemental budget.
So I'm glad that Senator Limon's office reached out. We did provide some areas here in the city of Fillmore as particularly the request for infrastructure needs. We did supply a Senate pro tems office with infrastructure needs and fill more. We do not know, but I would love to give a very positive update next time. But I think it's just a sign of us having a good relationship with the Senate Pro Tem's office and hopefully discontinuing that relationship as well as with our legislators, not just here in California but also in Congress as well. So I think that's my general updates.
Thank you. Thank you Councilmember Villasenor.
Councilmember Brugge?
Yeah, fortunately we had a very busy week more with being away from home and having visitors at our house I didn't have any meetings on the calendar but I do have four coming up this week so I'll be able to report back on all of these meetings including The Ventura County Transportation Commission and we are really starting to look at how, what preparation needs to be done for the Olympics that'll be here before we know it.
And it's going to even though we don't have any of the Olympics occurring here in our county one of the speakers we had recently pointed out that you might think you won't be impacted but when People that visit the LA area where most of the events are being held, they will not be going to every event. And when they're here in town and they don't have an event to go to, they're gonna wanna tour around. So it affects, it will affect the county of Ventura as well. But anyway, so by next week I'll have four different meetings to report back on.
And I just also want to remind everyone that I have my standing Wednesday night after council meeting tomorrow night. Porch Talk at my home. And it's been a huge success, I think and I'm getting positive feedback. And community members are welcome to attend and just talk about anything film or related so please join us.
Thank you so much.
Very quiet week for me, nothing back to report but looking forward to a couple of meetings that I have going on for the next couple weeks. Thank you.
Yeah, just one quick note so I literally just stepped out of a meeting before this meeting that I forgot to report on which was the May Festival committee meeting. So what this, this committee is set up for is to try to revive The traditional Fillmore May Festival, which went away a few years ago but before that had been on a tradition for literally decades before that.
And so in any case I was wearing my hat as Rotarian as Rotary President, but it looks like it's making progress and I can report The subcommittees are being formed and it's looking like we're going to have the May Festival at the end of May, the last weekend of May. I believe that's the 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th. So mark your calendars be ready to have some fun and it looks like that's coming back.
0:28 – 0:3413 turns
Thank you, Council Member Guarnica. All my committees were dark as well so I will be meeting on my committees next week so I have nothing to report. Council Member Guarnica stole my thunder. I was going to report on the May Festival but thank you, Council Member. Moving onto the consent calendar but before I ask for an approval, I do have one speaker on item 8B.
It's going to be Laura Bartels. Welcome. You have three minutes.
Thank you, Mayor and Council. Good evening my name is Laura Bartels I'm the director of Santa Clara Valley Legal Aid Our entire community benefits when an illegal eviction is stopped and a family is able to avoid homelessness. When a disabled person qualifies for disability state or federal benefits, when a parent receives unpaid child support all of these people can avoid being on the public welfare system.
Santa Clara Valley Legal Aid has been in North Fillmore since 1996. We are celebrating our 30th year now of providing free legal aid to the residents of the Santa Clara Valley. We assist people in tenant law, consumer fraud, social security disability appeals, wage and employment matters We also help people do general self-help things like make sure they get a receipt when they pay for cash, keep copies of agreements, how to make sure that they get rental deposits back, save paycheck stubs for proof of employment. Regular things that can help allow them access to benefits in the future.
Traditionally we are an all volunteer organization In the past, we've received support from the United Way and from Helping Hands. We currently receive liability malpractice insurance for our lawyers through Ventura County Bar Association. And I'm here tonight on the consent matter. We have received an agreement to be able to continue operating our legal aid in North Fillmore. And there are two parts of the agreement that I'm hoping With the assistance of the council or on the city attorney that We can have taken out and that is a requirement that I provide $1,000,000 worth of car insurance And also workers comp we are all volunteers. I don't have anybody That's being paid and For and I don' have any I don''t drive clients anywhere. I don't have anything delivered there There's no nexus between a car and legal aid.
I am very grateful of the support of the city of Fillmore for allowing us to be here, to operate at the North Fillmore Community Storefront. We're open every Thursday night at six o'clock first come first served. And since 1996 we have served over 16,000 people in our community providing free legal aid. Does anyone have any questions?
Can we check with our attorney just clarifying
questions. I'm not the risk manager, I don't set the insurance amounts. We would need to ask the city manager since the risk manager's not here tonight. That's
Jackie Herrera. This is the first time I'm hearing about that, Laura, so I don' think it should be an issue if we remove those two costs. When the staff was directed to bring this forward, I thought it had all been worked out. So we can definitely remove the workers compensation items since you don't have any employees And then the automotive one. Just leave the general liability. I have provided that. Okay, perfect.
Should be fine? Thank you. Again, I appreciate the support of the community. I believe that access to justice makes us all stronger. Thank you.
Thank you Laura. Okay thank you. Yes,
Council Member Guarnica. Just a quick comment I think the work that you're doing is phenomenal and that it's such a critical part of our democracy to provide legal aid for those people that cannot afford it and my understanding is it's part of each lawyer is required to do a certain amount of pro bono work but I think what you're talking about goes above and beyond that and I just want to thank you so much for that service to our community
Laura, I want to echo the sentiments of my colleague here. Thank you so much for all your
work. I would just like to move the consent calendar given the two amendments to this agreement.
Okay is there a second? I'll second it. Okay we got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, motion passes. So
moving on to item number 9A, new business and that is the Santa Paula Hospital future healthcare services in the Santa Clara River Valley and Blue Ribbon Task Force representation.
Thank you Mayor. At the last meeting, which was August 27th, the Council Member Christina Villasenor requested support to place an agenda item which is part of the procedural process that the council follows. And it was to discuss the recent actions taken by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors regarding the Santa Paula Hospital. The report that was included in your agenda provided background and I'm sure everyone's aware of like, the action taken. So tonight staff is recommending that the City Council discuss the August 18th action of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors concerning the future health care That concludes my presentation and passing it to you Mayor so that you can initiate the conversation.
0:35 – 0:416 turns
Okay, thank you. I do have some public speakers so let's hear from our public speakers first. First off, I have Laura Espinosa. Welcome, Laura.
Good evening mayor, council members, city staff. A special shout out to my former colleague Council Member Brogy. Good to see everyone here working together on behalf of the residents of the Santa Clara Valley and I've dubbed it The valley of unfulfilled promises because on two major issues that impact both Santa Paula and Fillmore. I'm a resident of Santa Paula by the way, a former council person and the current chair of the Gold Coast Health Plan Commission that oversees all Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us today. I'm going to be speaking as one of the county Medi-Cal recipients but here I am speaking as a resident and member of Santa Paula Latino Town Hall.
This issue is of great importance. There are two major issues that I think our residents in particular are greatly impacted Both of those, Santa Paula Latino Town Hall has consistently worked on for since our existence 30 years ago. These are four main pillars for our organization access to higher ed, access to quality health care, civic engagement And affordable housing, those four main issues impact predominantly the Santa Clara Valley. So you know the outcome of the vote on August 18th and why I say this is a valley of unfulfilled promises because we have been promised not only for a community college which we continue all property owners to pay on since 2002 And that has not been constructed yet. We all pay on it for our health care in this valley, and I'm sure you're aware of H.R.
1, the big bad ugly bill proposed by the national administration. And it's going to have severe repercussions to all of our healthcare, not just Medi-Cal recipients, all of our healthcare. I'm here to support you and your ad hoc committee. I want to say with all due respect, seven years after the fact it's a little late. The Blue Ribbon Committee was formed seven years ago when Latino Town Hall forced the county to a sit down meeting to reopen the OB unit at Santa Paula Hospital.
As a result of that, we also forced them because they never go willingly. You know that. So we forced them to have town halls in both Fillmore and Santa Paula to hear from the residents how they would like to see their health care delivered in this valley. From that plans were made. We have the artist renderings of a whole complex Am I close to time here? Yes,
your time is up.
Okay. So we have the renderings for a complex promises made promises unfulfilled and we are we have recently sent your city manager letter in your mayor requesting a meeting as we have in Santa Paula to discuss what joint efforts can be done. Thank you for your time, and we would love to sit down with you to discuss it in more detail than three minutes
allows. Thank you, Lara. Next up we have Rick Castanero. Welcome, Rick. Again, you have three
minutes. Thank you and good evening Council, Mayor, and staff. We're here tonight to talk to you about an issue that we've been working on for many, many years. For me, this started with mental health and I'm very proud to say that right now Fillmore's Mental Health Clinic that is by Ventura County is doing excellent work. Your service rates have risen but I have to tell you I cannot imagine a community without a school, without churches or without a hospital And what we're being told right now is that we can go to another place to get service. What the county is doing is they're going to drop the bill on people who can't afford it.
Right now, we're going to look at giving a $5,000 ambulance bill to community members. It's devastating for families and What we want is for you to know that this ad hoc committee is very important. Right now, there are three health organizations that are interested in buying that hospital because they say they know they can make it work. Why the county can't make it work? There's a long history to that.
But it doesn't matter. The work and the advocacy that you can do for your community as leaders is more than enough. We just have to make sure we hold the county accountable to keeping their promise. I was on the Blue Ribbon Committee when it started, and I was there for about a year. And at that point, I read into it and didn't feel that things were gonna happen.
And I was told by CFOs nothing was going to happen with that because the county has to pay off the Ventura County Medical Center. So they're trying to move every patient they can there to take care of budget issues and if you don't want to take my word for it, look at the Ventura County Taxpayers Association articles. It shows it all right there. We've collaborated with them and we're still collaborating with them because we feel the taxpayers deserve better.
You have a chance with this ad hoc committee to do what's right for your constituents, and I hope you will engage in this dialogue and continue to serve your community as you can. Thank you. Thank you Rick.
0:42 – 0:5617 turns
Next up we have Chris Espinoza. Welcome Chris. You have three minutes.
Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and members of the Council. I'm here to speak on this important issue and to stand with the council as they contemplate what role they can play in ensuring the provision of care to all of our residents in this community. This issue could not be more vital. There is a life expectancy gap between the Santa Clara Valley and East Ventura County of 11.8 years That is unconscionable, and it's unacceptable. Now we're forced in this situation through mismanagement and bad decisions that are putting all of our residents at risk. I would encourage the council to consider broadening this scope because this conversation and the solutions to come are not going to come from a blue ribbon committee that has not made substantive progress on this issue.
It is going to take Innovative ideas, creative solutions. In government there are a lot of reasons to say no to a solution that you know to be in the best interest of the community and it takes courage to force policymakers to say yes and that's what I'm imploring each and every one of you tonight whether you're on the Ad Hoc Committee or not To use that pulpit of advocacy in your capacities to ensure the healthcare of our residents. There's a concept in indigenous teaching called the seventh generation principle, we look at seven generations before us and we plan for seven generations into the future.
I would submit that is the moment we're in for this valley. We need to think about the seven generations to come And what our legacy and contribution to the future of their health care will be. And each of you plays a critical role in ensuring that that happens. So I know sometimes we want to strive for calmity and collegiality among different policy makers, whether it's the Board of Supervisors or the State Assembly or Congress. But now is the time for leaders to stand up and bring advocacy to the issue. And that's what we're hoping that you will bring where the community is behind you, we're ready to stand with you as partners there are solutions to ensure that we can maintain an emergency department in this valley To ensure that the county follows through on their commitment in choosing option two, to build a comprehensive care center in this valley.
We can accomplish it all if we have advocacy from our leaders. So thank you very much and I hope that you will share and contribute to that advocacy.
Thank you Chris Okay. Is there any online speakers for this item?
No one online.
Okay, thank you. So moving on to discussion.
Christina. All right, thank you. Excuse me just pulling up my notes that I have written up on this topic for today and I want to thank our public comment speakers very much for your understanding your history of advocacy Your continued advocacy and forward-looking for what our residents need not just now But many many years into the future so I just wanted to comment that I was there at the August 18th Board of Supervisors meeting.
I did make public comment, my public comment focused really quick on the gap so Per the data from the county, again per their slides that they came to our city hall chambers and presented it was a lot of information. I managed to try and just look at their slides in crunch numbers as a public health professional It was in the data, but this is something that I pulled out from the data that I thought was really vital.
They said that most of model number two, most most of the services would be covered right? Most ER visits could be covered under this different model to this expanded access to care. What the county didn't point out, but that was in the data and then I brought up was that 10% of the 17,000 visits a year to the Santa Paula Emergency Room which is 2,750 visits a year. Which is seven to eight visits approximately a day fall under the category that is necessary emergency room services.
That would not be available in our valley. And these are for folks that may have myocardial infarction, aka potential heart attack, signs and symptoms of strokes, ectopic pregnancies, suicidal ideation, and serious injuries to the body, broken bones, arms, legs, dislocated shoulders, that sort of thing. This is all data that the county put out there. And what I pointed out in my comments was 10% is everybody. I mean, seven to eight visits a day, 2,750 visits a year.
These are our families, this is us, these are our relatives, our neighbors that would really be up a creek without a paddle to put it gently and so I strongly advocated for option number one, for the micro hospital. Again we know that option number two was selected and so my comments now shifting to where I think we should go as a city from here. I 100% am behind an ad hoc committee. I think we need the Ad Hoc Committee to be an official vehicle of communication with the public.
This is somewhere where we could have meetings with the public, we can engage and I want to point out that I think the Ad Hoc Committee should not just serve The Blue Ribbon Task Force that has been the vehicle of communication from the county, but as was pointed out by a few of our speakers and as has been discussed by Dr. Johnson, the CEO, that they are continuing to talk with other partners and there's potential out there for other hospital systems The county is just one hospital system here in Ventura County. We've got several other hospital systems, and there's even potential hospital systems outside of Ventura County up in Kern County or potentially others up in Santa Barbara County that as a formal vehicle of communication of us council members representing, sorry Carrie I know I'm always looking this way, I'm not looking this way.
You know, our 17,000 plus residents. I think we owe it to our community, to our residents, to make sure that if we form this ad hoc committee that we're able to engage with all potential stakeholders as we talk about the future of Santa Clara Valley Hospital, Santa Paula Hospital and the Santa Clara Valley health overall. I'm in favor as well of this ad hoc committee working on, I'm trying to think of what's the best vehicle for us to almost as a city have a position. Right? And so I think the formation of a resolution where we're able to just say these are our values. This is what we as the City of Fillmore City Council Representing our community believe in this is what we're advocating for. This is what we are seeking out and so with that tool of a resolution, I think we're able to then support legislation.
You know there's legislation potentially up there. I think Mayor Mendez had mentioned to me. That there's other communities across California who are also dealing with this. In Orange County, I think there's perhaps they're looking at the closure of a small hospital along Laguna Beach and not only the residents are concerned but the paramedics, the first responders are concerned of how long taking those canyon roads right to the nearest hospital in inland Orange County would be. So being that this is I want I think the City of Santa Paula wrote a letter to the Board of Supervisors prior to their decision. We're now post-their decision, but regardless, I think that we need to let our Board of Supervisors know where the city of Fillmore stands and so I think that's another tool that we can use.
So I think that's really important and whether we say right now as a council that Our support for me, it's option number one. And exploring ways even after the vote to make that happen. So that's- Quick
question. Can I ask a clarifying question? So Christina, so just I want to get back to the stats that you kind of brought out. So I just want to make sure I understood kind of what you said because If I understood it correctly, I'm really kind of upset. Honestly because what I heard you say is okay out of X number of hospital visits that they get at the emergency room there's 10% that they will not in the future be able to handle right?
Yeah technically 9.6 that was on the slide but yeah I say
10%. And from what I heard of your description unless I misunderstood Those are all of the really critical ones that if you are in tough shape, they're going to have to bypass you and send you down the road to either VCMC or Ventura Memorial. Right?
Is that correct? That's correct. They said on the scale of 100% of visits right .1 which is very small those are the severe trauma, The next group, 9.6% are those that I listed and Expanded access to care and medical office buildings. Those folks would not, there would be no services at that model for those 9.6 or almost 10%.
And that included strokes and
heart attack? Per the county slides, those are the options. That's what was put on the slide. That was what I put on the slide, yeah. One other thing, I'm sorry just before I forget that I wanted to add and that is just again to my fellow council members actually one of our speakers spoke to it and it was on my list of things to mention as well and that is as we have this discussion and as we move forward Government agencies work together, and we have been working together. And I'm glad that the county is still engaging with possible other partners.
But I think we always need to remember that us as elected officials here in the city of Fillmore and us as a council representing all of the residents of Fillmore, that is our first responsibility. I think that's the best way to say it. That is our first responsibility, and so I think it's correct in saying that most of the time we're working together. Government agencies are always working together but there are times where we need to say our responsibilities to our residents and it might be in conflict with what the county is seeking out to do.
Christine, just again follow up question here. So just to clarify the vote that they took It doesn't necessarily mean that's for sure the direction they're going. It just means that that's the direction that they believe is the most financially-
No, that is the direction that they are going. And the reason that vote happened on the 18th was almost it was pushed saying this vote should have happened earlier. We need to get going on what is the future of healthcare services? From the county, in Ventura
County. And that's because the hospital itself won't meet structural earthquake standards in 2030, right? Three years from
now. I want to interrupt real quick. None of that... There is going to be an overlap where we're not gonna have any services at all. Because the new facility is not going to be built on time. That's already been clearly stated that it's an important note to bring up and for our residents to know that there is going to be a gap, I don't know, a year or two years, I don't know how long but we will not have any kind of facility at all.
County services.
0:56 – 1:0411 turns
Yeah so. Council Member Roger?
Yeah, this is extremely frustrating. And I appreciate all the speakers that were here and it's definitely something that we... I think someone pointed this out that we should have been putting an ad hoc committee together years ago. But with that said one thing some of the... One of the speakers mentioned how the life expectancy for Santa Clara Valley residents is 11 point something years less than people in East Ventura That to me is just mind boggling.
But I think that one thing, it kind of reminded me of obviously a much less important topic is you know what? I've sat on committees during my tenures as a council member that involved and included council members from all over the county So I like I said, I have four meetings this week and there's all different council members from all over the county. And I've learned through that experience in working with these other council members on these committees and I'll use Ventura County Transportation Commission as an example.
We had this little tiny Fillmore problem where our bridge was washed out where the train was, it stopped a train. And I was absolutely astonished at how the other council members from different cities on from the furthest counties or cities away from where we are jumped on the bandwagon and provided so much assistance and support. I think that's something that we can look at doing, and I truly believe that other communities that are not being affected, that are not part of Santa Clara Valley would jump on the bandwagon. They would provide assistance. They don't want to see this happen even to Fillmore, Santa Paula or Piru. They don't want to see this happen, I'm sure.
And one of the communities I sit on is the Ventura Council of Governments and we have all sorts of topics just all sorts of things that we discuss out there at that meeting. We meet once a month and I have a meeting coming up this week, one of the meetings I have. And I'd like to bring that up at the VCOG meeting and get it, I can throw it out as a future agendized matter but I'd like to get the word out there to other communities That this is happening to the Santa Clara Valley. And I'm pretty confident that other council members can weigh in on this, and I just think it would be one more something else that we can do to move this forward.
I'd
be in
favor
of that.
Yeah. So I'll bring that up on Friday at our Thursday meeting for BCOG and get it on the agenda, and they'll be supportive. And I think we need that. We need numbers, we need numbers. We need people to say this isn't right. And I have always felt this and I've shared this numerous times from the dais that I always feel like Fillmore and Santa Paula and Piru were always like the stepchild of the county. Always kind of- Yeah, in different ways. Yeah, and it's like okay well then I'm not gonna mention the name of hospital but there's another hospital in our county that should be shut down.
And there was a lengthy article about some things that were going on at this hospital. I'm thinking, why are they shutting down or not considering the retrofitting of whatever needs to be done for Santa Paula's Hospital? And leaving that one open, it's irrational to me but now I'm just ranting. But anyway so I'll do that and I'll bring some feedback as to what we can do and what kind of assistance and support we can get from other cities outside of Santa Clara Valley.
