UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.0:00 – 0:032 turns
Good evening. Council Member Barrett. Present. Council Member Delgado. Present. Council Member Means. Here. Mayor Inegrin. Present. And the record will reflect that Council Member Castro is not with us this evening.
Next item is 4A, proclamation declaring April 18th, 2026 as the City of Moorpark's observance of Arbor Day. Parks and Facilities Supervisor Leland Baxter please join me at the podium to receive the proclamation. Proclamation of Moorpark City Council declaring April 18th, 2026 as a city's observance of Arbor Day. Whereas trees are a vital part of our community providing environmental economic and social benefits including improving air quality conserving water reducing soil erosion and enhancing the beauty and livability of our city Whereas trees contribute to the health and well-being of our residents by offering shade, reducing energy costs, supporting wildlife and creating a more sustainable and resilient environment. And whereas the planting and proper care of trees are essential actions that individuals in communities can take to protect natural resources for future generations.
Whereas the City of Moorpark has demonstrated a continued commitment to urban forestry and environmental stewardship by being recognized as a Tree City USA for the 20th consecutive year. And whereas in observance of Arbor Day along with the celebration of Earth Day, the city will partner with The Teaching Zoo at Moorpark College for the Earth Day At The Zoo on April 18, 2026 and will give away 100 trees to residents on a first-come first-served basis to encourage community participation in tree planting efforts. Whereas Arbor Day provides an additional opportunity to recognize the importance of trees and inspire residents to plant and care for them throughout the community. Now, therefore the City Council of the City of Moorpark does hereby proclaim April 18th 2026 as Moorpark's observance of Arbor Day and urges all residents to celebrate this day by planting trees caring for our urban forests participating in community activities that promote environmental stewardship.
A witness whereof the City Council of the City of Moorpark does set its hand and cause the seal of the city of Moorpark to be affixed this 15th day of April 2026 Would you like to say a few words?
0:03 – 0:086 turns
Thank you Mary Integrin. I also want to thank the rest of our esteemed City Council for their ongoing support of our urban forestry program So yeah, we celebrate Arbor Day every year this year is a little special because it is the 20th year that We are a tree city USA as designated by the Arbor day foundation so landmark year for us. We are celebrating this Saturday in collaboration with the teaching zoo at Moorpark College and Also with our Earth Day festival We'll be there to give away 100 trees. I'll be on hand to answer any questions you might have, so go ahead and come on out this Saturday, bring your questions, bring your gloves, grab a tree and celebrate with us! Thank You
Our next item is 4B, a proclamation declaring April 12th through 18th 2026 as Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week. Will Veteran Animal Control Specialist Loc Tran and Control Technician Eric Lozano please join me to receive the proclamation? A proclamation of Moorpark City Council declaring April 12th through 18th, 2026 as Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week.
Whereas the National Animal Care and Control Association has designated the second full week of April each year as Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week. And whereas animal control officers play a vital role in protecting public safety, promoting responsible pet ownership and ensuring the humane treatment of animals within the community. Whereas Loc Tran and Eric Lozano of the City of Moorpark's Vector Animal Control Division both combined have provided decades of dedicated service to the Moorpark community by reuniting pets with their owners, addressing dangerous animal situations, preventing the spread of disease and building strong relationships with residents and pet owners throughout the community.
Whereas City Animal Control staff work closely with residents, public safety partners and regional agencies to provide education, enforcement and support services that benefit both residents and animals. And whereas the dedication and professionalism of Moorpark's Vector Animal Control Division staff often goes unnoticed despite the important role they play in maintaining the health, safety and quality of life in our community. And whereas Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week provides an opportunity to recognize and thank the team of Lok Tran and Eric Guzlano for their commitment to service, and the care they provide to the Moorpark community.
Now therefore be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Moorpark does hereby declare April 12th through 18th, 2026 Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week and extends its appreciation to the city's outstanding vector animal control team for their continued service and dedication to the community. A witness whereof, the City Council of the City of Moorpark does set its hand and cause the seal of the City of Moorpark to be affixed this 15th day of April, 2026.
On behalf
of the Public Works Department, thank you so much for recognizing Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week. We are proud to serve the Moorpark community and remain committed to protecting the health and safety of both our residents and their pets. We truly appreciate the city highlighting our dedication to residents and the community, and recognizing the importance of the work we do every day. Thank you.
I'd just like to thank the City Council and the rest of the city hall staff for giving us this week. I know animal control is something that most people don't think about too much, but they do play a crucial part here in the city dealing with pets, wildlife and trying to resolve issues between neighbors with barking dogs and random things that most people wouldn't think are duties. And we do it happily to help out and make sure that everyone gets the service that they deserve here in the city. Thank you.
Next item is five public comment Do we have any speakers?
0:08 – 0:156 turns
Yes, mr. Mayor We have two speakers this evening for public comment And as this is public comment those speakers will have three minutes to speak on items that are Public comment items or items that are on the consent agenda So our first speaker is Harvey plaques who will be followed by Daniel Politi Mr. Plaques you have three
minutes Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Councilman. My name is Harvey Plax. I've been a part of Moorpark community for the last 40 years. I am also a member of the Board of Directors of Boys & Girls Club of Moorpark in Simi Valley. It was founded 40 years ago by Moorpark Rotary Noontime. The club was created to support the children who return home after school without adult supervision, an issue that normally affects over 700,000 kids every year.
Our mission is to inspire and enable young people to reach their full potential as productive, caring, and responsible citizens. We provide a program in four core areas, health and well-being, academic enrichment, life and work source readiness, and character and leadership. Our club serves more than 1,700 kids a day in 10 different locations with a focus on families who need us most.
About 74% of our members come from low-income households. Research shows that children who regularly attend the club are more confident, perform better in school, stay physically active and build strong friendships. Findings come from donations grants, community fundraisers and our annual gala. This year our auction and gala will be held on May 2nd at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library with Havana nights being the theme.
The event will feature dinner entertainment exciting auction items such as travel packages jewelry sports tickets and one of the items was a trip for four To Catalina, flying to Catalina to have lunch. Electric bikes and many other trips. Tonight I'm asking each of you to consider attending and passing the word out through your media. The citizens' voices and their platforms will get the word out.
When residents hear about the events through the city they listen. We ask that you help spread the word to residents, businesses, community organizations to attend the gala, to donate items, to sponsor tables, to bid in the auction and support the mission whenever they can. On behalf of the Board of Directors and on staff and volunteers most importantly the kids that we serve and your continuing support Together we can make sure that no child in our community faces a future alone.
You can log into our website, Boys and Girls Club Events. That's bgcevents.com or 805-527-4437. I will leave some information on the entry table for the people that are coming. This is really important. We do a great job in Moorpark. It helps keep the city safe and I appreciate your time within three minutes. Thank you.
And our second speaker under public comment is Daniel Politi. And this is the point where you would speak about any general public comment or items that are on the consent calendar, you'll receive another opportunity to speak on public hearing items.
So I got three minutes to rip through it all right now? Is what we should try and do? Okay. I'll just do the public comment one and then I'll try and get the bullets in. And if I hit buzz me out. Ready? Go! All right so I'm going to read this pretty fast. It was supposed to be cadence and all emotional blah, blah, blah. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm here tonight to ask a simple question. What is the city for? Is the city just pavement, budgets, contracts and reports or is it a promise? A promise that the people... Oh, I should make that bigger. That the people who live here matter. A promise that when fear enters our neighborhoods courage enters this chamber. A promise that when families are broken this city does not look away because right now families are living with terror that many of us will never fully understand especially not many of us in this room making what we're making Children are going to sleep not knowing if their parents will be there in the morning.
Fathers leave for work and their families wonder if they'll come home. Parents are taken, children are left behind to carry consequences that they did not create, did not choose and do not deserve. When this happens the injury doesn't stop at one doorstep it spreads. It enters classrooms, it enters churches, workplaces, it enters the hearts of the neighbors who begin to understand that if the government becomes It can become cold enough, distant enough, unaccountable enough that any family can be made to feel disposable. But people aren't disposable. Children aren't collateral.
And a city that claims to serve the public cannot be neutral when the public trust is being hollowed out from the inside. So tonight I'm asking this council to do two things. First, establish an emergency family stability fund for residents who have been harmed when a parent or caregiver is taken by federal agencies before that family has had a fair chance to navigate the legal process, i.e., due process.
Let that fund help with food, rent, child care, transportation, school needs, legal referrals and trauma support. Second, adopt a clear policy that forbids city staff and local law enforcement personnel from moonlighting for ICE-related federal immigration enforcement operations where that work creates a conflict of interest with their duty to serve the people of this city. This is not a request for chaos. It's a request for conscience. It's not anti-law, it's pro community. It's not radical, it's freaking responsible because the true measure of a city is not how efficiently it moves money.
It's how bravely it protects human dignity when that dignity is under pressure. I ask you tonight to remember this, government reveals itself most clearly not by what it says it values but by what is willing to protect when protecting people becomes inconvenient. So I'm asking you not as bureaucrats, not as managers of line items but as human beings entrusted with other human beings to act All right, and I'm going to buzz through this stuff real quick. I'm sorry if it's out of line but I still got 35 seconds so 10A, I've got a question for Homie Dever.
AMG Associates received $940,000 in one warrant cycle about 42% of the full register. I want to know what work that paid for? What fund and why the invoice contract backup is missing? 9a Paul Chan and PJ Godina. I want to know why we don't have the numbers on the monthly sewer bill as is, what the proposed one would be and what the dollar increase would be and why there was no written staff report attached to this agenda. Let's skip to Jeremy's that's a good one. Jeremy I want to know on 10-D why the six month library extension does no fiscal impact?
Thank you.
