City Council — 2020-06-09

Any faces? You say go and I'll call the meeting to order.

Yep, we are live.

Okay. The regular meeting of the Ojai City Council is called to order. Will the clerk please call the roll?

public comments And do those that requested the postponement then explain to the public why they're postponing it?

Okay, we already have the comments I think by email. Is that correct City Manager?

Yes.

Okay so we have that information. So now Bill's got his hand up. Bill you want to explain what are the requests for continuance?

Yes, the precise thing that Randy and I were proposing... I guess Randy you're still on board with this? Yeah is to continue to a time certain, maybe even next week if we could in the Tuesday time slot. And the reason is there's gonna be a lot of numbers discussion extensive graphics tables and rather than try to do that late in the evening when we're all also dealing with budget issues and other matters that we set up a session just for a full Deliberation on this topic and this topic alone in a special meeting. That's the idea.

Okay, and wasn't there some concern with the posting of this that didn't quite get posted in a way that it was accessible until just very recently James?

I think we had a couple of people say they couldn't access the large file, the 60% design. And so you know that would give them time to review that. It's a pretty large file so it definitely takes some time to review

Okay, so those are the two things that I heard Susan. One in order to give adequate time to really dig into this because it is complex and two some citizens felt that we didn't give adequate notice.

Yeah, I'm fine with that. So can we at this point decide the date certain for next Tuesday? So that the audience knows that it's going to be on there. We're gonna have a special meeting. Is that the direction?

Well with the maker of the motion put a time certain

like if With the advice of the city manager, if that's feasible to in the same time slot next Tuesday be the schedule I welcome that amendment.

Okay so then so that's part of the motion and it would be next Tuesday then what at seven o'clock?

Can we start it at six versus seven?

Why do we want to start?

It's going to be a long discussion.

Well it shouldn't be if it's the only topic it shouldn't be more than three hours seven to ten Well, if there's something wrong-

I'd rather it be six to nine but that's okay. I'm just saying... Oh well,

okay.

If we'd all agree that it would be six to nine, I'm for that.

What I was trying to say is, if it goes a little over, it goes a little over but it just gives us a little more latitude, that's

all.

Yeah,

well, I think we ought to put a time limit on it because this has been going on for three and a half years that I've been on the council and before I got here so...

Next Tuesday makes sense, James?

Yes, yes. And I will note the request for 6 to 9 p.m.. Yeah right. I

think by changing it to a different time we have to make more effort to let public know of the time change. I don't mind the time change personally but i just want to make sure that the public knows.

Okay well we'll post it on Facebook and a couple extra places.

All right thank you. Thank

you okay

So any

further question or discussion?

Okay. Is this the time? If

not, is there any objection to what Susan?

Oh nevermind I thought you were going to the next item.

No is there do I hear any objections to the amending the agenda to postpone to a time certain next Tuesday at six o'clock? Not hearing any so ordered okay now for the rest of the agenda are there any other changes?

Would you like the motion to approve? All right Susan has a question

Yeah. Oh, are we moving on or do we need a motion to approve?

Did you want to pull anything Susan?

Yes I want to pull E, I and M.

Okay well let's see uh... We can do that though under the consent calendar. Are we in agreement now on the agenda itself?

Yeah

with that one postponement okay. And i'll

second Mandy's motion to approve.

Okay, so no objection. The agenda stands approved as amended and we now go to the consent calendar and we have a request to remove Susan did you say E and what else?

I and M.

E, I and m okay.

So Mayor I move to approve the consent calendar other than E,I and M Second.

Okay moved and seconded any further discussion? Any objections? Hearing none, so ordered. Okay let's take I guess we go to E. Okay.

James, do you remember that last year we discussed investment policy? And I remember getting a little note from our former finance director Rudy that we had written something but I couldn't find the piece of paper. So I just wanted to assure that the concerns at the climate emergency member Michelle Leahy and Michelle Ellison were addressed. She wrote, please include divestment from fossil fuel companies and the banks that fund them.

The UC system just fully divested. And she sent us an article how the University of California has fully divested from fossil fuels So I just want to know if that's part of our policy or if we can still, if we didn't add it formally last year should we add that in?