Thank you, Carrie. That's wonderful.
As with children or pregnant or anybody that needs that direct support, they don't have to be driving 40-30 minutes however long it takes to go to Ventura. Especially if you have a crying kid and an infant or whatever might be seeking medical attention. Not only that but just members that we have here that need that attention but based on Budget or whatever might be or inconvenience. We're gonna take that away, and I was to attendance of the Supervisor the Board of Supervisors meeting as well and made a couple comments on behalf of myself And I was very proud and very happy to see a lot of members of the community as some of you That I saw that are intended here Advocate for us and I hope so to carry that other other Local officials will come in and support us, and I know they will because it's not about money.
It's about saving lives
Thank you very well said No
III think I've made my opinion clear that I'm absolutely in favor of having a Continuing the kind of service that would best serve our residents by having a hospital or some similar service nearby. And I don't think having something, sending that 9.6% of really critical Issues or problems sent an extra, you know 15 minutes down the road. I mean some especially I mean i've had You know and 30 yeah 35 40. I know with with you as well You know we've we've had cases We all know that especially in the case of strokes and heart attacks Time is of the essence my gosh, you know It can mean that just such a huge impact On the individual if you get them there 15 minutes later It can be devastating, and to me it's black and white. There's no in between here.
Very well said. And I want to agree with all of you that option one is the only option that would be acceptable. I mean, it's unacceptable to even consider closing a hospital and Basically saying that it's dollars over lives, and it's very, very unacceptable. So I share a story. You know, I've been affected by that hospital many times. And over a year ago my dad, last time he was at our house living in our home, he, I didn't know what was wrong with him and my wife at that time would take really good care of him. And he was complaining that he wasn't feeling well And I was like, what's wrong? What's wrong?
He's like, oh no. I hear a sound in my throat. Well we didn't know he was internally bleeding and our paramedics came and took really good care of him. Our firemen came they took him to Santa Paula Hospital fairly quickly And he spent some time there and then it came to the realization, hey we can't treat you here for that. By this time he's lost so much blood and he waited another two hours before he was transported there and they said if we would have gotten there within the next like 10-15 minutes, he would have bled out. That's how much blood...
Just imagine like we're getting up to the rainy season now and there's a predicting a super El Nino, I don't know how bad it's going to be. But can you imagine if disaster and the lives that can be lost just go into extra A couple of miles to Ventura or Oxnard for healthcare, that's wrong. That is just wrong. So I think we've got to fight for this hospital and I'm going to put it bluntly, we gotta fight for it and there's no other way so I'm in solidarity with my fellow council members that we gotta stick with our...
1:04 – 1:1016 turns
What's best for our community?
Yeah what's best for our community thank you. And with Santa Paula as well and Piru And keep this hospital there in Santa Paula because we need it. So I don't know, is there a motion? Do we need a motion?
We do need a motion and can I ask the city manager are we selecting the ad hoc members?
Please. We are.
Okay.
I do want to be on that ad hoc committee.
I would be happy to be on the acumen as well.
Okay,
I'm glad to be on it so
okay.
I'd like to move that Christina Villasenor and Mayor Albert Mendez be on the ad hoc committee for the issue of the hospital in the Santa Clara River Valley. And I'll second that.
We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? The motion passes unanimously. Thank you so much, guys.
Christina you'd mentioned You wanted authority of and you were talking about a resolution. I think about authority of the committee I think you could talk about it now And then we wouldn't have to come back on a separate item unless there was something that ad hoc thought Should be discussed by the full council so if you guys wanted to make clear what the authority was to support legislation to to support a letter To be signed by the council, things like that. You could address it now? Kind of make like a list right now? Well I mean and get the general sense. I don't think it has to be exhaustive. I think if everyone's on the same page about the breadth of the scope then that gives staff an idea of what's allowed without having to come back.
Okay
Okay, great. Yeah, I'm willing to put a few things out so I think in the resolution should be the council's commitment to keeping an hospital with an emergency room in the Santa Clara Valley. I think that That the resolution should be to inform the Board of Supervisors as to our commitment to that and our reasons why. I think the resolution should include also the need for us to support all, I don't know about support but in other words entertain, explore all avenues for maintaining or having any hospital system and emergency room in the Santa Clara Valley including working with potential partners and stakeholders in that.
And our resolution should be that we are, you know, continuing our community and continue to include with the community transparency and be a hub of information and a resource for Fillmore residents on this topic. We'll maybe continue to at our council meetings give the latest information through our channels, you know, our public channels Let's see. Yeah, and again engaging with various stakeholders not only limited to the Blue Ribbon Task Force but others.
Is there anything critical? Well one other thing I was gonna say is that we use data, that we support the use of data, of research looking at the health profile of the Santa Clara Valley to further our efforts of advocacy. Yes. Thank you. Okay, all right thank you.
I want to say something else okay may I say something now? I mean the numbers that the county gave they just don't add up This is on my heart, and I've had that conversation with many people. They systematically dismantled that hospital. And then they say well it's not making money, it's not viable. Well yeah you took all the services away with the end goal of taking the hospital away like come on. If I have a business and I take away all my, like the guy that owned what was it? Sears he bought Sears and he systematically broke the same thing. They did the same thing to that hospital.
It's not fair so I don't believe That their numbers, those numbers are just fabricating something that they made up. It's not true. They systematically dismantled that hospital. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you.
And per that, maybe one more thing in the resolution is not only look at the data of health data, health statistics but also economic numbers here in Ventura County and our valley and exploring a full understanding of the financial workings of the current hospital system and what would be a successful future hospital system? I think if we have a resolution that includes that, it allows us to fully see the full breadth of everything.
1:10 – 1:226 turns
Mayor, I'll just say one more thing. I think after hearing everything and even during the public speaking, I think one of the biggest things is like I don't think we should be penalized Because of where we live, geographically where we live and I think everybody should have access to 24 hour care. And I just think about like man if somebody goes ill or an elderly person gets ill or a car accident or whatever it may be at two in the morning and you're out of those working hours, you're out of luck. So the fact that we're all coming together and saying, hey, we need to work on something for everyone regardless of where we live or insurance. And I know we talked a little bit about insurance earlier but definitely it's a human right.
Thank you. Okay?
Just on that note, sorry one more thing I just wanted to put was that when Adopted to move forward with option number two, the medical office buildings and expanded access to care which is called sort of a expanded urgent care. They didn't even put 24 hours in care. The hours they put were 7 AM to 11 PM. So I just want to let everyone know that that's what the county put.
Thank you. Okay, so with that being said we already have it. So
moving on to item number 9B. Oh we need a vote on it sorry. So we have a motion and we had a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay the motion passes unanimously thank you. And now moving onto item number 9B Public hearing consideration of zoning ordinance amendment 26-02. Ordinance 26-998, amending section 6.04.5805 of the Fillmore Municipal Code. Brian?
Good
evening Mayor and Council. I'm Brian McCarthy. I'll be presenting this item. Get my PowerPoint up here real quick. Yes, this is a zoning tax amendment 2602 ordinance 26998 regarding pop-up businesses. This came out of the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee. It amends section 6.04.5805 as it relates to temporary pop-up businesses. The ordinance was originally adopted in 2018 and allows businesses or entrepreneurs to temporarily test the market. So if they want to find out if their project is going to be viable at a particular location within a particular segment of the city, pricing and overall appetite for whatever they want to sell.
And it allows them to test the market without big investment in brick-and-mortar employees and that kind of thing. It's restricted to the Commercial Highway, Central Business District, Commercial Neighborhood, Manufacturing Industrial Zones and the Business Park Zone. So as I mentioned, it was development out of the ad hoc committee. And one of their more recent meetings decided they would like to increase the temporary nature of it. The existing permit allows for 45 days plus a possible extension of an additional 45 days for a total of 90 days.
The Ad Hoc Committee asked staff to look at increasing that initial temporary use to 180 days. with the possible extension for an additional 180 days, so a total of 360 days. The types of other updates were made to the code as well. It clarifies that they are temporary use and issued by way of Temporary Use Permit which is a standard permit that the City issues, that they must have an active business license That the business will expire at some point and it specifies that it involves no vested rights.
It adds a requirement that they access permanent hand washing and restroom facilities within 200 feet, which is consistent with the health permit as well. So the county in the city are lined up in terms of having sanitation facilities Which some people mistake for customers, but really that's for the employees. So employees are the ones that are there all day long presumably and they're also handling the goods and services to the customers and so they need are the ones who really need access to those restrooms So I went over just a brief summary of it, and then the next couple slides are all of the actual words of the Ordinance Text Amendment. So it's very, very busy but we wanted to put exactly what it is.
The bold and underline is the added language and the strikethrough is the removed language so you can read there what was involved in what I summarized. It allows them to launch a product, drive sales, determine whether they want to invest long term They're generally, it defines pop-up business a little bit better than had previously been defined. It defines what they are, that they must have a business license.
Number three, it specifies under the zone, the specific zones whether it's permitted use or development permitted use. It does not allow for a conditional use permit, which typically has a little more intensive type uses, which wouldn't really qualify as a pop-up where they don't have an exhaustive city review process. Number four basically is what I described as extending the time frames.
And after 180 days, should the pop-up business owner want to pursue a permanent business, they would have to apply for a development permit or long term permitted use. Or find a vacancy where they can move in and it's a permitted use and get the process started to get moved in under a permanent basis so we try to give them some grace of let us know within 30 days of your 180 day expiration And we'll tack on an additional 180 days and as long as you are making progress within that time frame, you can kind of roll right into a permanent use. So it's meant to be flexible and work with them to get them in because of course we all want businesses to come and stay so it's to allow that latitude with staff to work with them more closely And then it also specifies that they shall cease and be totally removed within five days of the permit expiration.
Again, no vested rights. They must apply with all other codes that would apply to it so we're not getting into any health and safety problems. So if there's such things as fire code compliance, open flames, storing of propane, hazardous materials, those kinds of things are going to be restricted. And then again, the sanitation requirement is in there. And that's basically the gist of it. It's exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission had a fairly robust discussion about the ordinance and there were quite a number of things that were discussed.