You will receive an opportunity to speak on the items that you were just touching upon All
0:15 – 0:217 turns
right, thank you all the speakers next item 6 reordering of in addition to the agenda we need to pull anything from consent
Yeah, I'd like to pull 10e please
Okay
And then good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. Quickly I'd like to introduce Ms. Marroquin, our city attorney who's standing in this evening for Mr. Ennis and Mr. Henselman. So just wanted to welcome her to our chambers. And then secondly, I did want to bring to your attention consent item 10D of which staff has provided a supplemental staff report earlier this afternoon.
It's also been shared publicly and it is also available for public review in the binder just to simply correct a typographical error. Thank you. All
right, move on to item 7. Announcements, future agenda items, reports of meetings and conferences attended by council members and mayor. I'll go with Mr. Barrett
On March 20th, I attended the Chamber of Commerce Networking Breakfast. On March 21st, I attended the Spring Spectacular event at the Teaching Zoo at Moorpark College. What a great weekend that was and wonderful job by the students putting on their presentations. If you've not been to that event, I highly encourage you to mark your calendars for that in the future.
On March 24th, I attended the MESA Center Grand Opening. That's the Math Engineering Science Achievement Center at Moorpark College and a great opportunity for students studying those programs to have extra tutoring and opportunity. It was funded through a grant program that they received. On March 24th, I attended the Marketing Ad Hoc Committee. On April 2nd, I attended the Regional Defense Partnership meeting.
On April 2nd I attended the Clean Power Alliance Board meeting. On April 7th, I attended the State of Moorpark hosted by the Moorpark Chamber of Commerce and it was a great event. I think they did a wonderful job. On April 8th,I attended the Chamber of Commerce board meeting On April 8th, I attended the Lucky Q grand opening. What a great new addition to Moorpark to have an option, billiards option that we can go very affordable and they did a wonderful job renovating that space.
Very excited to have them in the community And great people to just an amazing community members, and I really enjoyed getting to know them On April 9th. I attended the Moorpark College art gallery ribbon-cutting Great new space that they have at Moorpark College They did a beautiful job of putting in that That gallery, and so I encourage you if you're on campus to check that out.
And that was it.
Okay on March 20th, I also attended the Chamber of Commerce networking breakfast on March 23rd. I attended a focus group for the Arroyo Drive project Which was basically an update for the via de la roya mobile home park Manager to let them know where we were in the process so that she can take that back to the community As it's been a long-awaited project On March 24th, I also attended the Marketing Ad Hoc Committee along with Councilmember Barrett. And I'm very excited that we will be showing you the wayfinding signage soon. It's almost there. Very close.
April 3rd, I attended the High Street Arts Center opening of Footloose and I might be a little bit biased but I do think it's a fantastic show with a great cast and you guys should all come and check it out. On April 7th, I attended the State of the City with all my fellow council members. An extremely well-run and very well-attended event. Really happy to see where Moorpark is now and where it's going.
On April 8th, also attended the Moorpark Chamber of Commerce board meeting and the grand opening of our new pool hall, Lucky Q. Councilmember Barrett said they did an incredible job renovating the space and making it their own. They have a huge following already, and they're really active at getting new pool players so if you don't know how to play pool they were very encouraging. They have all types of classes in leagues.
Also on April 8th, I attended the immigration stakeholders meeting along with council member Means. And I'm happy to see that Moorpark is at the forefront of hosting these meetings and glad to see that everyone especially Chief Odenath is willing to think outside the box and collaborate with other people in other groups. On April 9th, they attended the Moorpark Young Professionals Lunch. It's a really great group that consistently is growing introducing new people every meeting We meet the second Thursday of every month at different Noorpark restaurants. And this afternoon, I attended the Community Economic Development meeting along with council member Meadens.
0:21 – 0:262 turns
I think you guys covered most of it for me. Thank you. Sorry City Clerk Spangler, but I got a few as well. On the 6th of April, 4-6, I attended the Chamber of Commerce Ad Hoc Committee meeting with Mayor Enneagrin. On 4-7, I attended the State of the City. I know many of you were there as well and it's just, as Councilman Barrett was saying, it's great to see where the city is and where we're going and remember the progress that we've been making here. On the 8th of April, on 4-8, I attended the Immigration Stakeholders meeting with Councilwoman Galgado which I agree it was a positive collaboration and just a joy to see concerned people coming together in a positive way across many different perspectives. Also on that same day, 4-Eight went to Lucky Q ribbon cutting.
Even a guy like me would feel comfortable playing pool with two left hands. And on 4-8, I also went to the Moorpark Zoo Advisory Board meeting. It's a gem that we have right up the hill and I keep hearing people in our community say, do we have a zoo at Moorpark? We sure do! And it's just wonderful the exhibits they're opening and the improving facilities and access that they're providing On the 9th of April, I met with Darren Kettle, the CEO of Metrolink at Union Station. Got a tour, got to see the tracks and got to hear a bit about the state of commuter railroads and transit funding in our federal, state, and local jurisdictions We've got a real gem in our train station. You know, somebody close to me rides it every single day and making sure that we support that way of commuting and ride sharing and mass transit is important.
On 4-10 April 10th I met with John Davidson of the Masters HOA and got a tour of their community on 4-15 today along with Councilwoman Delgado. I had an economic development ad hoc meeting. And then just a quick response, unfortunately I will be out of town Mr. Platt when the Boys and Girls Club event is but I have been to that event before what an incredible event in such a worthy cause. I'm more than happy to spread the word because it's truly something our community can enjoy doing.
It's good to do and doing good. Thank you.
Had to skip around a little bit. I kept adding things as you guys were all talking. Been off for a little bit. All right, so Friday March 20th, I attended the Chamber Breakfast. Tuesday March 24th, went to Mountain Meadows School and I met with about four different classes and talked to them about how city government works. And I'm pretty sure the kids all thought I was way cooler than I actually am when I would tell them exactly what we did and I didn't live in a big white house With security guards, they didn't understand that. But it was great.
Kids asked hilarious questions. And then Wednesday... Let's see. Sorry. Wednesday, April 1st, I attended the chamber ad hoc committee with Council Member Means. And then Tuesday, April 7th to the State of the City which was also a very well run event. Chamber did a great job with that one and Wednesday, April 8th I also attended the Lucky Key ribbon cutting and it's great to see that place back in business again or different owner now but it used to be a pool hall before new owners came in did a lot of renovations to it and really excited for that. It's gonna be a great place.
That's all I have to report. I got a few announcements here. City of Moorpark will host a home buyers workshop on Saturday, April 18th, 2026 from 9 AM to 3 PM at the Moorpark Community Center's Apricot Room. Workshop is free of charge. My Way Home will present information on the home buying process, do's and don'ts of purchasing a home, credit building tips and first time home buyer loans and down payment assistance program.
Registration is available at mywayhome.org slash events or by calling 805-273-7800. Skate Night! Put on your quads or blades and join us for an evening of skating, music, contests and more at the first Spring Skate Night on Friday April 17th. The fun takes place from 6pm to 8pm at the Royal Vista Community Park's multi-use court. Admission is free. For details visit moorparkca.gov slash skate Earth Day at the Zoo. The City of Moorpark is proud to support Earth Day at the Zoo. Join us to celebrate the earth and its wild creatures on Saturday, April 18th from 11 a.m. to 430 p.m., at the Teaching Zoo at Moorpark College. For details and online coupon for free child admission visit moorparkca.gov slash earth Cinco de Mayo Fun Run. Sign up for our festive Cinco de Mayo family fun run.
Run will be held on Sunday, May 3rd at the Royal Vista Park Trail. Run or walk the trail, play Loteria and more. For details visit moorparkca.gov slash cinco. You guys are all doing that.
0:26 – 0:306 turns
We're
excited to share two upcoming family-friendly events for the Moorpark City Library. First, join us for our annual Kids Fest on Saturday April 25th from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., at the library in adjacent community spaces. This free event celebrates literacy, learning and community with activities for all ages including storytelling, live performances, hands-on crafts, a community resource fair and a touch-a-truck experience. It's a wonderful opportunity for families to connect with local organizations and enjoy fun engaging day together. We also invite the community to a family birding event on Saturday, April 18th from 9 to 11 AM at Arroyo Vista Park in partnership with the Conejo Valley Audubon Society. This interactive drop-in program encourages families to explore local wildlife through guided bird walks, nature activities and beginner friendly bird identification.
It's great way to get outside learn something new and experience nature together. Both events are free and open to the public hope to see you all there! All right, next is public hearing item 8A. Let's consider status of vacancies and recruitment and retention efforts in compliance with Assembly Bill 2561. Mr. Tahirihnu?
Good evening Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Carolina Tijerino, Human Resources Manager here to present the City's Annual Workforce Report presented in compliance with Assembly Bill 2561 a state law that took effect January 1st 2025 requiring local agencies to publicly report on position vacancies recruitment and retention efforts at least once each fiscal year For fiscal year 2025-2026, the city budgeted 78.71 full time equivalent positions in calendar year 2025. The city average vacancy rate was 4.6%, an improvement from the previous calendar year of 6.7%.
During calendar year 2025, the city successfully filled nine positions across multiple departments including the City Manager, Assistant City Manager and several technical and administrative roles. The City has taken a number of steps to strengthen its recruitment and retention efforts. These include streamlining the hiring and onboarding process, offering flexible work schedules, providing signing and referral bonuses for difficult-to-fill positions, expanding professional development opportunities, participating in career fairs, and completing comprehensive classification and compensation study to ensure compensation remains competitive and equitable.
