City Council — 2022-03-08

Then Randy wanted to make a brief statement

Thank you, Mayor. With all that's going on in the world today I know we're gonna have someone touch on the Ukraine concerns that we all have and are all feeling incredibly sad over but I'd like to take a moment of silence and I'd like to just not forget the six million people that have died of COVID The million people in the United States that have died of COVID.

The thousand people that die a day of COVID and the prayer is out to the children who are losing grandparents and parents, and parents that are losing their mother and father. And I just think with all All that goes on in our local community and everywhere else, there's just so much pain out there. And there's so much suffering out there that we lose sight.

And I'd just like for us to just bow our heads and just however we choose to do it, let's not forget what we've gone through and what we're going through and what will continue to go through. Thank you.

Thank you, Randy. Much appreciated. And I'd also like to recognize International Women's Day which is today. The theme is Break the Bias so I'd like to just take a moment in thanks and recognition and celebration to all the women on the planet as well as all the people who are working so hard for diversity inclusion and equity. So thank you.

Ojai City of Peace And leading our nation with this life-saving initiative. Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you tonight, our City Council, to all community members and those who are watching later this recording. Thank you all.

Thank you Brian for all the work for peace that you do in Ojai and the world and thanks to Dr. Bob Dodge also All right, let's move on. Thank you. Any commission reports James?

I did not see anybody in the room. I'll ask if any commissioners are in and

want to give a request. Mayor, I have a question on the proclamation. Oh okay go ahead. Do we need to vote on that? So it's a proclamation, so no vote is required. OK and then I have a question. How are we distributing? I would suggest other cities in Ventura County get this proclamation as well as possibly wherever if we have an email address for Ukrainian Council that we do so as well.

All right. I'd be happy to do that assuming consensus which I will assume unless I hear otherwise. I'll distribute that.

Thank

you.

Thank you, Bill. Thank you, James. All right, just a quick reminder about meeting protocols. Please raise your hand and wait to be called on no crosstalk. Please bring it back to the chair use the raised hand icon. Please be brief into the point stand topic please use respectful language in a civil tone. Please refrain from comment or deliberative discussion on an agenda item until after we have heard from all members of the public when you want to ask a staff member a question please avoid turning your question into a comment Write down your comments and share them after we have heard from the public.

Thank you, and then we'll move on to public communication a just reminder to the public these are items not on the agenda because they're and because they're not on the agenda we cannot discuss them um we are not ignoring you we can appreciate your viewpoint and participation and we will agendize for the future Potentially. Normally the public comment is three minutes, and if there are many speakers it will be two. Please stop talking when the time is up and model civility and respect.

No giving away time to another speaker. We're doing our best to run effective meeting and thank you so much all for your cooperation. Any public communication Gail?

Anyone in the Zoom meeting who would like to speak please use the raise hand function now And we have someone from the Ventura County Library. I don't have the name, but I'll bring them in and so whoever you are from the county library welcome and if you can unmute yourself, you can go ahead and talk.

Thank you so much. It is Ron, I apologize for not changing my name. Yes, thank you members of council this is Ron Solorzano the regional librarian for the Ojai Valley and I just wanted to give you a quick update on what we are doing out here First of all, a little bit late in coming but the Ojai Library has been open for full seven day a week service for a little while now. We reopened about mid-February after being closed a little bit due to last wave.

Customers are able to fully access the collection and many of our typical programs are returning to meeting in person. Some of our programs include the library's visits to the Ojai Community Farmers Market on the second Thursdays of every month, where our youth librarians are performing special in-person outdoor story time. We also have our family STEAM activities taking place at the Ojai Library on the first Wednesday of each month. Those are also outdoor activities We're happy to welcome back later this month our Paws for Reading Therapy Dog Program. That's an indoor program and anyone who's interested can come by the library Wednesday afternoons.

We're also offering outdoor story time at Miners Oaks Elementary School with the mobile library every Friday at 10 30 a.m., and also the Ojai Libraries Homework Center is back in operation Monday through Thursday after school, For adults, we have our very popular ukulele club resuming meeting in person Monday mornings at 10 a.m. We also have two special upcoming programs. First is a non-violent communication working group which is going to be meeting virtually on Zoom on Monday March 14th at 6 p.m., We are also going to have a Friday afternoon mindfulness group that's going to begin meeting on the first and third Friday of each month at 1 p.m., with the first session on Friday, March 18th.