They opted to remove the conditional use permit as I mentioned because we identified that as being a little more intensive They discussed possibly having a public notice for the pop-up business, for the surrounding area. And our discussion on that as staff was that it kind of gets into the long term permit Requirement that more time would be needed to do the public noticing they would possibly get delayed more And it kind of went against the pop-up nature of it where it's temporary small in nature And so once they do decide though to go permanent, that's when the public noticing will take effect So we felt that the public noticing is really there for the permanent and we didn't want to have that those kind of discrepancies They also discussed, which wasn't written in the staff report, banning single-use plastic.
And we didn't include that in the ordinance for a few reasons. There are state laws that address single-use plastic at the producer level and then there's laws that restrict plastic bags. You'll see it at Vons or other grocery stores where you're not allowed to use plastic bags. Few cities in the region have adopted some single-use plastic restrictions, but it's fairly limited. And some of them, you know, restrictions on like say a restaurant will only give you plastic if it's specifically requested and most of the other bans revolve around using polyethylene or styrofoam So it's kind of a limited basis on what cities are actually banning.
And then one of the bigger reasons why we didn't add it was that our current businesses, our long-term businesses operating under the ordinary permit system don't have such a ban and so there's a little bit of fairness or equity in terms of what businesses are required to do what. We can maybe talk about Taking up something like that on a citywide basis if we wanted to make that a little more equitable across all businesses and see if that's something that the council might want to consider. But, we didn't think that was really the driver of economic ad hoc committee for this particular case but the council could decide to direct staff to include something like that.
But we do have conditions of approval The conditions of approval are fairly robust for these types of uses in terms of collecting their waste, making sure the site remains clean. We could add on something about using separate recyclable bins versus disposable waste bins. That could be in the conditions of approval perhaps, which it is but whether it's an ordinance or not would be up to you at your direction.
So that was the nature of it, and what comes to you is pretty much what the Planning Commission ultimately decided to approve. There's no impact to the city. We felt that this Champion some of the city goals and values such as revitalizing downtown Central Avenue area in particular adds economic development What happens with? Vacancies is that vacancies tend to grow Because businesses have this kind of symbiotic relationship or customers to one Often visit they call them I call them pass-by trips. They'll visit other businesses that are nearby as well so when you have vacancies In one location, sometimes it has this precipitating effect where the adjacent businesses start to get slower and slower traffic.
And economic research shows that vacancies tend to grow. So this is a way to try to get more movement and more people in the area. It's community-centered, promoting sustainable balanced development in a small town charm. It kind of the entrepreneurs, the locals who want to get out there and incubate a business Staff's recommendations are to open and conduct a public hearing, approve the first reading to introduce Ordinance 26998 approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2602 and a finding of exemption from CEQA. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
Questions?
1:22 – 1:3036 turns
No. Councilman Brogan?
And I don't know if this is really a question for you or discussion for council, but maybe what you can just clarify for me and let me know that I'm correct on this. That the previous under the current code before any changes are made it's 90 days total.
Correct.
And at what point if a business owner were to decide to move forward With it being a permanent business, at what point in time during that 90-day period would they have to start the permit process?
Right now it doesn't specify. Which is one of the reasons we've added that language
for
what's being proposed.
So under the current code, they could go 75 days, 80 days and then say I want a permit, I want to continue.
Technically they would have to stop. The use apply for the permanent permit and then come back. I mean
you have to close all business down.
Yeah, I mean unless there's some other arrangement that's been worked out but it hasn't it hasn't happened yet typically these pop-up business or businesses are temporary in nature. Yeah. And it's you know, it's been the the food truck or kind of a pop up tent One example was ABC School, they brought in some temporary classroom trailers. They did a pop-up business and tested the market and then they removed them.
And then they later came back for development permit for permanent facilities. But yeah that's kind of how it would have to technically, they would close the operation while they're processing a new permit.
I had personal discussions with business owners in town about the idea of doing this, and feedback I got initially was that under the current code it didn't provide them enough time to really ascertain whether or not the business would be successful. And so I think that's one of the reasons we brought it to council anyway is so they'd have a longer period of time to sort of do a trial test on this business and then be able Decide at a point in time a lot of lengthier period of time whether they could be successful at it or not and that makes sense to me So that's what brings us to this to us today. Is that idea that we would need to extend this period of time? Yes, so But I still now we're talking about under the draft the changes The proposed ordinance will allow for the business owner to seek a 180-day time extension, so 360 days total.
But prior to their first 180 days, which is only 90 days longer than the original code, they'd have to make a decision whether they would want create a permanent business. Correct. So even before they enter their extension, they're going to have to know and so I'm wondering first of all why would they if they already know if they're able to make an extension? I don't think that's enough time. I mean I would like to see it a lengthier period of time that they could have even up to nine months if they could go nine months and so then that leaves them another do the math for me here Before they would actually make a decision and start pulling the permits to convert to an actual permanent business. I just don't think this change is going to help what we're trying to achieve, and that's to bring businesses into Fillmore.
I was thinking that before and now it's yeah, thank you. So
I agree
with you.
I'm running circles in my numbers in my head.
No, so let me see if I understand what you're saying, Carrie. It sounds like what you're saying is hey 180 days is not long enough maybe 270 days or nine months would be long enough for them to be able to determine, hey it's a viable business or it's not.
Right.
And so then at that point then they would be able to get an extension in order to do a permanent business. Is
that right? Or at the nine month period. They would then start working with the city to pull permits for a permanent business. I just don't think this is going to solve the problem that we have on all these empty storefronts, because it's still going to be a time crunch. It's still not going to be long enough and a long period of time to allow someone to get in there, get the experience on what they're trying out as a business and see if it's going to be successful.
And I'd love to see that extended somehow to a certain period of time. I'm throwing out nine months.
So I have a question. How many pop-up businesses have we seen, even?
Since 2018 when the initial one was enacted I'd say it's roughly about five to six. And we haven't had feedback for the most part. I'm not aware of them saying that They didn't have enough time or something like that, but sometimes we don't get that kind of feedback. But we're more than welcome to hear what works for the community.
So about five or a half a dozen in eight years?
Yes.
And if the goal of the pop-ups is to bring permanent businesses into town, letting them have a period of time for trial run, how many of those five became permanent businesses?
I'm only aware of ABC as a school
Okay,
one did a permanent expansion. I don't have an example of another one that did. I think we had a food truck that ended up closing down. There's been a couple that came and went and then we never heard from them again.
Right?
And that's my concern. Yeah, I mean if the council can determine how many days you want.
I don't think 270 is a problem for me anyway. I'm okay with that. I am
too but before we say anything Council Member Villaseñor wanted to say something
So I just had a clarifying question on this expansion of the temporary permit. So currently it reads 180 days, 6 months with the option to renew for another 180 days so another six months. So really at the six month mark feeling positive about it and then for another six months. So is the request Katie, Carrie I'm sorry to change that to like you said nine months 270 days do you want to keep that renewal period for six months?
No in the way it reads they have to decide well before the end of their first 180 days if they want Pull a permanent start down the process of creating a permanent business. So they have to make the decision before they even entered their other extension hundred of 180 days.
I didn't really okay, I didn't realize that's
before the initial period ends that they need to apply for that but all these dates are what staff recommended if the council wants to try different numbers we can do that and if you don't want to make them apply 30 days before I mean
1:30 – 1:4040 turns
I just think there's no one. There's no data suggesting that 180 days is a magic number. I think it was thought maybe at the ad hoc day economic ad hoc committee was 90 days total. We if we doubled that, that may be sounded like a lot of the time to 180 days and then another 100 days beyond that. It was just the opinion, it wasn't based on data or a study. But if 270 feels more realistic from the feedback from the local businesses then we would go there if that's what the council would desire yeah.
That would
be my
proposal. Yeah
I agree, fine. I was thinking the same thing when I was reading this and going over the agenda And then you brought it over and start running it over in my head, she's right.
I have another question too Brian unrelated to the time frame but if someone goes in and wants to start a pop-up and I know that it's written in here they're not just I understand the rationale behind it that the pop-up business show I'm reading the amended version the pop-it businesses shall Meet the requirements of building code and fire code requirements. Do you envision, let's say take one of the storefronts on Central for example.
Do you envision that they will have to go in? Let's take the old-
The hardware shop.
Hardware shops, something
where
you buy
tools.
Patterson's
hardware. Yeah some of those buildings have been recently upgraded and they comply with the American Disability Act requirements with access to restrooms.
Oh they have? Some have.
Some have, some have not.
Okay.
So...
But regardless on day one at the pop-up they're going to have to...
Yeah if you have fire code violations or if you have like in Patterson's hardware I believe you have some structural issues from the 1994 earthquake still that have not been remediated. The theater went through a remediation process, but there's I believe the hardware and maybe some others that have not been upgraded yet so there are some significant safety issues out there that the property owner should be the one improving it, and then bringing the pop-up businesses in there so that they're viable.
And they're up to building code because if the city is ignoring the building codes, that would be illegal. If something happens, there'd be maybe a liability issue that maybe Tiffany could speak more to.
There's nothing that the city can do to encourage—I'll use that word—encourage the property owners to make these enhancements, bring them up to code?
No, I wouldn't disagree with that. I think we could do some kind of incentives. You know, I mean, I wouldn't suggest that we pay wholesale for any improvements but, I mean, we've done stuff to help encourage business owners to paint their decaying paint so why couldn't we also do something like a matching program To okay, you want to do an earthquake retrofit? Okay. We'll pony up a certain percentage.
I don't want us to pony up anything.
Well, I don t either but if we want to encourage it hey, you know. You said that there's nothing we could do and all I'm saying is I think there are things we can do whether or not we choose to do them is up to us.
Maybe I should have used a different word than encourage. Force, let's use that word force. Can we force them to bring their properties up to code?