The City recognized bargaining unit SEIU Local 721 was notified of tonight's hearing on April 3rd and was given the opportunity to make a presentation. Because the city's vacancy rate is well below the 20% threshold established by AB 2561, no additional vacancy or workforce data is required to be disclosed at this time. The city is in full compliance with Assembly Bill 2561. Our vacancy rate has improved and our efforts to recruit and retain a strong, stable workforce are ongoing. This concludes my report. I'm available to answer any questions the Council may have, and I respectfully request that the Council receive and file this report. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any questions of staff? No questions? Do we have any speakers?
No Mr. Mayor, no speakers on this public hearing item.
Thank you. Well this is receive and file so all in favor? Aye. Okay. Next is Public Hearing Item 8B. It's considered resolution updating the citywide schedule of fees and service charges including development impact fees and staff real-time billing rates in rescinding Resolution Number 2025-4309. Mr. Poonsalam
0:30 – 0:366 turns
Hi, good evening Mayor and City Council members. Tonight I am presenting an update to the city's schedule of fees and service charges including the development impact fee and staff real-time billing rates. So some background on December 18 2024 council adopted ordinance number 524 which updated the methodology of updating the city's development impact fees annually using the annual percent change in the construction cost index or CCI For the L.A. region, as reported by Engineering News Record for the 12-month period ending in February.
For this past 12-month period ending February 2026, the annual change in CCI was 0.3%. On April 16, 2025 Council adopted resolution number 2025-4309 which among other things authorized staff to update the user and regulatory fees annually using the annual percent change in the all urban consumer price index for the LA Long Beach Anaheim region for the 12 month period ending in February.
For this past 12 months ending February 2026, the annual change in CPI was 2.9%. This year new fees include a credit card processing fee of 3.95% and an e-check fee of $1.95 which was discussed at the March 4th, 2026 council meeting. In addition to that, facility rental fees are being proposed to be removed from the citywide schedule of fee and service charges and will be adopted as its own schedule. The item will be brought forth to the City Council as a separate council item.
In addition, staff real-time billing rates are being updated to reflect changes since the last update to those rates on September 4th 2024 when resolution number 2024-4267 was adopted. The calculated rates include the updates for fiscal year 25-26 and 26-27, which both incorporated a 3% COLA. In addition, the benefit load rate used for the calculation has been adjusted to 44.58% to reflect fiscal year 26- 27 benefit costs, an increase of 0.37% from fiscal year 24-25.
The overall change to the staff billing rates, incorporating the 3% COLA and the increase of benefit load rate results in an average increase of 8.2%. The proposed 8. 2% increase noted in this schedule also includes all city positions both full-time and part-time in the resolution and the staff billing rate schedules and includes overtime rate which considers non-managerial positions.
These rates are used for cost recovery purposes for several city programs, including the calculation of deposit-based permit application fees charged by the Community Development Department, staff time devoted to public work projects and grant reimbursement. The update to the City's schedule of fees and service charges, including development impact fees and staff real-time billing rates if approved will become effective July 1st, 2026. This is a public hearing. A public hearing notice was published in the Ventura County Star newspaper on April 5th and April 10th. The notice was also emailed to the Building Industry Association of Southern California the gas company, and Southern California Edison as per their requests. And it was also posted on the city's website and posting board.
Staff is recommending the City Council opens the public hearing, accept public testimony, close the public hearing, and adopt a resolution to update the schedule of fees and service charges including development impact fees and staff real-time billing rates and rescind Resolution Number 2025-4309 This concludes my presentation, and then we're available if you have any questions you may have.
Thank you. Any questions of staff? All right. We'll go ahead and open up the public hearing. Do we have any speakers?
Yes, Mr. Mayor, we do have two speakers on this particular item. First speaker is Daniel Politi followed by John Gregory-Chok. And since this is a public hearing, speakers have five minutes in which to address the council.
Is it I'm addressing them or can I address the guy who presented? Addressing
the council.
Okay, hello council. I'm just going to give the questions that I would ask if I were being asked to rubber stamp this. I would ask to see one real example of how staff billing rates reached 8.2% and then on the COLA question if my math is correct or his math, I'm wondering how he calculated the compounding COLA because I don't think you're supposed to add those 3%. So, I think it's 1.03 times 1.3. But I'm not an expert. You guys have experts on payroll. So, I would just ask Mr. Poulsen who was the one who published the paper.
Your report says the updated real-time billing rate exhibit is available in the Office of City Clerk. Not attached for the public calculation workbook. I would be wondering who's responsible for not attaching it to the calculation file and how residents can test whether or not these fees stay within a reasonable cost with some sort of math behind them? Those would be my questions, thank you for your time. Thank you.
0:36 – 0:4323 turns
And our second speaker is Mr. John Gregory-Chuck and again you have five minutes to address the council.
Awesome, thank
you.
Hello. My name is John Gregerchuk. I'm a resident just outside of town off of Hitch Boulevard in Homeacres, and I'm also a builder. And so when I saw that this was on the agenda and it included the permit fees, the development fees, the planning fees, I figured it'd be fun for me to come and kind of explain what that might look like for me as a builder if I'm building a single home.
If we were to take one single family home and kind of run it through some of the building and permitting and planning fees associated with this fee schedule, It might be illuminating to see what that looks like. So let's take a small modest 1,800 square foot four-bedroom two-bath home and then we can apply an average cost of construction about $400 per square foot to build this home that gives us a cost the construction hard costs of about eight hundred and eighty thousand dollars Now, when we look at the fees associated across the planning fees, the building fees, the mechanical review fees, the electrical review fees, the plumbing review fees. There's also Green review fees. The way the fees are currently structured are all based on a percentage of your building permit and your building permit is based on a sliding scale, based on the valuation of the total cost of your project.
And so when we look at this single family home associated with a four bedroom two bath home those costs Just the permit, the planning and the impact fees result in about 12% of your construction costs added. So you have $880,000 and then you can add 12% just in the permit fees associated with that so that can kind of provide some context on what that looks like for a project That 12% does not include the affordable housing fee. If you are required to provide an affordable housing fee on your project, that's an additional $111,000 and so that essentially doubles the fees that you're paying to the City of Moorpark to build a single home. And that brings you to an additional 25% added to the cost of construction And so the reason I highlight this is just we are in a housing crisis and we do want to see more for sale homes being built in the city of Moorpark.
And I just want to illuminate kind of what that fee structure looks like, and also just ask if there's an opportunity or if there was an opportunity to sit down to kind of see how these fees impact the actual, I know they are impact fees but it's how the development impacts a city. But also how those impact fees impact residents and future residents who would love to call Moorpark home. And so yeah that's what I'd love to talk about with the costs and I'm happy to answer questions about that or talk in more detail And then just in general, I think there's some pretty neat things that have come down. I know the state laws are pretty controversial when it comes to housing. There is one that's a little more fun and it could help the city with the impact fees and the fees associated with plan check and building permit reviews.
AB 253 allows small residential projects, so if you're building 10 or fewer homes to submit through a private provider plan check. That private provider plan check could potentially save the city some money and it also gives the builder the option of selecting who will do their plan check and reviews. And then they, the builder and the customer can then choose what their fees will actually cost because they can compare and shop around with the market. So that one just for your reference is AB 253. It is brand new so it's these housing laws are always changing. So I know it's super complicated but I really appreciate the time and I appreciate you giving me a chance to kind of speak to how this would impact me as a builder. Thank you.
And those were the two speakers we had on this particular item.
All right, so we'll close the public hearing and move to discussion. First question, AB 253 how does that apply to Moorpark?
Can I defer this to our CDD director?
Good evening, thank you very much. So I myself am still getting up to speed on it but my understanding is that this provides options for developers and homeowners who would like to develop for plan checks that exceed 30 days with certain jurisdictions. It allows them the opportunity to bring in their own plan checker to provide that service on behalf of the municipality and that is the extent to which I'm familiar with at this time.
Okay, so that's only if it's going to take over 30 days. It's not a monetary comparison?
That is my understanding at this point. It has been signed into law, but I'm not yet familiar with that nor have I heard it really brought up as a potential option at our counter. My other concern from what I heard by Mr. Gregorchuk was I do not believe that certain plan check fees obviously would no longer be charged because we're not providing that service, but the other impact fees obviously would still need to be collected for the development. Correct.
Thank you. Yeah,
I know we're in discussion now, but we'll go back to the questions Regarding comparing to Long Beach, Anaheim. How are we compared to local cities as far as our fees?
Yeah, this was a discussion that occurred a few years ago when we adopted our development impact fees. It's challenging this evening because the action before us tonight is to escalate those fees in accordance with the annual increases that are being put in place so this is not imposing any new fees for the city it's simply escalating them I don't have the knowledge of when our fees were approved several years ago But I remember there was a discussion in comparison with similar jurisdictions about where our fees bore out.
And where were they?
Yeah, I recall that discussion not where we landed
specifically
so if that's something the council would like more information on be happy to prepare that and bring it back.
In my discussion with PJ he said we were relatively equal with most other cities in the area as far as he was aware but...
My understanding is that we were middle of the road as well.
Middle
of the road.
After the increase. After the increase, that's correct. That's my
understanding.
0:43 – 0:459 turns
Chris? You got anything?
No? Yeah
for... Could you explain your 8% methodology for our speaker?
So since the last time the staff billing rate was approved, which was in 2024, we've had two COLAs. So it is additive on top of each other to 3% plus the 3%, and then adding in our benefits, the increase in benefits for medical costs and other benefit costs based on that. We do the calculation on what the rate is for each staff member based on their both the maximum step as well as the benefits, and then we take the average and calculate that for the change from this proposal number and the prior adopted one. And it came out to about 8.2%. Perfect.
Thank you. It's not going to be a even 8. 2% for each one because it's the average of the whole. Thank you.
OK. Tom, comments? Questions? OK. Yeah. I mean it makes sense to me the costs are going up for everything and staying in the middle of the road is a good thing. We're not outside of anything locally. So I'll go ahead and I'll move the recommendation.