Yeah so it's unfortunately not part of the policy. Um I think uh I saw that email so we were reviewing it earlier and yeah for whatever reason um As you mentioned, last year it came up but it didn't get added in. So I talked to the finance director and we talked about... I think a good process to move forward would be the investment policy is created by the finance director and the city treasurer. So, I asked the finance director to reach out to City Treasurer Raines and then come back with a recommendation.

I'm sorry, yeah.

Mayor, can we have an assessment of just how much money we have invested in these? And is there a cause and effect to it? That's all.

I think we mostly have CDs don't we?

Yeah, we mostly have

CDs at this

point. Plus we're getting fewer CDs because of the pandemic so this may not have any real impact at least on the industry that we'd be investing in but I think We're gonna have a budget and finance committee where the treasurer will be there.

And

that's what we

were thinking too, is we could talk about it with the treasurer at that meeting.

Okay and then report back to council on any policy change. Is that okay Randy?

Yeah I'm not in disagreement with what Susan and Michelle was talking about. I just think it behooves us to know how much and what are the impacts of- Okay so we'll get a report

back. Okay, now Susie was it I?

L.

Oh, L.

Okay.

Pardon me. All

right. I thought it

was I. I thought whether I was in

there.

Let's see maybe I missed

one. You meant L. It

looks

like an

I. Well then

I move approval of I.

Second. Okay moved and second to approve I. Any objection?

Wait a minute. Is that the microenterprise home kitchen operation?

No, I is the library special tax you mislabeled so we're just going back and approving I and then L and we'll take L up again.

Oh sorry

okay. Everybody good with that?

Yes.

I don't hear any objection to the approval of ISO ordered. And now let's go to L, which we had approved but we're going to pull back on that because of the misunderstanding. Okay. All

right. So James what is your thought process for not recommending this? Because when I took a close look at it it seems like it could be a good thing for Ojai

Yeah, and this is one. We tried to rewrite the report to state clearly that what we're opposed to is not the concept of micro enterprise home kitchens which for people watching who maybe aren't familiar is a new concept where residents can be used to provide 30 meals per day or 60 meals per week and somebody can come Uh, eat those meals at the residents or pick them up or take them to go.

So we're not opposed from a staff perspective. We don't have concerns with that concept so much. We have concerns with the current legislation, which basically says that the city has two choices to allow them or not to allow them. And if they're allowed, we have no regulatory ability on them. So we can't require that they have adequate parking, we can't require that they follow any specific requirements.

So our recommendation is that we provide a letter to the county that although we'd be open to MECOs with city regulation, we do not support it as they're currently proposed.

Because the proposal is to preempt local regulation or local control, which is something in our platform that we generally are not. Where's the League of Cities on this? I'll get

to you. So again, I speak to that one. The League of Cities opposed the bills that created the MECO statute. Unfortunately they passed and what the statutes did is they give the county public health officials and county environmental health officials the power to decide our zoning The state statutes create the structure where the county approves MECOs, that approval applies across the entire county including the unincorporated cities. The league opposed that but it nonetheless passed and the league has been working with counties to identify opportunities that exist for the county to narrow the impact of that opt-out decision and that is I think at the heart some local opportunity for regulation and the question is whether they will do so or not.

Bill? I just want to point out Susan one of my biggest concerns because when i first heard about the concept, I'm absolutely wonderful all right but then when you look at the slide which says MECO summary and this is one of my core problems can be operated from single or multi-family homes owned or rented So if you think about what might happen in an apartment building where people are running a business all of a sudden that might have impact on their neighbors in a way that would take away, without us having any ability to regulate it almost sort of sets up a situation where the concept is undermined by The fact that there's no real regulatory guidance that can be brought in locally, that makes it work for our community. So my objection to echo the mayor is that the one size fits all mentality that might come out of Ventura County and I would hope that they would allow or find a way to allow each of us to implement this concept in a way that makes sense for our community.

I understand what you just said, those are my hesitations as well. But on the other side, you're talking about 60 meals a week so that the most they could do is twice a week 30 meals. That's the most they could do. They can't do more than 30 meals a day.

Fine and how do you regulate this? How do you

audit that? Things like that is something you would do if you were having a party at your house.

Did they pay for the extra trash disposal when they are a renter in a small apartment unit?