We can't force them you know it's really their private property rights to sit on if they want but there are other means like you know vacancy taxes I mean it can hurt financially over time To have vacancy and then if they can't get a business in there because they've gotten so far behind in terms of building code safety regulations It gets harder and harder to catch up We do we do offer opportunities If businesses or tenants possible tenants want to know if they can move into a building, you know Soften will send the building inspector over. We'll send the fire department over let them know what they can do What quick fixes they can do to get in?
We often do that So we do provide that guidance on a just ad hoc basis. Not everybody's going to be that easy, some of them like I said like Patterson's Hardware may be a little more challenging. Some of the more challenging issues come up with accessibility from the parking lots in through the front door and then the restrooms would be kind of second to that
Okay, what's my two cents?
Anybody else? It's challenging. The ADA laws and stuff are challenging when it comes to our downtown because it's so
old. I do. I've got a comment on this and maybe think about it. Working with a local nonprofit that Is converting to a business and need to get up to code. And was out of code with their exit signs, right? Per our fire code and it got there but my point is that it's very pricey because just for example, to get up to code, right? To have all the fire exits and We've got to put electrical in there, especially if electrical is not going through a certain wall where that is a fire exit. So that being said it is you know even things that we know that need to be there like the fire code and the you know the exit signs.
To try and have a pop-up business, but knowing that you almost like you've got to invest. A pop-up business has to invest in the building really? That's really tough and I think it might be just a step too far for a pop up business. So is there anything where we were talking about holding trying to see property owners If there can be some sort of collaboration, I don't know if we can dictate that through ordinance or something. But the property owner hopefully wants to fill that vacancy.
And if a pop-up business were to again like split the difference of doing these necessary, these required legally required permitting and being in compliance especially for the safety compliance of fire compliance. It benefits the property owner on one end hey you're getting your building up to code your property up to code benefits the pop-up and saying hey it usually is this much but Property owners will do half of it for you so that you can get that pop-up.
I don't know, I might just be spinning here but I'm just trying to think of... It's probably a step too far for pop up businesses and what can we do to maybe make the property owners move?
Just a quick follow-up to that. So what I'd like to see if possible, Brian is just the number of either one or the other. Number of let's keep it to central for right now. The number of buildings that are out of code right now that you wouldn't allow someone to start a business there unless they brought everything up to code and that or the number of ones that are you could walk in and start a business right away because I think what will happen is The property owners that have brought their storefronts up to code Are used as pop-ups and more pop-ups that come in then That might be an incentive also for these other property owners to say hmm. Okay, well things are happening on central things are happening And so maybe I should throw in some money and I can you know Get on the bandwagon and start bringing in some money on my property.
I think part of it is a lot of the property owners don't, they don't care if it sits empty we do
Yeah, what we could do is we could maybe develop some kind of outreach and program whereby if we get in touch with the property owners. We could talk about maybe having inspection day or something where we could make the rounds, maybe with the building inspector, maybe with fire. Kind of go through and try to find those things that need to be upgraded. And maybe just give them a list and start there.
Yeah, we kind of have to do that. We have that list to say if someone comes in and wants to set up a pop-up, where can I start a pop-up right away? And you can say these storefronts are viable right now, these storefronts we can use right now. These other ones there has to be work done.
Yes. Your example at Patterson's is a good one because that one is particularly challenged for
these reasons. I have a question and I think it's for our city manager. The new software we got For the
co-star.
Yeah, but that'd be helpful and what they're proposing
not to track that particularly but we have had discussions about starting that vacancy registration program. And so as part of that we can make that a requirement and then we can keep us separate database with that
was just a thought. Thank you councilmember gurney.
I was just going to say, to me the basic idea that the language is going for. I'm in agreement that if we give them more time they'll be able to vet out whether or not it makes sense to put a business in. I mean, I think you bring up a lot of good points about hey having to comply with the code. Well we can't really budge on that right? They've got to comply with the code and I think you brought up some good ideas about hey what can we do to encourage pop-up businesses to find a spot that they can actually start but I think ultimately our question before us is Do we approve of this language? Does this language make sense as modified by you, Carrie, on the 270. And I think for me it does.
Yeah, I'm fine with the language on it. I just want the numbers to change. Sure. The days, time periods.
Yep.
So does somebody wanna make a motion with the new numbers?
1:40 – 1:4925 turns
Go
ahead, Carrie.
Okay, well I would like to make a motion. Do we have to open the public hearing first?
Oh yes sorry so at this time i'm going to open the public hearing there anybody out here for this item seeing there's nobody here uh i'll close the public hearing and i'll take a motion
Okay, I will make a motion to approve the first reading to introduce ordinance number 26-998 approving ZOA 2602 and finding of exemption from CEQA with the changes that we discussed and changing The trial period to, or keeping the trial period with the extension but not having to submit the paperwork, the permit request for permits. Correct me in my language.
Within 30
days? Until they are nine months out until they've been operating for nine months
I got lost.
Is that right? So apply for a permanent permit location within 270 days of issuance. And then from there they could operate from 270 on would be 180 after that. Yeah, 270 plus 180 to the close up and be permanent
right as a pop-up so 270 plus what it is a pop-up but then that would be the final and and it's got to be a business that next day after that last day
after 270 plus 180 while we get them through then their permanent And by the way, permanent could be they find a vacant storefront and the property owners got it ready to go and they're ready to move in. True. And they know what their cash flow is. They know what they can afford in rent and the property owner knows are going to get the payback for the improvements and they worked all that out.
Maybe they find a location downtown and it doesn't require a development permit. That could happen too. There's a lot of scenarios like that.
So
they can operate for nine months before they have to make a commitment to submitting the application for a permanent business.
No, I think that's fine.
The second part being 180 makes sense because you don't want applications to lag. Sometimes you can get an incomplete application in and then you don t get movement, and it kind of lags and lags for a long period of time by having a shorter backstop. It gives staff better check-ins with the applicant where are you? And then we can push it with an impending deadline like that.
So I'd like to second that motion.
We have a motion and second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?
So approving an ordinance of the City Council of the city of Fillmore, California amending section 6.045805 of the Fillmore Municipal Code governing the operation of pop-up businesses and finding of exemption from CEQA.
Okay we got a motion, we got a second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously thank you. Thank You Kevin and thank you guys moving on. Brian actually. Force of habit. It's okay. Moving on to public hearing for the issuance of revenue bonds issued by the California Municipal Finance Authority in the amount of $25 million for the acquisition, construction and equipping of a 50-unit multifamily residential rental project located at 215-221 Palm Street and 534 Santa Clara Street.
Thank you Mayor and City Council. This item is the Fillmore Terrace Project, owned and proposed by People Self-Help Housing. And as mentioned it's a Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act hearing. You may be familiar with it. The location is at Palm. 126 and to the north is Santa Clara Street. It's a 50 unit low-income, very low income, extremely low income housing development it looks like this.
It was approved administratively under the state laws for low-income housing The owner People Self Help Housing is through the state Getting bonds, they're borrowing money which to allow them to finance and go through construction. It's $25 million and under the federal law they have to conduct a public hearing because it is tax-exempt bonds. And these will be used for finance, construction improvement, equipping of the property.
It was publicly noticed. The California Municipal Finance Authority is the bond issuer. They were created in 2004. And it was to promote economic, cultural and economic development. And to provide economic and charitable activities throughout California. Fillmore is a member agency of CMFA along with 300 other municipalities. And the CMFA assists local governments in non-profit businesses so also private businesses and basically what it does is it allows private businesses to access funding at a tax-exempt rate or at a government level type rate so that they can proceed with projects that are charitable such as low income housing. So it makes them more competitive in terms of financing.
There is no impact to the city for this action. There is a shared fee aspect to it, so the CMFA will charge a fee as part of their bond issuance and some of that fee will get fed back to the community participant which is Fillmore in this case and I believe the number's somewhere around 12,500 that we could get back from the process and that's more or less just to cover administration I'm happy to answer any questions.
Questions? No, no questions. Okay so seeing that no more questions in the discussion this time I'd like to open the public hearing. Seeing there's nobody here from the public on this item I'll close the public hearing and I'll entertain a motion.
I'll give you staff's recommendations are not to conduct the public hearing which you did The Tefra hearing and adopt resolution 264131 approving issuance of the bonds as defined in accordance with the California Municipal Finance Authority for the benefit of the developer or its subsidiary or affiliate to provide the financing of the project. The resolution is solely for the purposes of satisfying the requirements of TEFRA code and the California Government Code section 6500.
So moved.
And second? I'll second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? The motion passes unanimously, thank you.
Moving on to item City Council consideration of updated social media policy superseding policy number 19-105
1:49 – 2:0518 turns
Mayor, can we do the LGCMA item first? Yes. Before that one please?
Yes. Oh yeah. So consideration of participation in regional management, that
one? Yeah. That's the local government climate alliance,
yes.
Yes, thank you mayor. Let me just bring up my PowerPoint.
Give me one moment, Mayor. Apologies.
All right, excellent. Thank you City Clerk for your help. Mayor, City Council and staff, for the record my name is Angel Garcia, Senior Management Analyst for the city of Fillmore. Today I am presenting item 9D which asks the council to consider whether the city of Fillmore should participate in a regional membership in the Local Government Climate Alliance or LGCA through the County of Ventura.
I'll start with the action being requested, then cover the background on the organization, the regional membership structure, the fiscal impact to Fillmore and the coordination and representation considerations. And finally, the options available to your council. So the requested council action before you tonight is requesting that the council, one, receive this presentation, discuss potential participation in a regional LGCA membership through the County of Ventura and provide direction to staff on whether the city should participate. Membership as a legislative advocacy organization is a policy decision so staff is making no recommendation at this time and direction to staff is at the discretion of your council.
So some context and background, what is the LGCA? The Local Government Climate Alliance is a coalition of local governments that coordinates advocacy on climate and energy related policy at the state level. According to LGCA it was formed to give cities and counties a more focused voice in state climate policy discussions and to help ensure those policies reflect the practical and financial consideration local agencies face when implementing climate programs.