Second.
Move the motion and second we need a roll call.
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion and second we need a roll call.
Show transcript
And the record will reflect that Council Member Castro is not with us this evening.
I move on to Presentation Action Discussion Item 9A That is considered sewer rate presentation by Water and Sanitation Director Paul Chan, Ventura County Water Works District 1 County of Ventura Public Works Agency
0:45 – 1:025 turns
Good evening again, Mr. Mayor staff is requesting that that item be pulled at this time as that will be coming back to the council on May 6th
Move on to presentation action discussion item 9b Let's consider resolution revising the rules and regulations governing city facilities rentals and facility rental fees Deposits and additional charges in rescinding resolution number 2020 dash three nine six three miss Anderson
Thank you, Honorable Mayor and Council. Tonight I'm presenting recommended changes to the City's Facility Rental Rules and Fees. We are recommending several changes to our rental rules which were last updated in 2020 as well as a change in the way that we actually calculate and apply fees to user groups. So do you have a PowerPoint here?
In Miss Anderson real quickly council before you begin I did want to bring to your attention as well on 9b that the Supplemental packet was provided to you earlier this afternoon. It is available for public consumption Did our city clerk but I did want to make that clear Sorry, Ms. Anderson.
No problem. Okay so changes to the rental rules and fees. First I'd like to go over some of the more significant changes to our rental rules as I mentioned these were last updated in 2020 so about six years ago and changes were made to address new rental trends issues that have come up within the last few years Many of the changes are just a general cleanup of the language throughout for clarity and transparency. There's also some language that was moved to more appropriate sections for consistency and just a better flow with the document.
We added some definitions for clarity, so we added definitions for non-profit organization, public agency, recurring rental, special attraction, and vendor. And this is also to eliminate redundancy of repeatedly defining those throughout the resolution. We added some language to comply with new California laws that have come about since the last time we revised these. One is to comply with the California Public Resources Code in our permits required section, we currently require a rental permit if you have 25 or more people in attendance.
There is a new law from the state that if an eligible entity is doing interpretive services in your park, you have to allow them to do that with 30 or less people without a permit. So we have added some language to address that to make sure we're in compliance with that new California public resources code. We've also added some language to address sidewalk vendors. There have been a lot of new laws about sidewalk vendors Most of those are addressed in the Community Development Department They still have to get permits and other things, but there's really no way to regulate them from operating in a park once they Have that permit from community development So we do make sure to carve that out in our rules that Sidewalk vendors are exempt from getting a park rental permit to operate in a park But we do also stipulate that they cannot operate within 300 feet of a permitted rental And this is because many of our rentals, particularly events and tournaments have their own vendors there.
And we don't want to have a conflict. And then finally, we added some language to address obtaining temporary food facility permits from Ventura County. Ventura County has a fairly narrow definition of what a community event is. And so this added language would give our department director the authority to declare permitted rental a community event for the purpose of obtaining their environmental health permit and it would solely relate to that.
We have revised some of our policies for our larger renters, for rentals that are 1,000 plus in attendance. We are now going to require a 60-day application submission period rather than 30 days and this is because those larger rentals require other public agencies to be involved including getting places of assembly permit from Ventura County Fire. Many times we have to have law enforcement scheduled Oftentimes they do have vendors, there's insurance requirements. So this just gives staff adequate time to make sure that we can coordinate with other public agencies to make sure that those rentals go smoothly.
We did actually decrease though the cancellation window from 60 days to 45 days which just gives a little bit more flexibility to the renter but still allowing adequate time to re-rent that facility if needed. There were some other changes to our cancellation section as well. We increased our cancellation window for inclement weather from 72 hours, which is three calendar days up to five calendar days and this is just allow more planning time whether it's just a parent with a pavilion for their child and they need to reschedule that birthday party or if it's a large venture with a tournament and they need to notify vendors and teams It just provides a little more flexibility to them But we do explicitly state in that section that the non-refundable fees are still non refundable and those primarily Relate to permit application fees which are used to cover staff time to process permits Again, the renters still can reschedule they can still get a credit but we're just not going to refund those Permit application fees.
And then finally we added some language to just clearly address cancellations that are due to wet fields and rules violations These were already implied in the resolution, but we just wanted to more explicitly state them for transparency Another change, we relaxed the restrictions on locations of attractions performers and equipment in the parks because again throughout the resolution staff already has the ability to regulate that. And then we did add some language to just explicitly give the director the authority to limit rental attendance and this would be to prevent something like a 5,000 person rental at Tierra Jada Park. Some parks don't have the parking they just don't have the infrastructure so we wanted to still reserve some ability to limit very large rentals at certain parks We have added some language to place conditions on the storage of renters' property, and this has come up because we now have several renters that are storing property.
We have a lacrosse group that does their season at Arroyo Vista Park now and they have a storage container there. We have a rental group at the community center that has a storage container there. We have several soccer club teams that store their soccer goals on our property. And then we also have a dog agility renter that has overnight storage for her agility events. So we felt it was appropriate to add some language just explicitly stating that if you're going to store property, it does have to be requested on your reservation application and then on the approved rental permit.
And we are also making a condition that if you're doing overnight storage on a facility, the renter does have to rent that facility until the closing time and then begin the rental in the morning at opening time. And this is to prevent a renter from taking use away from the public or another renter just because their property is being stored. And then for rental restrictions, we have added a restriction for the Magnolia Conference Room and City Council Chambers to be limited to meetings and similar activities that are appropriate for those rooms.
We are also restricting portable lights to Arroyo Vista Community Park. This is already being done in practice but it's just Solidifying that Currently the only groups really using portable lights are some of our youth sports organizations And if there was a concern with this restriction, we do have separate agreements with all these youth sports groups That will be actually renegotiated next year so again these are just rental rules for the entire public if there was a Desire to let the youth sports organizations use portable lights elsewhere. That could actually be dressed in their facility use agreements And then finally, we are prohibiting recurring use on open grass areas that are smaller parks to prevent renters from dominating the turf area of the park.
We would still allow that recurring use at Arroyo Vista, Mountain Meadows, Peach Hill and Poindexter because those are larger parks with large grass areas so having a recurring rental there would not take us away from the neighborhood for those particular parks. And then going on to our rental fee updates. Our rental fees were actually established back in 1986 just on a market survey and we have, you know, updated them periodically over the years. There was a change made in 2023 when they were incorporated into the user and regulatory fee schedule And then at that time they were increased in 24 and 25 by CPI. And so what we're proposing is removing the rental fees from that user and regulatory fee schedule, and putting them at the same resolution as our rental rules because the rental rules and fees are very closely related.
And this just provides better transparency for the public if a renter comes in they can see the rules and fees in one document. And we're also Going to be recommending that moving forward the fees are increased by actual city costs rather than CPI so there's a there's obviously close relation to our city costs and what we're charging and We are going to recommend changes to the group classifications as well. As well as how the fees are calculated So to talk a little bit about the changes to our group classifications, we currently have four user groups, Group 1, 2, 3 and 4. What we're proposing is adding a new user group classification which would be Group 0.
And this group essentially is going to be things that are completely subsidized by the city. There will be no fees charged for these renters. And this would be essentially public agencies for public purposes. So for example when the county uses our facilities for elections, we would not charge them. We would just absorb all of those costs. This group will also include more park non-profits for free events that are not a fundraiser. Our community surveys always show that our residents want more events, so for the city to support that if there's a nonprofit willing to do a free event that they're not using as a fundraiser, there are some attendance limits at least 100 but not more than 1,000 we will support that by issuing a no free permit And then the third group would be Moorpark Unified School District just for PE classes during school hours, really to encourage them to get a permit so we don't have issues that they might try and use a park and there's maintenance going on or something of that nature.
And then Group 1 would be redefined. It would still include public agencies if the public agency's use does not qualify for Group 0. It would include Moorpark non-profits for free events, but those events could be a fundraiser. And then it will also include the Moorpark Youth Sports Organizations in accordance with the terms of their agreement and again this part would not go into effect until next year when those agreements are renegotiated.
And this group is going to be basically charged a base rate, which is the city costs and for the groups two three and Four four was actually not changed at all two and three we did just refine some language But they were not materially changed. It's the same user groups We just clear it clarified the language a little bit And then as far as the fee changes, what we're proposing is instead of going from a fee based on just some market survey, going to a fee that's actually based on our costs. As a base rate which again would be charged to the group one and then we would charge groups two three and four on a specific metric from that base So group one is paying that base rate, essentially the city's cost. Group two is paying 250% of that cost.
Group three would be paying 325%, and group four would be paying 400%. And the philosophy behind that sliding scale is still the same. Essentially, the farther someone is away from being a core constituent of Moorpark or from providing a public good for the community, they're going to pay more of a premium for renting a facility and taking that use away from the public or other renters.
In addition to those fee changes we are revising our permit application fees to ensure that we're covering our cost of process the various permits We are adding fees for the property storage again. We had been charging these under the director's ability to add additional charges, but we wanted for transparency to include them in the fee schedule and And we are also adding a credit card payment for fee for credit card payments over $1,000.
This is a temporary measure to address the council's concern of the city absorbing credit card fees but in recreation our fee is actually lowered to about 1.95% plus 20 cents But our recreation software also handles all of our recreation program registrations for camp and classes It's also our ticket sales for July 3rd so the issue of credit card fees is a little bit larger than just what's being addressed tonight in our rental fees and Then finally we did relax some of the cancellation fees based on the cancellation date previously. It was 50% across-the-board But now it's on a little bit more of a scale where the earlier you cancel, you're going to pay less of a cancellation fee. That's really just to be a little bit more customer friendly and not have quite such an onerous cancellation fee.