Okay, I get your drift. Could we give direction to staff to make clear that we are not opposed to the concept but these That we're not opposing the authorization. You know, like state that a little more diplomatically.

I'm

fine

with it. Okay. It's a twist between cup and lip. We got to have a design right?

Yeah.

Okay. Thank

you. To me the question and maybe it's too late to have this discussion that states basically preempted and then punted into the county. And then the county is going to either say yes or no, but when you think about it, this exempts them from fire codes. It exempts them from I guess ADA. In effect the people who run these little restaurants they say it's going to be an entrepreneurial opportunity to go into business but we have people that are struggling in business and if people are going to start doing this with no overhead and no oversight one of the biggest hazards of a restaurant are grease fires If you have somebody cooking, not that they would intend to burn the apartment house down or even their own home down. But it's a possibility so it doesn't seem to me that we want to be supportive of it at this stage.

Randy?

Yeah I just agree with that. I just look at it as health and safety. I don't understand why we would want every citizen in Ojai to be able to open a restaurant And would you want a restaurant next door to you? Again, this kind of reminds me of the old SDR debate. Not in my neighborhood and not my next door neighbor and so I don't understand why this community would want that. And if they do maybe we need to actually take it to the community and say, do you all want it because I don' think we would.

Well, we need to take it to the county so that they don't impose it on us is the problem. That's what the letter is supposed to do and then we can sit down and talk to anybody who's advocating for it maybe they can do it in a sensible way but when you think of what it takes just if even with a leaf blower as loud as it is and you can smell the gasoline how hard that code is to enforce if we don't have any right to do anything in every residential neighborhood you could have this going on I'm just wondering, what is the benefit versus what is the risk? And I'm not sold on it. So okay.

Is there a limit to the number even that you can have? I

don't believe so. No, the legislation does not provide for a limit.

Okay, all right, I can move on. Thank you. Just write

out-

Well, I approve it with the understanding of what I stated that we're in support of the concept of local regulations. Something

like that? I'm not in support of the concept yet. We have to know more why we would be doing this. Do we have a motion of some sort? I move we approve it as written but- I second that. Okay, we have a motion and a second further discussion.

I don't want to.

Okay,

you don't

want to have your name on something that's saying that you don't like the concept right?

Yeah

but we haven't said we said we don't like the concept or are we just silent on that and saying that we don'y like what's been written i think it's what James

yeah um so the way we wrote it was we wrote as a proposed as currently Are opposed as it is currently written. So I think you could read that as saying it supports the concept or it doesn't, but I think that actually is in line with what I'm hearing.

It's a compromise, either endorsing or opposing it. We're just saying that in its present form, it doesn't look like something we can manage

very well. Right?

Okay.

Yeah, I just feel like there is a place for it. I don't think everybody's going to do it. You're talking about somebody making maybe making who knows how to make tamales, for example. It would be

great and I bet they're doing it right now and I think that's wonderful. We don't need to institutionalize this. Okay, all right. Is there any objection to the motion? If not okay no worries you got it James okay. No, she wants

him.

Okay. I'm the liaison to Ventura County Animal Reg as you all know. James, I'm looking at that $53,000 for additional costs for minimal service. What do you think about that? And then, you know what I mean? I'm going to vote in favor of this because as I understand it the city can break the contracts anytime. Correct?

Yes.

Says at the end Yes, I keep wondering about just we've got the Ventura County. I'm sure this has been discussed in previous with previous councils We have the Ventura County Humane Society is based in Ojai and I sometimes wonder what they could do since they're here if If we ever got to a time to discuss that with them so as long as it's clear that we can break the contract as long as that's correct and And I don't know about this additional cost at this point in time. I'm not happy about that.

If there's anything you can do about that, I don't know.

Well, vote against

it. Do I have a question, Mayor?

Yes, Bill.

James, are we in any way endorsing any of the positions of the county here? And I'm referring to the 1-2-3-4 bullet on page one dash One two two, where it states that the animal care services budget will increase by five percent per year each year. In other words they're laying out much higher than the cost of living increase for the animal services budget for each of the next five years are we endorsing that in any way shape or form or concurring with it?