Proposed regional membership, so here's how the proposed arrangement would work. Rather than each jurisdiction obtaining its own individual membership, LGCA has indicated that Ventura County and participating local agencies may collectively join under LGCA's membership tier for populations of 500,000 or more. Annual dues for that deer are $8,000. The County of Ventura would pay that invoice on behalf of the region so they would pay the $8000 then invoice each participating city and agency for a share allocated by population. So this proposal through the County of Ventura was presented to the other agencies involved through Viscera. So for comparison, LGCA's published annual dues for an individual local government with a population below 50,000 would be $1,500.
The rate Fillmore would pay on its own. So if we as Fillmore would like to join the LGCA as an individual entity, we would fall under that 50,00 population category. Hence, we would be paying 1,500 if we were joining on our own. That part is important. So the fiscal impact to Fillmore's share in the proposed membership. The allocation uses a combined population of about 700,000 for the 10 cities in Ventura County. Fillmore's population is listed at 16,000 or about 2.15% of that total which produces a proposed share $172.08 annually. The county has indicated that through Ventura County Regional Energy Alliance it may contribute up to $4,000 towards the membership further reducing the cost to participating cities.
If the council directs participation Fillmore share would be paid from the city manager department dues and subscriptions account identified by finance department Even if some of the cities do not join, Fillmore's annual invoice would remain $172.08 according to the County Ventura Sustainability Division. So let's say for example if the bigger cities like Oxnard or Ventura do not choose to participate and join the LGCMA that wouldn't impact our cost share we would still be at $172.08 which is good.
The proposal also includes forming a working group under Viscera made up of county staff and representatives from participating agencies. That group would nominate one individual to vote and speak for the entire Ventura County region within LGCA. Practically, participating jurisdictions would coordinate their positions through a single regional representative rather than each city exercising its own separate vote.
Oxnard, Thousand Oaks, Ventura and Port Winiemi have currently expressed interest though expressions of interest are not final commitments and the list remains subject to confirmation so I'm still awaiting updates from county staff if those interested cities have moved along and have confirmed that they will be joining as a region towards the LGC May. The working group would also need to reestablish how regional positions are developed, how disagreements are resolved and how the representative is authorized to vote. Those procedures aren't yet defined so there's still some tweaks that need to be made to the regional structure but those will be figured out as more cities decide to join in as a region and will be formalized as the procedure goes on.
So some options for council consideration today. The Council may authorize participation under the proposed regional membership or you could decline to participate altogether, or request additional information on the membership structure or advocacy process, or you can also provide direction to staff of whether you would like us to look further into this. I'll re-estate that Council is not recommending one option over another. Participation is a policy decision at the discretion of your city council tonight.
So we're requesting that the City Council receive this presentation, discuss potential participation in the LGCA membership through the County of Ventura and provide direction to staff on whether the city should participate. If the council directs participation, the fiscal impact to the city would be $172.08 annually from the dues and subscriptions account and the county would pay the LGCA Subsequently, the invoice to the city. So we would get invoiced by the county and we would pay that $172. And if you want to see the one pager on the LGCA it is included in your staff report and in the packet as well.
That concludes my presentation. This item was reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's Office, and the LGCA Organizational Policy Overview is attached to the staff report if you need a reference. To help answer Council's questions on the LGCA joining the council meeting today remotely is Stephanie Lopez Lozano, Acting Administrative Analyst for the city of Santa Barbara, and we are here to answer any questions you may have. Stephanie, if you're on would you mind just saying a brief hello to confirm that the council can hear you?
Hi, council members. Can you hear me all right?
Yes. Okay, fantastic. Thank you, Stephanie. So Stephanie and I are available if you have any questions.
Thank you Angel. Questions? All right.
Yes, I do thank you for your presentation Angel. Just so I'm understanding looking at the one-page overview. The City of Santa Barbara is the initial fiscal sponsor. I guess my question is Is this a statewide coalition that is still in formation? And if Santa Barbara is the initial sponsor, has it sort of has its origins in Santa Barbara County. Are we sort of I just want to know like how big is it at this point like how many cities jurisdictions have committed are they trying to be statewide but we're starting here.
Thank you Council Member Villasenor. Stephanie can you chime in on that question please
Of course, thank you Council Member Villaseñor. Yes this is a state um so this kind of started I'm so sorry i'm getting a little bit of feedback so I apologize if I hesitate with my words but the coalition the alliance started with a few participating jurisdictions a few founding jurisdictions that saw this need to fill this gap at the state level so what we were seeing is that What was translated at the state level wasn't being well received at the local level. So we want to fill that gap and have our voice heard at the state level.
Some of the founding jurisdictions are City of Santa Barbara, City of SLO, we have the city of Santa Cruz and a couple of others that I'm blanking on the names right now but we have currently about 20 plus over Participating cities and counties across the state, and we'd really be interested in the city of Fillmore joining just to cover our central coast region.
Thank
you. Sure, okay. So I mean, I think I have an understanding of what it is. So I just want to state what I think my understanding is and you can correct me if I'm wrong. So basically what we're being asked is okay, if we just join as a city ourselves, we pay $1,500- That's correct. And we get a vote at the table directly. Versus if we pay 172, then we have to kind of gather with the other cities in the Ventura group and come to a decision. And then that group then gets one vote. Is that correct?
That's how the proposed structure would work, yes. So I included that cost so you can see that if we were to join on our own then we would have to pay $1,500 annually to LGCA but County of Ventura is proposing that we join as a region. So that way it would be cheaper for other cities particularly smaller jurisdictions like ourselves. So for example cities like Oxnard and Ventura with bigger populations would have to pay substantially more.
I guess the question for me really is, to be able to support this would be okay. I agree with, I guess the local government climate alliance it's objectives. My concern would be because we are a smaller city if we go in with everybody else, are we gonna be drowned out by the other cities versus going on our own number? So that's the first question that I would have.
And then the second one is, and this kind of goes back to the basic idea of governance and representation and so forth. Which is I mean we already have the California League of Cities. That theoretically they take positions on a lot of different issues. So what is the advantage? Okay, let's say that we go with 172 annually, it's a drop in the bucket, it's a subscription.
How is that going to help us advance our legislative agenda for climate and energy more? I mean are we getting our $172 bang for Is the question I have, right? So versus if we if we pay 1500 are going to get 10 times more vote at the table. You see where I'm going with this is is we have a channel already which is the California League of Cities They're supposed to be listening to us and saying, hey yeah these things are important.
Right? This is maybe this is another channel a we're approaching it from okay we're going at it from the California League of Cities aspect priority pay our dues so forth for that now where we have another angle is that kind The bottom line is?
Yes, based on your question I would kind of see the LGCA as kind of another tool to add on our toolbox. We of course also have the League of Cities as an advocacy proponent as well as our own so as your public policy manager I do look at policy based on your council approved public policy platform and we do issues letters of support opposition or whatever that matter in alignment with League of Cities but also on our own Based on current legislation at the state level. So we do have our own lobbying efforts with that, but really if your council were to decide to join the LCMA. My apologies I keep messing up the acronym. The Local Government Climate Alliance it just adds another tool that we have in advocacy at the state level.
But of course if we want Directive voice in that front. We could choose to join as an individual, but we would have to pay more at 1500 But that would be a policy decision your council would have to make Stephanie if is can you kind of give an example if? How does it look like when the city joins on their own and how kind of that participation looks like
Yes, of course so I will say I'm just listening to the question, the city of Fillmore would receive all access to everything that all of our members have. Of course, I know some things need to be discussed with the county of Ventura. That's kind of heading this. sort of organization to make sure that multiple jurisdictions in the county of Ventura can join the LGCA.
But I will say the City of Fillmore will still have access to like all the resources, all the information on legislation pieces which a lot of our jurisdictions are having are finding great value because I know To your question, Council Member, on having the League of Cities. They do a great job of tracking everything but what LGCA is really focusing on is climate energy resilience and funding related to those items because we are seeing there's so much legislation being passed and created and it's really hard to keep up with everything coming out. So our focus is more on this climate-related piece And as Angel mentioned, this is just another tool in the toolbox to make sure we're keeping up with all the legislation at the state level.
2:05 – 2:107 turns
Okay thank you for answering my question.
Yeah, my so my my two cents on this one is that I think it would be Beneficial to join this group with paying a year's dues And and really seeing what what it's all about. I think that's you know, I think that's a worthy investment that this This group is forming and Yeah, I would like to see what it can really hone in on. A couple of things that stood out to me in the staff report was that states that the advocacy is intended to help ensure that state policies reflect the practical and financial considerations encountered by local agencies. And I think that is really important We do have League of Cities and I know that there are specific policy groups, you know that focus on environmental issues. But this sounds like it's very very focused on climate and very focused on funding around climate and resilience.
And it seems to I think mesh well with what Ventura County Regional Energy Alliance looking at Council Member Rodriguez is also honing in on around what there's She's right, there's a bunch of funding out there and how can small cities like ourselves maybe advocate and hone in on it? And also I think another thing that they mentioned here in their 2026 legislative priorities expanding local authority and funding for these kind of climate programs. So just by those two for me it's worth to invest for at least one year $178 and I'll even add To have our council member Rodriguez who's already on their Ventura County Regional Energy Alliance maybe be our rep if we decide to go this direction with the county. I think it's worthy of an investment of a year and maybe to re-examine and to hear back at some feedback about the effectiveness of seeing this because it would be, if it is truly effective what a good return on investment could possibly be.
Thank You Christina
Yeah, I'm always a little bit reluctant to throw our vote. Let's call it a vote in with the whole other agency because there will be times when we might be in a minority on the way we feel and I'm thinking about Councilmember Guarnica's comments. Do we want to have our own voice? There's no way of gauging how often that would happen. I mean, there definitely will be times when the rest of the county as one body would feel one way about something and those of us here might feel differently about it. And one thing that jumps out at me, which I just happened to get in my box today, as you all did, this is just a piece. This is an example on the whole climate alliance Climate action, electricity, clean energy, all these things.
This article was placed in our inbox about the steelhead trout that have been protected and is causing issues for us on getting rid of a rundown. It sounds like I'm getting off the beaten path here but my point is that for decades they've been saying that the steelhead trout is natural to the county, to the rivers and therefore we're prohibited from making improvements on the rivers that we need to make improvements on.