And then finally, just to go over a little bit how we came up with these fees. We had a cost analysis done by 110% Inc., who is our consultant for the recreation master plan that is going to be coming out soon. And so we took those costs where they basically came up with an annual cost for ball fields, for athletic fields, for picnic pavilions and we calculated annual hours. We did add some ancillary costs for parking lots, restrooms are the things that a renter would be using when they rent a facility And then we divided those kind of total costs by the hours to get basically an hourly base rate. And then because the data that the consultant used was from 2022-23, we just increased it by the percentage that our park costs have increased to get a current rate.
So what that looks like is we basically looked at for the park facility fees as when are parks typically used? Because again when you rent a park facility or taking that use away from the public So hours were calculated for both outdoor and lit facilities as well as the outdoor lit facilities. Lit facilities are open longer, so we got basically an hour per facility for both lit and unlit.
And then we have the master plan cost analysis. So again, that's the annual cost for various facilities and just to explain what some of these are. The parks general is what includes those ancillary facilities such as parking lots, restrooms, and just the general landscaping. And the specialized area includes our dog park at College View Park which is actually not a rentable facility so that's not included in the fee schedule as well as our skate park at Poindexter Park.
And so putting this all together, we can see on the spreadsheet. So for example, athletic fields, we have the number of unlit facilities, how many hours per facility to give us total unlit hours. We have the number of lit facilities times that hours per facility to give us total lit hours. We get our grand total of hours and then we have there that annual cost from our master plan, all the ancillary costs that were attributed to that as well to get a total facility cost That gives us an hourly rate when we divide that by the hours and then that was increased by the 14 percent of increase in our cost to get our current base rate, and those are all just rounded to the nearest dollar for the fee schedule. We have just always had a practice of rounding to the nearest dollar.
For pavilions I just did want to point out those were calculated a little bit differently. We pulled that out because we have four different sizes of pavilions we rent so then we had to allocate that pavilion cost out between small medium large and then our pepper tree pavilion And we do also have a small part-time staff cost attached to that because our weekend park and facility attendants are tasked with checking in with pavilion rules before and after, and making sure they're clean. So there's just a small amount of staff time allocated to that to ensure that again, we're covering our costs.
And then finally, how this affected the fees is we had some fees that were raised across the board between the user groups. Some fees that went down and then for some fees they went up or down depending on user group because again we're just using a consistent metric across all facilities to scale these fees and in the staff report there are some charts which are here on this slide that show you kind of how those came out And even though we're now going to a cost-based process rather than a market survey, it still is important to make sure that we're not outside of what other agencies are charging too far. So we did do a fee comparison and you can see all of our fees are still well within the range of other agencies. The only fees where we're the highest or lowest are for a resident.
For tennis courts, we are $1 less than our Next closest one and then we're $16 higher on the gymnasium for a non-resident And we use the just resident and non-resident as the benchmarks because agencies handle youth sports groups nonprofits all very differently So these were the most apples to apples benchmarks to choose And so that's all of the basically a summary of all of the rental rules and fees change. I did want to read this revised staff recommendation as Mr. Royce mentioned, so our new recommendation is to receive the presentation on revised rules and regulations governing facility rental and facility rental fees, deposits and additional charges. And then to direct staff to notice a public hearing for the May 6th 2026 City Council meeting for adoption of resolution and approving the rules and regulations governing city facility rentals and adopting facility rental fees, deposits and additional charges.
That concludes my report and I am available for any questions.
1:02 – 1:0917 turns
Thank you. Any questions of staff? No questions? Go ahead and we'll ask for speakers
Opening the public hearing and asking for speakers. Yes, we do have one speaker. Let me confirm. Yes, one speaker on this item that is Mr. Daniel Politi. As this is a presentation action discussion item you have three minutes to address the council.
Hello, good evening everyone again. I'm just here with some math questions. Okay so during your presentation this was something I hadn't heard. I was wondering if there is a benefit and then what it would be to us as a city footing the county election costs for the change in the rental thing if that was something that had to be worked in there? If you had thought about just maybe putting some language in that changed that because that seems like a fairly big expense it could be avoided fairly easily And then with the calculation that 110% Inc. did, you said they basically did it or did they do it? So I'm wondering if we could see a formula like an actual formula and not a description of one for where some of these numbers came from because the narratives that were given based on the report didn't match every cell in that slideshow.
I mean, it's not bad. It's all good ideas but it just doesn't match up so like if I were going to vote on something, I would want to know that what you said matched the data you presented And I'm also wondering, so what is the projected extra annual revenue and which group is mostly projected to foot this change in spending? Is it going to be a Group 2, Group 3, Group 4? What kind of analysis did 110 do on that? Is this going to shift the cost to our Moorpark residents mostly based on in practice numbers or are we going with the in theory numbers of out-of-town people pay more. So it's probably good. Those are my questions. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Just one speaker?
That was our only speaker.
We'll go ahead and close the public hearing, move into discussion. Are there any things we could answer to the speaker?
Yes, I did do an analysis of the effect on revenue based on the hourly fee changes. It's about $49,000 estimated for next fiscal year. The bulk of that would be on Moorpark residents just because that is the primary renter. Most of our rentals are by Moorpark residents. Then as far as the county elections, you know, they are only So often they use to our facilities or a list and more park community center But again The reasoning behind that is we want it to be easy and convenient for Moorpark residents to vote. The county likes our facilities More than other facilities in town so we feel that is appropriate to absorb those costs to make voting easy for our residents
Okay. Thank you Any comments
Regarding increasing the fees, it's just to cover the increase in costs. We're not looking at any type of amazing surplus and increasing these fees to our residents correct?
Yes, essentially just going from a market-based process to a cost-based process. And so again there are some fees that for some facilities went up actually for some facilities they went down. So instead of just doing based on market we're now just basically right sizing those costs based on what the costs are for the cities for each facility type. Thank you.
There's a lot of cleanup work in this that makes a lot of sense now before it was just kind of across the board and one size fits all. So I think it's a good effort for this.
I appreciate the detail, too. I'm sorry. One more. I do want to applaud restricting the use of the smaller parks because I do know there was like an agility, a dog agility thing at the park near me and it's like no one could ever use that on Saturdays. So thank you for putting that in there.
Just just to confirm for some of the larger organizations that have regular soccer turn and not tournaments with Soccer on weekends or whatnot this effect. This these fees would not go into effect until their next contract That would be in 2027 then is that right I?
That's correct. So for the youth sports organizations that have facilities agreements, this would be AYSO, Moorpark Girls Sophomore, Moorpark Little League, United States Youth Volleyball, Moarpark Soccer Club and Moorpark Musketeers Youth Football League. They actually have specific dollar amounts currently in their agreements that they pay so these would not go into effect for them until next summer and we will be bringing those contracts to the council in probably spring We do meet with the groups prior we talk about because there's different things besides fees that we negotiate So council will have a chance to visit fees for these groups specifically when we do those contracts
Thank you. There was a bit of a leading question. I'm glad the answer continued to be consistent as it always is Overall, I think this was a terrific balance of figuring out what we need to charge to my time's up Very clever city clerk Spangler. I know when I've spoken too much. You should
always do that for Tom. My apologies, council
member. I think we've done a really good job of figuring out a logical reason why we're charging the fees that we are. We're subsidizing where we can and where we should We're not subsidizing where we need to be getting that cost recovery. There was thought put into it, compassion and a focus on city service while also a fiscal responsibility. And I applaud every bit of that all the way through. I also support using the facilities for the county elections in case that was something that come up. I think it's a reasonable question asked. What are we charging? Who are we charging? You got some of that from me offline but I think that the intent is strong I also wanted to point out that with these contracts that renew, and I wasn't going to name all of them because I wasn't going to get them all.
That renew...I didn't like the idea that we might raise these fees on some of these projects lower than others and then Johnny down the street gets his membership increased and now he can't afford to play soccer or volleyball or softball At a certain point, that's the organization's concern. We have to figure out cost recovery for our citizens and for our city. But the fact that they have advance notice, the fact this isn't going to be impacted until August of next year, those organizations are going to find ways to be able to make that effective for their membership. And I think we should move forward as presented.
1:09 – 1:1413 turns
I'll echo those comments regarding the fees. My comment is regarding the rules, we have restricted alcohol use at the parks to non-profits to be able to apply for that and is there any reason that we couldn't expand that to other renters?
So certainly that would be at the council's discretion. Ultimately, prior to I think our rules change two or three, well the last time we changed the rules is when we actually started allowing the alcohol use. Prior there was none. We do allow it for private renters inside the buildings at Arroyo Vista and the community center but you're correct in the park it is only for non-profit organizations for events But certainly council's direction that would be a decision again. We're going to be bringing this back on May 6th And I don't know I could defer to it. I don' t know if Captain O'Donoghue has any comments on the alcohol use in parks I know in the past law enforcement has had some concerns with that
Yeah, I mean it's something that we definitely would need to have some thoughtful discussion about. I mean there are certainly some concerns generally speaking with alcohol being provided or available in a park setting if there is no restrictions or certain restrictions much like what we would do with some of our special events. So I think with some thoughtful discussion that we can minimize some of the potential public safety issues that may present with alcohol at parks.
Yeah. I guess the reason I bring it up is, you know, if someone's trying to do say a lower budget wedding reception or something and rent a park facility And to be able to have alcohol, you know, at that and obviously follow rules and have the regulations around that is fine. Or even just a birthday party or that type of thing. I would love to give them that option. And if it becomes an issue we can always take that away as well but I think it would be a nice thing to extend.
>>:Yeah, no. It's a good point. I mean, every birthday party at the parks has beer and wine there obviously. Everyone does that anyways if you've ever seen that happen before. It's happened...