If you have any questions about these programs, you can contact the library or you can visit our website www.vencolibrary.org, and you can always reach out to me directly as well. That's all I have for now. Thank you so much for your time. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me or the team. Thank you.

Thank you, Ron. Fantastic programming. Much appreciated. Exciting! Anyone else, Gail?

If there's anyone else in the Zoom meeting who would like to speak, please use the raised hand function now and I'll call on you. And Oh, we have Larry Steingold and I will unmute him. Mr. Steingold if you're there, if you can unmute yourself and there you go. You should be able to speak now.

Thank you very much. Could you please or someone please clarify the request for virtual meetings that are they going to be together with public meetings or instead of? That's all I'm interested in. Thank you. Thank you, Larry. Resolution. That's all thank you.

Thank you. Any any more public comments deal?

Let me see that he was the last one there's no other speakers raise their hand

okay great thank you all right well let's move on to the consent calendar bill is your hands up

Yes, I want to pull item H for discussion.

Okay. Susan? Same here. Okay great motion to approve everything else.

I'll move to approve consent calendar items A through G and item I.

I'll

second.

Okay all right roll call please Gail.

Are we opening this up for

discussion? Yeah, do you want to go ahead and talk about it Bill.

Yeah I had first I have a legal question and before we get into discussion if that's okay of Mr. Summers. Sure uh Mr. Summers I read in the staff report that the option under ABC 361 is either or in other words it reads either state local officials have imposed recommended social distancing In-person meetings pose an imminent risk to health and safety of attendees. So may I assume based on that, that in terms of our resolution AB 361 can be invoked simply by the finding number one and does not require finding two and three?

Yes, that's correct. Just the finding that there have been recommended social distancing measures is sufficient to move it forward.

Okay and the reason I ask the question if that's okay Mayor Sticks to continue is that I think where we're going is to have Invoke this for purposes of having hybrid meetings. In other words, people in person and or Zoom participation basically it becomes individual choice. My only concern about findings two and three would be a finding of imminent risk even though some people may not feel it's an imminent risk in terms of participating And I'm wondering whether it'd be possible to invoke AB 361 by simply having finding number one in order to not basically have a finding that it's an imminent risk to have a meeting together at Libby Ball or in person at the council chambers.

That's my concern. I'd rather be minimalist in terms of passing this with invoking AB 361, but just having finding number one.

I would support that after I ask some other questions.

Any comment from staff?

I just want to clarify because the question that we got asked a lot today, and I think Councilmember Wyrick didn't just kind of answer it in his statement. But I do want to clarify that the resolution does not require that the city only meet virtually. It just gives the city the ability to include I've sent a few people who had asked questions about this today.

That is intended to allow people who might otherwise not be able to attend, to still participate in meetings moving forward. And so it's really intended as a way to enhance participation. It is not necessarily tied to any decision regarding where we're going to meet or how we're going to meet. So the resolution does not lock us into anything. Thank you, James. Susan?

I have two questions and I wrote it down so I wouldn't forget it. Are you saying that without this resolution if for example a council member or commissioner say they're feeling sick or they're out of town on an emergency they can't have the option of attending via Zoom rather than missing the meeting You mean to say that it's illegal to have that option without this resolution?

The resolution makes it much more practical. And so, you know if we could all remember back to before COVID which now is hard to do It was, it's a lot of effort to be able to meet virtually. It's a lot of organization. I'm not exaggerating when I say, I've told people this story but I had a council member who wanted to meet from a hotel in another state and they had to post the notice on their hotel front door. They had to open their hotel room door so that it was a public forum.

Theoretically, if anybody wanted to go into the meeting they'd be able to go into this person's hotel room and speak. And then it required I would say that one instance required 25 or so hours of staff time to coordinate and make sure all those things were covered with the resolution. If somebody calls today and says I'm not able to attend or I'm not feeling well or whatever it is We, they can call it. That's it. We don't have to jump through any other hoops. So it's not that it's impossible without the resolution but it takes a lot more effort. It takes more staff time and what ends up happening a lot of times is the person says nevermind I just won't attend because this is a hassle so.