Agreeing to it within the contract. I wouldn't say we're endorsing it or concurring, but that's what we're essentially agreeing to by agreeing to the contract and then likewise they also had noted that their hourly rate was under charge so they're going to increase that from 60 to 90 an hour in this agreement as

well.

That's

a huge increase in this economic environment. That's a huge increase in this economic environment. I'm sorry, maybe in the past we just agreed to pass throughs of that nature. I don't think we just kind of agree to those kinds of passwords anymore. A 30% increase in salary and this economic environment? What?

Yeah.

I agree with you Bill.

Yeah, I agree with you Bill.

Does this have to be approved or what's the timing on

that? So they were asking, they're requesting that each city approve it by June 15th. But if we have concerns, we go back to them with concerns. I don't see why we would approve it if we have

concern. Part of our conversation at our next meeting is going to be the adoption of our budget and If this is a contract, one of our problems in trying to control our costs are contracts. And they're going to increase the contract by this amount, as Bill says, in these economic times. It seems like we've got to have at least a better understanding of what's happening to us. Can

we make a motion just to approve one year? You could if you wish, yes. I'm going to make a motion we approve a one-year contract. Is

there a

second

to that?

Because of the time they need it, that's written in stone. They need it by June 15th correct?

That's what they requested I you know we don't have a problem going back and talking to them if that's what we choose to do but...

I'm gonna just make a motion for one year

okay we got a motion we have a second to that I'll second it

Okay, so I need clarity. Do we even have to do that right now? Can we postpone the one year and not get into any trouble or will they're gonna be... They want us, so, I think we can

negotiate. It looks to me like they're trying to increase their income for the same reason we need to increase ours only they're increasing theirs at our expense. We should know what we're doing. What are we going to give up $58,000 increase is as much as we give what the museum in the past. And we can't even afford to do what we've done in the past, so okay.

Do we want to approve that or do we want to continue the matter to the next meeting?

Yeah, I wanna make a motion that we direct James to send them a letter with our concerns. And if the city attorney agrees, we can postpone this to the next month. I'm

not aware of any legal requirement to make a decision by June 15th. The county's made the request but I'm not aware of any statute that dictates the response by then.

And what are our concerns? We just don't want to do business at that price.

Yeah, I think we're in a stronger position if we don't agree to anything yet.

Okay. Bill, you okay with that?

I don't know if I agree with that. I think we came up with a simple plan of something just like this with the housing authority when we didn't do for three or four years What's the, our housing numbers that we had to validate every

year?

The Reina. And all that did was cause us grief so I'm not for kicking something like this down the road. I'd be forward agreeing to one year and then negotiating anything after that but kicking this down the road doesn't If we don't agree to it and they resend their services, what are we going to do? And I'm sorry. The animal shelter in town is not set up to do what the county does. So until that agency in town comes to us and provides us with a letter of intent as to how they can provide those services, and now we have something to weigh, I'd be willing to listen.

I request a vote on my motion.

She's had her hand up.

I would normally agree with Randy on what he said, but I think due to the circumstances, the pandemic or total lack of income, I think that we should tell them we don't have the money and see what happens.

Yeah, if we do that on everything... Like Randy says, they could just say fine. You don't have the money and you aren't getting the service until you come to an agreement with us. I don't think we want roadkill and stuff which only they provide a service for. Are we ready for a vote on Bill's motion? Yes. Okay, well- I have one

question. What year, what exactly is the one year and what's the number we're voting on Bill?

I believe that's $40,882 for 2021. Just that one year right James? Yeah we'll talk

to them about the following years after we know what's going to happen to us on everything else that we can't afford to do.

Well there's two sections essentially one is the shelter services for 40 000 the other is the field services for 46 000 And the challenge with the field services is they are typically the state mandated requirements. And we don't have really an alternative to perform those right now. So if we were doing one year, I would think we'd do both of those, the shelter services and field services.

That's the intent of my motion is just a one-year. I think that'll send a signal for them.