>>:First time hearing of it, Mayor. Is that what's in the Red Solo
Cup? But I don't think it's preventing people from, you know, it's preventing people from going crazy with it but I think it's a good point to having bigger parties, bigger events like that. And I wouldn't see any reason to not do that. I mean, it's a park. It's a great spot to go have a big event or a party and I don't see anything wrong with that. The only thing that I'd be hesitant on is if we turn it into a thing where we require fencing and security guards and insane amount of oversight for just a cooler full of beers. So I would like to visit that, if you would all agree. That's something we should look at putting in this as well.
But obviously we'll talk to the chief about that too. Make sure we're on the same page. So if we could direct staff to, I guess, look into that or put that in the next meeting? Is that what we want to do?
Yeah, so it looks like we would have to put forth the rules as proposed right now and then add the alcohol at a later revision to the rules. But we could certainly have that discussion in the meantime because it may not be something we're able to come to some decisions about very quickly because actually right now for our indoor room rentals for private renters, we do require security guard and some other things. So I think that might be a little bit of a larger more time consuming discussion.
I'd be okay with going forward with the fees and then coming back with a larger discussion and obviously making amendments to that, which is fine too.
If I may...I believe that this item is coming back because it's going to be noticed for a public hearing? Correct. So that would give us time to evaluate the issue that was just raised and come up with some potential modified language if that is what the council desires.
Yeah, and I would just like to chime in. We...I'm not sure how much time this would take just to put something together. We may delay that public hearing by another council meeting. I'd like to see what other agencies are doing with that so I can share that with the council and it might take a little bit of research but we'll try our best to get it on schedule but it might go into another council meeting afterwards.
For efficiency and effectiveness, would it be better for us to approve this as is and come back and revisit that item? And make the change later or is it better...
No. Because it's a public hearing we have to come back for the public hearing if we change it then it comes back again as a public hearing so it'd be better if we can just address it now and come back to the council as soon as possible and that way we can talk about it.
1:14 – 1:2024 turns
If I may, Mr. Lorenkowski? The public hearing would be for the fee element only. That's what requires the public hearing. The rules and regulations could be brought back at a separate time without requiring a public hearing. Wonderful. So it just depends on the direction That council would like to provide as far as noticing the hearing for our next meeting to adopt as presented but certainly that could Result in a change to the rules later, but the rules would not require the public hearing
Okay. Well, so it sounds like we can stay on track and we will move forward with our public hearing if adopted as is and then we can revise the rules shortly after or if we can get it done at the same time.
Excellent. I agree. That works?
Mr. Mayor, I would suggest in consulting here with our council just looking at the breadth of what's being revised, the rules and regulations and the fees and they're all tied together It's probably just going to be a lot cleaner, honestly, to just bring the whole package back at the same time. If that's okay with Mr. Laurentowski? Because otherwise you'd have to separate this item out right now, essentially. You'd be approving part of it.
Rules and regulations can change throughout the year so if we ever made an amendment to any other rules or regulations would that require a public hearing to come back if the fees aren't changing? No.
Excuse me, sorry. It would not so as was mentioned by Madam City Clerk the item that requires the public hearing is the fee portion. So that is what would be coming back but my understanding is that tonight was supposed to be a presentation on the rules but we would be bringing the whole package back for adoption as one item for both the rule portion. So you discussed tonight provided some feedback You could certainly make changes at the next meeting when it comes back.
Further revisions as well, as well as the public hearing on the fee portion as well. But I think what the recommendation is bring it back as one package that doesn't mean you can't amend the rules over time independent of the fees.
And I might just also add as well, the conversation could turn when the research is being done that by putting into the policy the use of alcohol etc. there might be a fee associated with that. So if that's the avenue that it ends up going down then we would have to bring the whole thing back anyway and it would have to go through public hearing as well. So it just seems to me it would be a lot cleaner if it was all vetted out At the same time, and then if there's any incurrence of fees or discussions about that regarding alcohol. Then you would see it all at the same time unless unless there's opposition I'm open to.
It shouldn't be rocket science here.
No, I think we're kind of all saying this same thing in a different way
There are already fees existing for use of alcohol because we do like I said allow it in Arroyo Vista Park for nonprofits And we do allow it indoors for all users. So there already are alcohol permit these security guard these although fees are still in there So wouldn't necessarily be changing fees But it would just have to change the rule of who is allowed to have alcohol in the park
so at our next meeting during public comment or during What is it? The public hearing. Yes, sorry. Whatever word I'm not catching right now. Will we split those two up if for some reason we do want to modify slightly? Will we just be having the public hearing for the fee structure? Fee structure already includes alcohol all of that good stuff and if we decide Go forward with whatever you have brought to us new regarding any new alcohol consumption in the open space outdoor park great, and if not we can continue with agreeing to or approving the fee structure and then separating that at that time and modifying the actual rules portion
Counselor correct me if I'm wrong, but you do what that is an option that you have tonight Is it you could approve the fee structure? And then we could bring back But that would be you would be sending it to a public hearing
so yes So we need to so I think the question was at the next meeting so the item comes back as a public hearing a discussion of the rules as revised based on comments or some any recommended language you have tonight and They would come back modified. There would be further discussion on the rules, as well as the notice public hearing on the fee component. If for some reason you look at the rules of the next meeting and you say, oh, you know what? I think we still need some further modification. We have further questions. That could always be segregated. You could still move forward with adoption of the fees. Correct. That's what I'm asking, so there would be
no... Tweaking the rules as time goes on. Correct. So no additional hearing necessary? We'll just move forward with the fees as they are? Correct. Okay. Then yes. I'm fine with it. Does
that work?
I love procedural compliance structure. It's my favorite. That's why I do this.
Okay is everyone okay with that? Great. All right, so we're going to go ahead and receive the file... Receive and file this and direct staff to hold a public hearing on May 6th. All in favor? Aye. Okay.
Thank you Mr. Ryan.
Hope we're all confused now. That's good enough. Okay.
We'll move on to item 10, consent. We pulled item 10E so we'll go ahead and entertain a motion for the balance... Move
to approve the balance.
...including item 10D as amended.
Move to approve the balance with item 10 D amended. Second.
The motion is second. Need a roll call?
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion is second. Need a roll call?
Show transcript
1:20 – 1:279 turns
And the record will reflect that Council Member Castro is not with us.
It seems that our speaker wanted to maybe speak on something there, is there an opportunity to speak on consent? If it's not pulled, is that procedure?
No just consent.
Just consent okay just making sure
Let's move on to item 10E. Consider award for a construction contract to Pavement Coatings Company for 2026 pavement rehabilitation project CIP number M0054 in resolution amending the fiscal year 2025-2026 budget to fully fund the construction of the 2026 pavement rehabilitation project CIP number M0054 and making a termination of exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in connection therewith. Mr. Kim?
Thank you
Mayor Innegren and council members. Daniel Kim, City Engineer Public Works Director. Thank you for reading that long title. On February 18th the city council approved the 2026 pavement rehabilitation project and authorized city staff to advertise a project to obtain construction bids. The scope and breadth of the 2026 pavement rehab project is consistent and in substantial conformance with the five-year pavement rehabilitation plan That was reviewed and approved by the City Council back in October 18th, 2023.
Shortly after council's authorization staff published a notice inviting sealed bids on February 25th 2026 with a bid opening date on March 26 2026 Staff received five bids with pavement coatings being the lowest responsible bidder at $2,429,654. Pavement Coatings has worked on past city projects both as a prime contractor and a subcontractor so they are definitely familiar with this type of work performing on City of Moorpark streets.
When we opened the bids, the overall price was much lower than estimated. I will want to shed some light on that. The project was scoped out and estimated back in January-February timeframe. And we looked at past agency projects in the summer of 2025 to see what their costs were for similar projects. City of Simi Valley and Camarillo performed large scale pavement rehab projects last summer, and they were receiving bid unit prices for asphalt at around $250 to $270.
per ton, and slurry seal roughly at around 30 to 33 cents per square feet. The lowest responsible bidder, pavement coatings, and we were surprised across the board the unit cost per ton for asphalt was about $150, almost $100 less per ton. And the slurry seal on a square footage unit price was coming in at 18 cents versus 33 cents during that summer. I don't have an explanation for the price being lesser than what was paid in the previous summer, but that is the bids that we received and happy to say they're coming much lower than anticipated.
With that, that's for the construction contract award. We have a Construction Management and Inspection Services proposal that we received from M6 Consulting. M6 Consulting is the city's municipal services engineering firm and they primarily provide services to city on city projects and staff augmentation services And to manage a project of this size and scale, we asked them for a proposal for construction management and inspection. And their proposal came in at about $281,000. So the total cost of the project With a 10% contingency on the construction portion, it comes out to approximately $2.9 million.
This project is not funded right now. Hence we have a budget resolution to amend the budget to fully fund the project. This project will be funded should the council adopt a resolution. It will be funded by Fund 2416, Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Fund. The revenue from Fund 2416 comes from gas tax and so this project will be fully funded from Senate Bill 1, the Road and Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 and there's no general fund in this project. So with that staff recommends Oh, I do have to add this is consistent with council goal.
That's pretty important. I don't have the... Oh, there it is. The action is consistent with City Council Goal 3, Object 3.6, Implement Pavement Management Plan. So with that for the record, I'll just recite staff's recommendation. It is to consider and award a construction contract for the 2026 pavement rehabilitation project M0054 to Pavement Coatings Company and authorize the city manager to execute the construction contract in the amount of $2,429,000 $654 plus a 10% contingency amount of $242,966 for a total contract amount of $2,672,620 subject to final language approval by the city manager and adopt resolution amending the fiscal year 2025-26 budget to fund the 2026 pavement rehabilitation project and making determination of exemption pursuit to seek in connection therewith.