And I have related...

Oh

go ahead Susan

So I'm definitely in favor of going back to in-person meetings, and I'm in favor of having the option for people to participate via Zoom. But that's easier for them because I want to have as much public participation as possible. But if I support this, I don't want to imply that my approval for this resolution in any way Thank you.

And I would add, Madam Mayor if I may that the resolution is presently drafted accounts for that. Section two simply notes the existence of a state of emergency that continues to impact the ability to meet and then two say local officials have recommended measures to promote social distancing. The current draft does not rely on the other options for eminent risk findings.

Thank you. Thank You Matt.

Randy?

Sign this conversation moot, so I'll ask this question to James and to Matt. Is the mask mandate being lifted this Friday? This coming Friday?

So my understanding is that the county has lifted its mask mandate and it's now a recommendation.

So where this body makes- is making a lot of its decisions I want to make sure I heard correctly.

Regardless, this resolution can be adopted and the City Council could still make a separate decision about where and how to meet. The resolution just ensures that if somebody did want to participate remotely they're able to.

And my final question is once Once we, I'm sorry there's something flashed up on my computer. Once this goes away and we are back to some type of normalcy again we will make that decision as a council as to where to meet when to meet the time to meet am i correct? And that time is coming pretty soon so um the duration of this resolution lasts 30 days That's why we're doing them month to month. Am I correct?

Yes, it can only be renewed for 30 days. Yes. Okay.

All right. Thank you.

Mayor, I'm prepared to make a motion.

Okay. Susan, do you have another question? Your hand is still up.

I'm not used to this.

Doing a great job. Thank you. And I just want to thank James and staff because I think we had the highest rate of in-person meetings last year. Is that correct, James?

I would say that speaks to, I think the city council has had that commitment of trying to do everything possible to encourage public participation. We had calls from other cities asking about how we were doing them outdoors at the bowl and I think that we kind of were the first to do that. It's just this combination right now as it's been very cold on top of everything else but yes, to answer your question We were in person when most had gotten virtual.

Yeah, so thank you for your flexibility and thank you to my colleagues for flexibility too. Ryan, do you have a question or comment?

I just want to say before we all start thinking this is over, I'm currently COVID positive as well as a bunch of people around me. So regardless what anybody thinks let's not forget that it's not over yet.

That's all. Thank you. Thanks Ryan. Best wishes. Hope you get better soon. And the other thing I'd like to say is that we are all, we realize we're moving into a hybrid world. Meetings are all moving this way and we're becoming more flexible so that more people can participate. So that's a wonderful thing. Randy, you have a question or comment?

Yeah just a comment. You know I read all of the comments that came in to the City Hall and the Council and it...I think there was a sense that we're not open and that we're not trying to be as transparent to the community as some community members think we're The reality of this is we were the first community to mask. We have been the safest community in the county.

I made a comment months ago that will more than likely be the last community to unmask, and Ryan brings it clearly home. This isn't going away. We're gonna have to learn to live with it. I think we all recognize that. But having the ability to zoom in is something that I think we need to look at and any other opportunity for any other citizen to be able to zoom in when they'd like to. I'm not sure without an ordinance like this if we have the capabilities, James, maybe you can answer it, to logistically Allow for zooming in the public comment section or on any of the agendized items moving forward, along with in-person meetings. I'm not sure how that's going to work. So all of this is just so confusing at times, especially when everyone's doing the best they can.

Thank you, Randy. Okay. So Suze, is your hand up for a comment?

Did Bill make a motion? Go ahead.

You want to make a motion?

I'm going to move that we invoke the provisions of AB 361 by resolution with finding number one and not including finding number two and three.

I'd like to second that. Thank you.

Can you explain what that means exactly?

Well yeah, it invokes all the provisions of AB 361 based on the question that I asked Mr. Summers and why was answered but it does not have a finding that meeting in person would present imminent risk to the health or safety of attendees So it does not include those two findings. And

it's clearly up to the individual's choice? Exactly. Okay, all right. Thank you and Susie, you second that?