Well, then this article that we received today says that's not true. So all these years we've been thinking it's one thing. There are times where we will have a different opinion about things and do we want to just, even though only for $172. But then I guess that's the question is then if we are part of that and they have one opinion can we still express another opinion on our own through our own advocates? And I don't know, this makes me a little bit uncomfortable that we're throwing away our own vote on things.
Council Member Brogy, to answer your question. If there is indeed a difference in opinion through this if your council were to decide to join we can definitely express that we're in opposition to that and then as well we could issue our own letters of opposition. We do do that for state legislation that although it may not be in partnership with the broader coalition of some sort if there is a legislation that is in conflict with your council approved goals through your public policy platform we do issue letters of opposition So if there is an instance where we are not in agreement with the proposal that the other broader county may agree on, then we do issue our own letters of opposition.
And so whatever's submitted to Sacramento via Ventura County it would be noted that Fillmore disagrees? Certainly. Okay.
Certainly.
2:10 – 2:2530 turns
I would just, sorry. I wanted to add too to what Carrie was saying and that I think one year sort of like dip our foot in and see what the organization can do but also see to gauge how we feel our voice is really heard through this group. And if you know feedback comes back that we are out of alignment with some things then you know we reevaluate for sure.
Yeah, Angel I was thinking about that too. Let's say are we committed to the 172 that year or can we change our mind if we see that our vote is not being heard? Or it's not working for us? Or can we change it to 1500 for the year? I guess that's my question because it sounds like yeah, we definitely want a vote. We definitely want to be part of and hearing our voices but you also want to see fills up water as well.
Thank
you for your question Council Member Rodriguez. As previously stated, we are at
council discretion.
If it's their discretion that it's not worthwhile to continue participating, someone can bring it back to the council for consideration if we should exit entirely or if we should re-enter on our own but under that $1,500 tier with our own vote. Stephanie, can you just clarify that? If there is a participating city that wants to exit that they can do so after that year, can you just clarify that?
Yes, of course. Thank you for the question Council. Yes if any jurisdiction wants to remove themselves from the alliance they can do so within 10 days written notice. Of course with the County of Ventura's involvement in this there might be additional like communication that needs to happen but yes that is possible
All right, thank you. Thank you.
Yeah just it just seems to me I mean it's a very low risk at 172 or 170 units. It's very very low risk to dip our toe in but I just want to make sure I understand what our role is going to be there
I just have one last question. So how are we updated? How are we apprised of what they've been doing and what, obviously we would have to cast our opinion on something but when ultimately whatever the issue is when it reaches Sacramento how do we know what the outcome was?
Stephanie can you chime in on that on how the LGCA updates participating jurisdictions on the results of their outreach and advocacy?
Yes, of course. Thank you again for the question. So we do communicate with our membership so if the City of Fillmore appoints someone which I kind of assume would be Angel he would receive all the communication and he can report back to the council on the happenings and what's been going on, what's been passed, what hasn't been passed.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Can I entertain a motion?
Yes, I will make that motion that the City Council does join via the Ventura County region for a one-year membership paying $172.08 and I guess appointment can – sorry, I'm in the middle of a motion. But is appointment staff or elected official? Or is it traditionally staff?
Stephanie, can you clarify for participating jurisdictions, is it usually staff that sits on these meetings? Or is it an elected official? Or at the discretion of the participating jurisdiction?
It's typically been staffed, but more than happy to explore if an elected official wants to receive communication.
So I'll save you guys a meeting.
Okay, then I'll put it with a play with just two staff.
Okay. You got a motion the second? Motion second all in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously thank you Okay now moving on to City Council consideration of an updated social media policy superseding council policy number 19-105.
Thank you Mayor, before I introduce this item just want to thank Stephanie for tuning in and for staying at the council meeting answer questions really appreciate your help.
Thank you guys bye
Okay, fantastic. Good evening Mayor, City Council and staff for the record. Angel Garcia, Senior Management Analyst with the city of Fillmore. Today I'm presenting item 9E which asks your council to consider an updated social media policy. Proposed council policy number 26-105 which would supersede the city's current policy which was adopted in 2019. This item was reviewed by the city attorney's office.
So the requested council action staff recommends the following, that your council receive and file this report and adopt resolution 26-4125 which would authorize your council to adopt policy 26-105 and supersede policy number 19-105 and resolution number 19-3712. With this proposed policy there is no fiscal impact to the city. So background and why an update is needed. Some context and background on May 28th, 2019 the council adopted resolution number 1930-3712 approving council policy number 19-105 social media for public use as it's titled which you can see attached in attachment one in your staff report as a part of this item. So under this policy there's a three page policy document that governs how the public interacts with the city social media And one of the main things about this policy is it prohibits comments on city's posts entirely.
So that's why when you go on our social media, that's why you may see no comments whatsoever on our Instagram but also very limited to none on our Facebook as well. The staff report identifies three reasons an update is warranted. First, the 2019 policy doesn't cover how accounts are created, who may post for the city, account security, accessibility especially when it comes to re-sharing content especially in times of emergencies archiving. Second with this new policy we would be in essence taking a different approach when it comes to comments being left on our social media and And third, some of kind of the legalities around comments and kind of addressing the legal language that was in the 2019 policy.
So some of the major changes at a glance, I went ahead and made a comparison chart for your council just as an ease in access. So this slide compares the two policies in the five substantial differences. Of course, the new policy is in your staff packet for reference as well if you want to take a closer look at it. And for the comments that 2019 policy prohibits them. The proposed policy would allow the city to enable comments, and if it does, Section 11 of your new policy treats the comment areas as limited public forums. And enabling the comments would enhance the city's engagement, increase the city's likelihood of showing up early on residents' feed-in algorithm And really what I felt as your PIO in making this policy is that comments are a crucial part to grow your social media audience.
So, I felt that enabling the comments would do better to improve our analytics and our overall growth of our social media platforms. Secondly, the 2019 policy kind of governs how members of the public can interact with the city's social media accounts. The proposed policy would also govern how the city manages our own social media accounts, who is authorized and how are they secured? So password management making sure that they're nice and secure, who has the authority to post on behalf of the city things of that nature is all outlined in this current policy Moderation, of course since the 2019 policy doesn't allow any comments. Ours would actually have specific categories on how we can moderate the comments to ensure there's no obscene comments being left on our platforms and also provides direction for blocking pretty much in 2019 it kind of gives access to folks should be blocked without any notice For this one, there would be consultation with the proper staff to ensure there's an equitable process before someone gets blocked from our city accounts if need be.
So at review we would review this policy twice with everything how it goes in Sacramento with new changes with social media. If we would review this on a two year basis to ensure that we're in compliance with state guidelines and free speech laws things of that nature.
Question? Yes, Council Member Garnica. Does the policy address anonymous
posters? Anonymous posters? So I think you're
thinking about... Or
commenters,
I guess.
Okay, I think what you're referencing to, Council Member Garnica is that You see on community groups where it says anonymous participants and there's some random numbers, those are settings that are on the Facebook group itself. So that's an option you have as part of that group, yes. But if someone were to comment on the city's social media account they would in essence have to make up an anonymous account if they want to truly remain anonymous otherwise it would be from their preferred account.
Okay,
great. Thank you. Yes of course. Any other questions before I move on? Okay thank you council. So moving on sections four through seven are entirely new of the new policy only accounts approved under the policy are official city accounts and if a department wants to create their own account they would have to submit a written request This would be known as account administrators. And they are, and account administrators are authorized in writing and in essence every account would need a primary person at least one backup so that way to ensure that there's constant access to that department, to that account. So let's say if someone leaves you can still ensure there's access and you're not locked out of that account or if it gets hacked things of that nature.
So some key provisions with the comments and the moderation. So under section 11 of the new policy, it underlines rules and guidance that we have when it comes to moderating the comments left on our platforms. It specifically states that there are limited public forums for City posts based on what's being posted. Section 12 lists what may be hidden or what may be removed, especially if there's true threats, obscenity, spam, unsafe links, private information posted without consent and other similar categories. If you want in-depth guidelines it's all listed in that specific section.
One thing I do want to prove just so we're in compliance with free speech laws that the policy doesn't explicitly block or hide criticism, insults or unfavorable opinions about the city officials or its decisions that are not grounds for removal. So I just want to make that clear and then before hiding or removing a comment we as staff would have to preserve a copy and archive it and if a blocking of user is needed for repeated egregious violations it would require consultation with The city manager, city attorney and PIO or whomever we designate just to ensure that we followed all proper protocols if blocking of a person is warranted.
So content standards are there in the policy as well. Section nine covers promoting city co-sponsored, permitted and community events. So the reason why with this new policy, this pretty much gives us a flexibility to reshare posts. As your PIO I've noticed that it seems that the City of Fillmore is pretty much the go-to source for community members to find out what's happening in the City of Fillmore, what's going on. And I noticed this particularly with our analytics when we worked with the annual CESB car show for the 4th of July and the increase in attendance. Since we've been investing in our marketing, we've seen increased attendance across the board for our city events. So in essence, this would give us the flexibility that if we are a sponsor for an event or are in partnership with an event, we could reshare their content.
But also if there's, for example, an extreme heat warning, this also gives us the flexibility to re-share content from a Cal OES, a Cal Fire, or County of Ventura, things of that nature. It gives us those, that flexibility. So fiscal implementation, so if because this is just purely a policy decision there's no fiscal impact to the city. And this would also be in coordination and support your council goal number five which is improve public communication and engagement So to wrap things up, staff recommends that the council receive and follow this report and adopt resolution number 26-4125 approving Council Policy Number 26-105 in superseding Council Policy Number 19-105.
The alternatives for council consideration for your council to determine is you may choose to adopt the current policy that I'm proposing with modifications from your council, or we could continue the item with additional information for a pending city attorney review. Or you can decline to adopt this current policy and the policy from 2019 would remain, or we could continue reviewing and bring some other edits and considerations for your council to determine.
That concludes my presentation. The 2019 policy, the proposed policy and both resolutions are included in your council packet. I want to thank Alexis L. Hall from Tiffany's office for her assistance in reviewing and drafting this policy and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Now I have a question but I have a comment just want to thank you on your presentation and your hard work you know for bringing this Policy up to date and into current time. So thank you so much for your hard work, Angel.