If you have any questions I'm available
Any questions?
Yeah, thank you Mr. Kim so we're looking at a total of 2.9 I'm rounding the numbers when we were going out to bid Delightful news that it's it's less than we expected. Thank you What do we think this was going to cost us in total amount?
Sure the staff report in February I estimated somewhere around four point two four point three million dollars And that was based on a much higher unit cost per ton for asphalt and a much higher Per square foot costs of slurry perfect. Thank you
1:27 – 1:3311 turns
So, is there anything from stopping us taking advantage of these awesome prices which we never get and fast-forwarding next year's pavement project?
That's a great question. So I did include...I didn't say in the presentation but we do have a schedule of substantial completion for paving and pavement rehab around September Per council member Barrett's recommendation. We're going to move forward with the next study Miss miscalces working on the RFP now and we'll probably publish that in June to have something awarded by August as soon as we're done paving we can start that Study ASAP to set the next five years As far as amending the scope I did speak with the city manager on that and there are planned CIPs that do have a pavement rehabilitation component to it. That is not fully funded as of the moment, so there's an opportunity to reallocate unspent SB1 gas tax funds on those projects.
So there isn't the shortage of projects that can benefit from this, but my recommendation or our recommendation is to stick with the approved scope and then we can reevaluate the neighborhood pavement rehabilitation with the next cycle.
That's fine. But you're saying the next cycle could take end of the year, right? Or when you start it in September?
Sure. Well, what we're doing is we're doing all five years all at once so there's possibly a savings in terms of just volume for that matter for us this time around. If we were to award a pavement management consultant for this summer they can probably scan the streets this winter And then we would have something to the council spring, summer next year for the next cycle of streets.
Like I said, we do have an opportunity for any unspent funds to reallocate those to other projects that are actually planned or in the planning stages today that just aren't fully funded or can benefit from these funds as well.
I mean, I would love to see that list of what we could allocate those extra funds to if we're not going to be able to know about the actual next street analysis until beginning of next year.
Sure. I mean, if I may, with Ms. Reyes... So we have a high street phase two project that I will be coming to the city council for professional services award to get that design going part of that scope of work does have pavement rehab in it. And so that project right now, the construction portion is not funded today. So there are planned projects that don't have funding allocated to it that may but should the council go that route and may benefit from these unused funds?
And moving forward they can be Spent towards pavement rehabilitation projects and neighborhood streets as well. So we could come up with a menu of projects at some point And see where these eligible dollars could be spent
towards Right now it's great we save the money but changing the scope would then delay the project I And I'd rather get those residential streets moving forward quicker.
Oh yeah, no, I don't want to change the scope of what you already have. I would like to, as an added agenda item which I know we talked about at the beginning of this meeting but since it's coming up now maybe give that to us as some type of presentation that we can say yes this is where we would like to spend
I think we do have a CI a quarterly CIP update that will be coming to the City Council and in short time And so, I think that maybe that's an opportunity to see that the city's portfolio of upcoming projects both from the planning and execution phases and then we can certainly have a conversation or present to the council about Where these projects line up, where the stream of dollars can come from to fund these projects at different stages.
If we were to expand the scope of this, Mayor Engen suggested that there would be some sort of delay to reimagine it. Do you have any idea what that delay would be if we did decide to redeploy this back into the neighborhood repavement plan?
I don't anticipate that much of a delay. The standard specification for public works construction does allow contractors to change their bid unit prices based on the percentage of change that occurs, so that can open up the city to the contractor allowing them to propose unit price changes. As far as delay though, I mean...I don't see too much of a delay but we also want to make sure that we're consistent with the scope of work and stay within certain percentages.
1:33 – 1:4225 turns
And I might like to also add that Mr. Kim has also built into the plan there's a 10% contingency but With the state of affairs and the way things are going right now, I mean there's other things that could possibly happen. So I know we're wanting to hedge our bets on that there's gonna be a great deal of savings and as Mr. Kim has shared you know that will definitely come back to council whether it's through the CIP update reports or once the project nears completion for you to all spend additional time vetting where those additional funds could go and where they might be utilized but That would definitely come back to you at a later time.
If we were to approve this tonight, when would we start to see new pavement actually hitting our roads? So I
have a schedule here. Sorry for my pile of papers here are just kind of out of place. Here it is. So assuming that the council awards the construction contract, our goal is to have the contract executed by the end of the month And it typically takes 30 to 60 days for the contractor to mobilize and so If we do an effective notice to proceed like sometime early June I wouldn't be surprised if you start seeing The contractor working out there late June, but it's still dependent on their schedule Their ability Appreciate that. Thank you
So I don't think the issue is where we can spend the money, because obviously there's plenty of projects to spend the money. I think the issue that I'm hearing is that, you know, we're seeing a savings right now in the pricing that was not reflective a year ago, right? And so if there's an opportunity to potentially add to this contract in some way, move forward. We want to move forward.
But then potentially maybe there's a list of streets of people that have complained residents that have complained. That didn't make the cut I know of several off the bat right so you know some of those those high touch point streets that we know we are hoping are going to be reflected in our next payment Pavement plan, right? Is there an opportunity to add some of those to this before we do our survey before all those elements. And I guess with the reasoning of taking advantage of a lower price while it's available to us and what that would look like is that a possibility?
Short answer yes. There is an opportunity adjust There's some flexibility in our opportunities to adjust the scope. And if there is an opportunity, for example... were across the street from an area that maybe wasn't called out this time around, but there's an opportunity with the pricing that we have today to just hit that area. We could certainly evaluate that and make a judgment call there and say here is an opportunity for us to finish it as opposed to maybe doing 75... For example, right? Other than just do 75% of it, maybe we could hit all of it. So there is an opportunity there I hesitate to say yes right away because if the contractor hasn't even started yet But certainly and we have great relationships with our contractors So there is certainly possibly an opportunity to work with them.
And while they're here provide us value and Do more than what's in the state of scope?
so with this whole pavement plan in general, I mean we have well to redo all the streets in town would be like 35 million dollars
I would like to have spent more on the streets
if we could have to get more done. I know once we start paving these streets out, people will think that all the streets are getting paved and then there'll be a very big difference between the ones that are paved and right across the street where they're not. They're still in terrible shape. So I know we can spend this money in a lot of different areas but we budgeted a certain amount of money to fix streets.
I would want that money to go as far as it can with all those streets Now, you mentioned that it would be a change order to add anything to this possibly. We don't really know but it could be a possible change order so the delay wouldn't be that big of a deal. If we just move this item to the next council meeting would you have enough time to figure out if that was a good idea to go forward with that or it would just wrap us up in more delays and change fees and not really help?
So to change that now, to come back I may have to... Defer some of this to the city attorney's office. But if I am materially changing the scope of work now, I may have to re-bid this project. That was terrible.
So I think we can't start moving the scope of work substantially. I think kind of what was described of you're already doing work. You see you can go a little bit further. Different from vastly saying we're now identifying new areas that were not part of the bid because that could have impacted others Maybe if the project had been bigger or someone else would have come in at a different price amount So we can't do that. Now, you could certainly put another project out to bid for another You know section of the city that you that you'd like to see Repaved how long with
that bidding process take?
We typically like to advertise for four weeks so it allows the contractors to get with their subcontractors to evaluate, get material pricing and so on and so forth.
Okay, so if we bid it out again then we have an opportunity to get it even cheaper.
Not again but new portions. It could also go the other way. Additional ones are
great. Additional portions. Okay, so that's a discussion for maybe we can propose that for another agenda item. So it wouldn't affect Item E tonight though? Unless you want to pull the whole thing and then refit the whole project, right? Is that what you're saying?
Are we out of questions in any discussion? I'm always unsure
on the... We have an open...
This isn't a public hearing item. It's a consent calendar item.
And it's been pulled, so we're discussing it. So I'm good to stop
asking questions and start having opinions?
Hold on, wait, hold on. Do we have any speakers?
Yes, Mr. Mayor, we do have one speaker card on this item. Mr. Daniel Politi. And since this would be like a public comment, it's three minutes.
Cool.
Hello.
Hello. Three minutes, three questions. All right. Starting from the least important and then going to the most important, Mr. Daniel Kim. The line item adds $281,300 of M6 construction management inspection work on top of the paving contract. What math did staff use to decide that this level is appropriate? And what can we get in hours and rates benchmark or comparison to similar projects?
Number two, Mr. Daniel Kim. This item appropriates $2,953,920 against a reported fund F2416, a balance of $4,754,333. So this single action uses about 62% of the fund and roughly 3.11 to 3.69 years of the stated SB1 revenue. What future pavement work is getting deferred to prioritize this? And can we see, I wasn't listening. Whatever. I was wondering what projects would be prioritized in the algorithm that was used to decide the prioritization of the remaining projects which sounds in line with what City Council was asking?
And the last question Mr. Kim, the addendum says that the engineer's estimate was $4,334,626. Sorry about that weird dollars-dollars thing. Low bid was 249... $2,429,654. Okay so we got a gap of $1,904,972 about 44%. Can you please explain why this estimate was stale? Conservative, I understand the difference in those two building materials but I'm wondering where the other 44% delta came from. And then what I'm wondering is the quality of the consulting firm that you conducted this with if they're getting a 50% multi-million dollar disconnect? on their estimate, especially when we keep hiring these consulting agencies and proposing to hire them for more consultation on their grossly incompetent and wrong consultations. Because that starts making me think about words like fraud, waste, and abuse.
But I'm not thinking of them right now. I'm just saying if we just keep saying hey let's consult to these guys when they're way wrong for tons of money well then I start thinking about those things. Thank you.