Yes, especially since we have the option of spacing people, we have great ventilation. Anybody who's concerned can either mask or wait in the outside area. I think our setting is conducive Mayor,

can I get one more clarification from our attorneys? So what's the opposite of Bill's request?

The opposite of Bill's request would be to not approve the resolution and thereby require that all meetings be in person By default, with remote attendance still allowed but under the old rules for remote attendance that require among other points as stated by Mr. Vega that the remote location be open to the public and be noticed on the agenda which requires that it be listed on the agenda that 72-hour window.

That'd be the opposite of Bill's motion or I'm sorry Mayor Pro Tem Weirich's motion.

You know, I'm going to vote yes, but it's a hesitant only because I'll be honest with you guys. I'm not quite sure if I'm 100% behind and I'm not sure what risk we're placing on the community and what additional time we're placing on staff. So those are my two concerns, but I'll vote yes. And we'll work this out.

Mayor Sticks?

Yes. Okay, thank you. All right, we will move on to public hearing number two. It's the fifth City Council redistricting public hearing introduction of the third draft map so we'll receive input from residents and city council. So James you have a staff report?

Yes thank you Mayor. We have a couple of slides that our representative from Redistricting Partners will present Just briefly, I'll note just and it will be in the presentation but we had prepared draft maps B and C. And at the last council meeting a request was made for a modification to map C so that has returned now as map D. This meeting. I think she's in and I will hand it over to her with one quick note, which is for anybody who needs an interpreter for the redistricting project or items we do have an interpreter available and you can access the Spanish translation by clicking on the interpretation button on Zoom.

But with that, I'll hand it over to Kaye to walk us through it.

Wonderful. Thank you so much. It's good to see you all again. And I'm also happy to see the dogs in the background. That's nice to see too. All right, so this is our final draft maps presentation and as James said we have an additional map to go over tonight. So I will give the presentation and then we can really zoom in on all of these maps as you'd like to.

So first, we're going to go over the Fair Maps Act criteria that we've gone through each meeting. But just for anybody that's new to this process, we're going through our three draft map revisions. So that's Draft Map B, C and D. And then we are going to vote on a final map. So first, we have a set of criteria That the Fair Maps Act passed by the legislator mandates. It's a set of criteria that we follow when districting, when drawing district plans. So the first of these is that each district has to be of relatively equal size. When we talk about size, we're talking about total population or people not citizens or voters.

They also need to be contiguous so what that means is that districts don't hop or jump where you can draw them with one line We also maintain communities of interest, which these draft maps have and especially Draft Maps C and D were drawn specifically to keep the VMU intact. We follow city and census designated place boundaries, and we also keep districts compact in both appearance and function.

So with more cities and counties using community-based redistricting following communities of interest, we move redistricting out into the public with maps driven by community of interest testimony. So what we've done was get input from a community which drives the process with multiple ways for the public to engage. We have rules for the process that emphasize the importance of traditional criteria that we just went over in the last slide And then we release the maps for feedback. So today, um, we're going to see the plans and we will take any public feedback that we'll get.

So as I said, uh, we have plans B, C and D to go over. And each of these plans has an overview at data table and individual district pages so you can really zoom in on that data. So these are the current lines for the city of Ojai and the current data. So right now we have a total deviation of 15.9%, which is over the maximum of 10%. So we do need to shift our population, uh, to make sure that we have equal, relatively equal size districts.

And then we also have individual maps of each districts that are in your packet, and they can be brought up on screen at the end of this presentation if anybody would like to see them. So first we're going to start with Draft Map B which is our minimum change map. We really just focused here on balancing population where we needed to. And so this is what Draft Map B looks like again pretty similar to the current map but with one And then we have our data table here with a total At 9.8%, so underneath the 10% deviation.

And we have Draft Map C, which keeps the VMU intact and balances population. And so here we have Draft Map C, which was requested two meetings ago. And as you can see it there are pretty drastic changes to the districts here. So they are letters instead of numbers to not assume where That will be at a later meeting for sequencing to figure that out. And we have much lower deviations on draft map C with the total deviation of 2.4%. And so, at the last meeting, Draft Map D was requested.