Well what was weird? What I couldn't figure out is the field services are going up 50%. The other stuff is going up $2,200. So you said 30%, I'm so confused. But the 60 to 90 dollars is a huge increase. Yes

and that's a lot of money Yeah,

and it's still under market rate. It says but that's the huge part this 46 eight had to have been 50. This had to be $24,000 or I don't know would've been whatever 60 would have worked out in that is he was 30,000 less? That's a lot less than the numbers need

the basic service and Bill's motion was simply to give us one year rather than commit us to five years. And that sends the message that we needed to talk to them now back to the same place at the end of the year they may say You know, I won't even use the expression you probably got. Anyway, if you aren't going to pay for it, you're not going to get the service. This gives us one year to sort this out and find out, you know, the answer to all our questions. Okay is there any objection to the motion?

Hearing none, okay James.

Well I have a question why is... James there's two separate parts right? There's animal care services and then field services we're only voting on one of those two right now correct? No

i understood it to be both of those for one year. Right.

One's 40 and one's 46 are we so we're saying we'll approve both of those for one year?

Okay

Yes. I have

a question, Bill what is your objection to James bringing up these issues and then voting on it next time? You just want to get it done or... It's $53,000 for additional cost for minimal service that's a chunk of money.

I'm concerned that the end of the fiscal year is June 30. Next, I don't know what their plans are. If they don't get approvals, they have to make plans for continuous service beginning July 1st. Our next meeting is at the end of July, the third week in June. I just didn't want to risk an interruption of service issue but still send a signal.

Mayor?

Randy?

Mayor, that's why I'm in total agreement with Bill's methodology and it does give us some latitude to negotiate. But again if you're not paying for a service why would I provide it? It's real simple and they have every right July 31st if we don't have an agreement in place for them to terminate it. They'd send us the termination letter and say call Santa Paula see if you'd like to use their services.

Well Susan's question is if we don't do it tonight does this automatically interrupt service And we don't know that, do we James? You said they've asked us to get them an answer by the 15th.

Yes, they sent a request out to all cities asking so that they could be prepared to provide service on July 1st if we could reply by June 15th but there was no else.

I just want to add this contract is cancelable under 90 days notice by either party, any time. Three years, two years doesn't matter you can cancel it in 90 days

anytime. We're all talking

about this but the reality is we keep a 90 day right to change it at any time. Correct. Let's vote. Two or three years doesn't make any difference if we don't like it we say no we got 90 days notice to renegotiate it.

Okay we've allowed James and Obligators for one year and with a 90 day notice to get out of it. And if we get answers to these questions over the next couple of months, you know, we can go ahead and get involved in a five-year contract if there's some benefit to that. I don't see what it is other than maybe have us on the hook for them. Okay, I didn't hear any objection to approving it for one year.

Okay, do we need a roll call Matt because it's money?

Mr. Mayor real quick I just want to say the contract can't even be renewed for five years it says only upon mutual agreement this agreement may be renewed for up to five consecutive one-year periods you can't even do it for five straight

years okay good then we're not in conflict with anything right and to answer the

other question I don't uh because it was on consent no roll calls needed

Okay, okay so we're all right. We're now to public comment do we have uh public comments city manager the emails?

Yes so we have emails we've summarized them um that we had uh I'll just quickly uh the general public comments today we received 16 comments supporting pickleball hours being expanded at Libbey Park And all the other comments were on other items. So we will mention those when we get to them.

OK,

so we go to item number two then?

I would like to give a liaison to the Green Coalition and I just want to call your attention to the letter that they sent I will maybe I'll just read the first two paragraphs because normally they would be at the podium and they wanted to introduce us to their new board. The new board is, may I continue Mayor?

Was this sent in under public comment?

Yes, this is public comment.

Okay, okay

proceed. Severo Lara is the new president of the Ojai Valley Green Coalition Board and then Kathy Nolan is the vice president, Kit Stoltz is the board director secretary, Michelle Ellison is on the board, Ray Powers Janet Sajay Nott, Christopher Aniker and Tara Saylor. So it's a 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9 member board and they've been meeting to what's the word? Revision the purpose of the Hawaii Valley Green Coalition. I've attended some of their Zoom meetings I'll read the letter that they sent today.

Dear members of the Ojai City Council, we very much appreciate the support of the city of Ojai in recent years and will attach separately a full report of our accomplishments, Earth Day, Ride & Roll and our composting initiative with David White were in large part due to your support, as well as generosity of dozens of Ojai citizens who donated their time and budget this year.