1:42 – 1:5318 turns
OK, Mr. Kim, could you explain some of those questions?
I
think a lot of it was already... Yeah, I think I did. The one that hangs on the most is the bid inaccuracy. Is there a reason why they were so far off in this one?
Again, we based our bid unit prices on estimates based on the project from the previous year. If anything, we thought it would tick up a little bit and so I am surprised at the bid units. The last time we bid out a big project there was Another global conflict that happened and this is not different either Which which is these are all oil-based petroleum based products, right asphalt and slurry seal. And so We're surprised but I mean some some of the higher bids came closer to $200 I'm just reiterating what the lowest responsible bidder came at. So, I don't have an answer as to exactly the discrepancy from last year to this year if anything else has gotten more expensive.
All
right
thank you.
Yeah, thank you. So I pulled this because I feel like we're behind on our pavement of our neighborhoods. I think we've all had that discussion and we're trying to do what we can with the money that's there and prioritize the right capital improvement projects To have a 40% of the opportunity to pay 40% more with the dollars that we had already allocated is one of the few wins that I've seen from a fiscal standpoint. And I have absolutely no doubt in the way that it was bid, I have no doubt in the benchmarking. It all made sense you explained it as it was coming through so...
Sometimes, sometimes we get bids that go up. I won't point to Jeremy Laurentowski in any of the parks and sometimes we have bids that go down. That is absolutely just kidding with you, Jeremy. It just happens to be in a bidding process. Sometimes they go up, sometimes they go down. If we have the opportunity to continue and expand what we're paving. It's not just that we get to pave more, which is a huge win. And it's not just that we reduce the number of perceived winners and losers because my street got paved and your street didn't but also the structural integrity as my very limited knowledge understands it is the longer we don't pave some of these we get closer and closer to this point of no return where those roads cost significantly more to have to tear up and replace so In hearing of the delays, and I understand we might have to scrap this.
We would have to re-bid it. We'd be here four weeks later if these are the pricing that is here now. It's incredibly enticing to me to try to go and get as much done for the amount of money that we have in the neighborhoods as we can. So that's the reason I pulled it and reviewed it I very much appreciate the work that's gone into this and the integrity of the work that is involved. And I do understand there are some delays, and there's some risk, right? It absolutely could be if we go out to bid. But with a bigger project, we might also get some economies of scale. Fixed costs are fixed costs. Those aren't going to change necessarily when you get a larger project. So it's possible that it could stay per unit at the same price or even take down a touch.
The only concern is this whole thing was bid out before the whole Iran situation blew up. Last thing I want to do is graph this and come out there and find out that now it costs ten times the amount or we won't even be able to do it in the first place. God knows what's going to happen with that, so...
Absolutely. That is completely and totally understandable, logical. I was on the impression that as that material cost changes and adjusts, we would still be subject to To paying for something or these these locked in it does not matter what the fluctuation of materials is so.
These. These generally are locked in it is their proposal price they are committed to these prices. I will say though, in 2021 when we went out to bid for Princeton... Actually, I take it back. When we were in construction for the North Metrolink parking lot, material prices were just astronomical and Caltrans did allow for their contractors to readjust their bidded price for asphalt and trucking Based on the oil index value, that's when Russia invaded Ukraine and so on and so forth. So they didn't make allowances for those adjustments because those prices just did not exist at that time. Certain things happened in the world that nobody has any control of.
I'm not saying this is the same thing exactly, but from a general perspective as of now the contractors are locked in. Their material proposal or proposers they generally lock in prices themselves so that the bid units are valid for a certain period of time. So if we were to re-scope this and basically re-scope the quantities and the limits This gets back out to the open market again and today's conditions may be different from three months ago that or two. I'm sorry a month and a half ago, which I'm just not aware of so They can go up they can go down If you look at the spread from low to high I believe there's And $800,000 spread just between the lowest and highest bidders. So that gives you an idea of what the spread can be just based on the bids that we've got so I'm not here to say Or have a crystal ball and say, I think we can do this much more if we go out to bid.
We have the scope of work. We got very favorable pricing. And that's just kind of where we're at in our recommendation is to move forward with this and adjust the scope as much as we can within the contract But certainly if the council is deciding on something else, we're here to take that feedback as well.
With that information I changed my suggestion there. It wasn't the understanding I had before. Thank you for the clarity. My fault. I think we should get as much as we can done under this and approve it and move forward. And then I would hate for us to redeploy the money that we saved here into other projects when we know we have a need in the neighborhoods, in the streets Hopefully the rates and the costs stay as we move into the next phase Stay where they are now, and we can we can address those concerns
so with what's the possibility of moving forward as it is trying to increase the scope within the confines of that But then also just going back out to bid for the incremental work that we would find that we would want to use that money for right now. I mean, you might have the same contractor re-bid that and basically have two contracts for the same thing all together or you might find someone else that comes in and gives it even lower a shot. Or they all come in and give us this crazy high proposal because oil prices and so on are through the roof. And then we know that was a terrible idea and we could just not do it. What about that? Is that something that makes
sense? I guess my confusion is, is a new pavement analysis required in order for you to see what would be next and what you would want to have an RFP out for next or can we do another one with the knowledge of what we have with our past analysis.
So is a new pavement analysis required?
Because that's what you're saying would be done at the end
of the year. Is
that needed so that we can move forward quicker?
One of the reasons for a pavement analysis is just an unbiased report and condition The city's current street conditions. In that pavement analysis, it factors in an annual budget for pavement rehabilitation projects. So the first time we did this, we assumed about $800,000 a year because that's what the revenue stream looked like five years ago from SB1 revenue sources.
From five years ago to today that revenue has increased from keep me honest to approximately $950,000 a year. So there's been an uptick in in revenue and gas has gotten more expensive obviously so when we factor the the revenue and the amount of the annual budget There is an analysis that's performed that does prioritize the most pavement rehab for the amount of money that you have.
And so it's an unbiased analysis. Now with that, though, the council can take that information, adopt portions of it, reject it all or accept it and then add to it, right? So there is that flexibility. And we typically work through that at the Transportation and Public Works Committee and we kind of go through this analysis together. We can certainly bring that back to the council as well and that's what we've done in the past.
That's what the purpose of a pavement, and that pavement report is actually oftentimes is reported to the state because they want to know how the city spends its SB1 dollars and how that's actually programmed as well. So there's a certain accountability that we have that we file an annual report every year to the state on what we spent this money on, what projects because the City Council adopts a resolution in the summer saying we're going to be doing this. With the SB1 funds. So there is a transparency involved, and there's an accountability involved in all of that. So to answer your question in a long-winded way, that's one of the tools that we use to pick which streets we should be spending the SB 1 funds on. It's not that we're married to it or tied to it but it provides a guidance and direction as to where do we spend our funds?
1:53 – 1:5711 turns
I just wanted to make sure we're all on the same page. So what's before the council tonight is The decision to either award this specific contract with the scope of work that was put out to bid or alternatively, the council could decide to reject all the bids and And say we want to expand the scope, go out to bid again. But that's really what's before the council tonight for consideration. Now you could certainly provide direction to staff to say hey come back on a later date with additional streets to add for another bid. You could certainly provide that direction but that's not what's before the council right now. The council's decision tonight is dealing with the award of this particular contract. Thank you for checking us.
If I may suggest then that we request for a future meeting, using our past analysis without coming up with a new analysis that will take time In order to hopefully capitalize on the current, you know, some of these numbers and the savings. If that savings rings true in another bid that we come up with Basically our next year based on the past analysis. I know You know things could have changed in that five years and that's why we would typically do a new analysis But maybe for this next Phase, we look at the past analysis so that we can get a bid out sooner rather than later if it comes back At you know a higher rate we could always hold off on that bid and do our pavement analysis and move forward as planned
I would just ask that we do it quickly. That comes back to us in a fairly soon meeting and then we look at the balance, the difference. Let's redeploy these dollars if possible while approving tonight because we did that analysis We didn't improve the streets. I promise you they aren't better. You know, I know I'm not a city pavement expert but if we're getting it after any of those streets, I think we're doing our citizens a good service for a future meeting.
So just to clarify, we accept it as it is. We go ahead and start paving these streets out. Take the cost savings. We use the previous analysis on the streets. Go out to bid for fixing that with a car seat. For what would be our next phase?
Yeah. Okay so can I ask... I'm sorry. Can I ask a clarifying... Just so that I make sure that we come back with the right thing. You're requesting staff based on the existing report that we have. We'll still move forward with the new report, we have data from the existing report to come back to the City Council so that we can not lose a year for example and start paving based on The past, the existing reports that we're not losing out on time per se. We'll be coming back with a 2027 project later this year to go out to bid. Is that?
Yep. That's right.
Okay, just I just want to make sure that that's what
that's okay So there'll be the direction to go and then we'll go ahead and we'll have any more discussions on this one.
No, okay?
So I'll go ahead. I will move the recommendation for item 10e. I'll second Motion in a second way to roll call vote
Roll-call vote Passed 3–0 Motion in a second way to roll call
Show transcript
And the record will affect the council member Castro is not with us
1:57 – 1:586 turns
Next item is 11, Ordinances. There are none. Followed by Item 12, Closed Session. Mr. Rojas?
And then I just, Mr. Mayor, just did want to clarify we approved the rest of the Consent Calendar as amended? We did. They've already done that. Okay. Just double checking. That would be all, Mr. Mayor. Staff would request that we go into closed session regarding Item 12A.
All right, I'll make a motion to adjourn to closed session. All in favor?
Aye. I'd like to disclose that I did meet with the HOA board John Davidson last week. I apologize it did not write down the day.
I also did too.
I had previously noted that and I believe you may have met them on the same day I did Councilman. All right thank you and good night Moorpark.