2:25 – 2:308 turns
Thank you, Mayor.
Angel,
I do have a question. Actually I'm very happy and pleased to see that the city is doing everything they can to transparency, communication and share posts. So the fact that you know you mentioned some agencies that would be posting things and you would be able to repost them or if you're sponsoring an event to show like hey yeah the city is not only just doing all these things but They're also sponsoring other non-profits or other events that are going on that other people are putting together. So fantastic, thank you so much for putting it together was really well delivered and looking to see what the members say.
Yes, thank you for your presentation Angel. It was great. I do have questions about the comments. To be honest, I'm super hesitant about lifting the comment. I don't know, ban what we have right now. We're not listing them because of a couple different reasons. One, what kind of monitoring is that going to take from staff? So not only like every day we're putting out content, we're re-sharing and it looks like we might put out more because they'll be able to share some great events that were either in partnership with or sponsoring.
But in social media, posts stay up. So we can post a couple of things and be like oh I'm going to monitor the three posts you put up today Let's say it just goes off the walls, comments from a post four days ago or a post 14 days ago. Or you know what I mean? Like this social media just lives out there for good and for bad. So that's my... One of my concerns is what's the plan for staff monitoring and is that gonna be really intensive possibly?
And then let me see what was my other one on two Spam, spamming comments right? So it might not be offensive and whatever but it could say hey you know get your AirPods for $29.99 and then there's like 20 of them you know what do we have to go back and erase all them so it's just it's sort of air questions around those things concerns
Yeah, absolutely. If I may address those council members, those are very valid concerns. I definitely recognize that as your PIO every day I check our city's accounts making sure what comments are being left with feedback direct messages things of that nature looking at our analytics good thing is is that With our platforms, right? They're ultimately owned and operated by Meta. And Meta is really good at detecting spam especially with harmful links. A lot of times it automatically detects it and removes it before even maybe someone from staff can get a hold of it but as far as monitoring, it would fall on staff as your PIO I will definitely handle that and ensure that There's no harmful links as long as you know it's being shared in accordance with our section 9 or section 11.
I'm sorry, but for example there could be someone that's leaving a safe link right? Discussing this policy, here's the link to that agenda item. That's an example right? So it would fall on staff to moderate but as your PIO I would monitor that look at it and see if it warrants hiding or removal things of that nature. And as far as for comments that are left in posts that were left four to five days ago, I would have to review that.
I do get notifications and I double check that. And especially you can leave filters on as well and a lot of times those filters are really good and could catch some of those harmful comments before they're even visible as well. So we do have some tools in our toolbox to address that.
Thank you. Thank you. Good question.
So okay, so that I got reminded about a question that I did have. So obviously we want to uphold the Constitution and give free speech and allow people to be critical of the government and of us. Of course, that's part of why we're democracy. However, I think and I saw in the language basically that you would be in consultation with the attorney as to whether or not a particular comment crossed the line. Because for example, I could see okay someone wants to criticize me fine that's part of being on the council. However what if they start let's say criticizing members of my family or Veering into areas that are not directly related to my position on the council.
How is that handled? City
Attorney, can you chime in please?
2:30 – 2:3611 turns
It's a very fact-based situation but I mean we'll have to look at the global situation when if something like that unfortunately happened But I can't guarantee that we would be able to remove something like that
Okay So basically, yeah there's no easy answer for that. Okay and okay is there a line that's crossed? For example I mean I would think this would probably be a little bit easier but like personal safety like if someone's making threats
or not... If someone tried to outwear you or your family lived right things like that like try to dox you something like that would absolutely come off okay and it definitely if it was any kind of threat even an implied threat okay and they that would be reported to the police as well
Okay, great. Thank you. Absolutely.
Good question is thinking about the comments and Is there any kind of banner that can be put on a social media post that's sort of like Mayor Mendez reads about our public comments, just even a couple of lines. Just a reminder as folks view things from the city of Fillmore. Again people are going to post maybe what they're going to post but it might be nice to be able to put a label of some sort on what goes out from the city.
Just a reminder about, you know this is a public forum. Again it's not about like Council Member Garnica was saying we understand the absolute constitutional right to criticize, to be transparent, to show concerns Yeah, I don't know. I'm sure it's sort of something that popped to the top of my head on that one.
No, I hear what you're saying council members so this policy requires staff that we have to create a guideline page for the comments and this will be linked in our link tree on our bios of our social media where residents could go visit that web page and see the guidelines when what it comes to leave in the comment. So that way by leaving a comment they recognize that there is this webpage of guidelines That's linked on our platforms that folks can read so that way they're aware of those rules. And then, so this would pretty much warrant accretion of said webpage with our policy, the guidelines and the rules. And the guidelines and the rules would also be included in the webpage. So if you look at the policy we actually do have the language that'd be reflected on the webpage.
Let me get you that. Page number, for those that have the report up. If you look at section 13 disclaimer and public notice language which is on page 17 of this particular item. That language that's highlighted in that faded gray is what will be on there. And another thing I want to know, Council Member, because you remind me of something that although this will be for our social media accounts. This emphasizes that for all official city communications the website will be the main go-to source for any of that right? In the 2019 policy at the time it was Fillmore.com but now this policy recognizes as its FillmoreCA.gov so that's another important change this policy makes
Okay, thank you. And then one other I guess maybe suggestion, I'm not sure this is possible. I know when I'm reading social media and it's an article, right? Lots of times the first comment is like a full link to the article and it has a URL to something I had to click on. I don't know if it's possible to like automate something, but it would be kind of neat to see that. If we made a post and the first comment was the City of Fillmore saying something to the effect of thinking about leaving a comment or are you going to leave a comment? Click here to read the guidelines just like almost like a constant thing for every post I don't know if that's possible. No,
I think that's a good idea Council Member. Okay. I was planning on doing some outreach to notifying folks that some changes are coming to our platform as well as collaborations because I think this opens the door to a lot of good collaborations that we as a city can do with government agencies, non-profits, co-sponsored events and outlining that process. So I do plan to do some outreach which could include letting people know hey here's some common guidelines go to this link right here. Okay all right thank you.
All right. Anything else? No? Then may I have a motion, please?
Okay, I will move that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 26-4125 approving Council Policy No. 26-105 Social Media Policy and superseding Council Policy No. 19-105 Social Media for Public Use adopted May 28th 2019 by Resolution No.19-3712. Thank you. Second?
Okay we got a motion and second all in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, thank you Angel. And now moving on to adoption of resolution 26-4132 authorizing the filing of a claim for fiscal year 2026-2027 Transportation Development Act funds and local transportation funds.
2:36 – 2:429 turns
Good evening Council Members, Mayor Mendez. I'm Debra Cavaletto, Finance Director. SB 325 is known as the Transportation Development Act or TDA of 1971 and it provides funding for transit and non-transit related purposes that comply with the regional transportation plans The local transportation fund, LTF portion of the act is financed from a one... Uh oh. Voice is going. Hold on one second.
Portion was financed from a quarter cent per dollar of the general sale tax collected. The funds are allocated to each county, including Ventura County with a portion passed by the Ventura County cities and VCTC or the Ventura County Transportation Commission administers the funds for this fiscal year 26-27 it was determined the City of Fillmore's allocation will be $812,788 Staff proposes that the city uses $514,638.37 of these funds for the transit operating cost. The FY 26-27 Transit Budget is $708,768. The results of the 24-25 Transit Budget had a carryover amount of $194,000 $129.63 of our Fillmore TDA funds, which has been applied to this transit budget.
If all of the city's transit needs are met, the TDA rule allows the remaining funds to be allocated for streets and roads projects. This amount will be $297,000, $149.60. The adoption of Resolution 26-4132 will result in the City's claim of the $812,788. And then it'll be allocated accordingly that we described above and in the staff report. This item remeets the City Council's goal in the areas of financial management. This is the end of my presentation, I'm available for questions as I can talk.
Thank you Debra. Any questions?
No.
Just great news. Yeah thank you good news okay so seeing no questions uh can i have a motion please
I'd like to move the motion for the City Council to adopt Resolution 26-4132, authorizing city manager or her designee to sign and file a claim with the Ventura County Transportation Commission for the allocation to the city of $812,788 of Transportation Development Act Fund for fiscal year 2026-27. Okay we got a motion second? Second. Okay all in favor?
Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously, thank you.
Moving on to item number 10 City Manager Verbal Report
Thank You Mayor I wanted to notify you and also the community that the Ventura County Library Foundation will be soon releasing a request for proposal or an RFP this week to hire a consultant to conduct a community needs assessment for the Fillmore library VCLF anticipates awarding such contracts sometime mid-November, with the Community Needs Assessment expected to take place sometime in June of next year. Any questions about the RFP should be directed to Nancy Sharm who's like the library director at the county level Or to the Ventura County Library Foundation. The city's not the one issuing the RFP, it's through the foundation but I think it's a step forward for them to figure out the needs at the library and spending some of the funds that they currently have.
Also, I would like to recognize and sincerely thank our Public Works Department staff who yesterday worked 12 hours of overtime during Labor Day. While a lot of us were able to enjoy the holiday with our families, they were here working the entire day. And so I just wanted to publicly thank them for their efforts for ensuring that they're keeping our water system safe Your efforts do not go unnoticed and thank you from the City Manager's office.
Also, we were able to publish the last edition of the city's newsletter. Thank You Angel for your help with that it has been already published then we just want to encourage residents to continue to sign up for the newsletters so that they can keep up with All the good things that the city is currently working on. And also just remind you to stay connected, follow us on our social media platforms and the website as well. And then remind everyone that September will only have one council meeting Council and myself will be traveling to the annual League of Cities conference. And so unless there's something pressing, the September 22nd meeting has been canceled and we will resume at the October meeting first October meeting that concludes my update.
Thank you.
Thank you Okay So with that being said I will now move To adjourn this meeting and we will meet again at our next regular scheduled meeting at 6 30 p.m On October 13th have a good night Yes, thank you.