It's also a map that keeps the VMU intact And it balances population as well, but it moves the boundary line between C and D from Drown Ave to Daily Road. And so this changed the population a lot. It was about 220 people in that area. So we had to make the map pretty different from draft plan C One thing, as you can tell, is that Draft Plan D actually looks a little bit more compact.

So that's a difference here. This is Draft Plan D with the current lines overlay and again we are using letters instead of numbers because of the drastic change. And then we have our data table here. Again, a pretty low deviation just like Draft Plan C with a total deviation of 5.5%. So now just to go back, we have draft plan B which is our minimum change to balance the population between three and four.

We have draft plan C to keep the VMU intact. And then we have a draft plan D which also keeps the VMU intact but it's slightly different from draft plan C. Can I ask you a question?

Because I still can't read the street names. Because it's purple, is D still four or is B? Okay. Sorry. Okay. So can you just give me a moment to look at the street names one more time? I'm starting to focus on... Okay so B is the south side of Ojai Avenue

Yeah, so I can also pull up at the end of the presentation those Google map overlays. So we can really zoom in where those are. But one thing to consider here-

Finish and then we'll take questions after, Susan?

Okay. And just to point out with draft plan B is our minimum change. So it keeps relatively the same boundaries as the current lines But draft plan C and D are such drastic changes that we do not have specific districts for them, and that's going to come at a later meeting when you number those districts.

And that's actually where I'm going to jump in if I could real quick there. We have prepared proposed sequencing for maps C and d, and I'll be covering that after Kaye's presentation. The council could adopt a map tonight and sequence it later or you could adopt and sequence tonight. Both are valid options. And I'll be covering some options for sequencing after Ms. Montblasir's presentation, thank you.

Thank you Matt. Okay so next steps as Matt just said tonight we will be choosing a map for adoption. Adoption excuse me so either maps B C or D and then the final draft map must be adopted by April 17th So I am happy to take any questions and I also can pull up the Google Maps so we can zoom in on streets if you'd like to do that as well.

Thank You Kay, much appreciated. Questions from Council?

Is Matt going

to...

I thought Matt was going to clarify some things.

Yeah, let me go ahead if I may Mayor and Council and suggest and I don't know James, I know I sent those slides I can screen share them too that's easier. Oh you're on mute James.

James are you able to pull those slides up?

Yes, I can. Thank you. What I've got is I got five slides that show sequencing options. Map B there's really just one option so that's easy. Maps C and D there's two options and I'll talk through those briefly with the slides if they're pulled up. If not, I can share my screen. All right, so can you make those full screen? Map B which is noted as the minimum changes map. So for this map staff would recommend that the council consider mapping it as close to the existing districts as they are now. So District 1 would be up in this year in 2022, District 2 in 2022, District 3 in 2022 and every four years thereafter and the lower district, District 4 kicked to 2024 and every four years thereafter. That's essentially the same as it is now, and that structured as a quote minimum changes map.

Next slide. Draft Map C option one I've labeled this old because this is what is in the packet. The resolution that's in the packet is this sequencing I've developed a second option that's labeled new. Old option is what's on the screen now, that would put the center district, the downtown core district in orange as District 4 up in 2024 and the others in 2022.

Next slide. But on reflection staff would recommend if the council selects map C and this is council's choice on all of these issues but if the council selects map C It may make sense to consider this sequencing option, which would put the majority of the district south of the avenue. The green district as district four up in 2024 and the three districts north of the avenue up in 2022.

The reason that we make this recommendation for consideration is the majority of the voters in the current district four is the area south of the avenue they voted in So I'm going to start by saying that the city of Toronto has voted in favor of a map C for 2020 and they would expect to vote again in four years. The district, most of the area north of the avenue that is the downtown core district A voted in 2018 and would expect to vote again this year in 2022 rather than being shifted out then this would be a sequencing approach to consider. Next slide.

Map D, here too I've mapped what was in the resolution. This would be the old approach, the same thing, the center district up in 24, the other three up in 2022. Next slide. Last slide. This is map D, the new option that would put same rationale as with map C, the area south of the avenue who voted in 2020 they will expect to vote in 2024 and that would be the district to mark it's district four. The other three districts red orange and purple north of the avenue would all be up in 2022. And as noted City Council can select one of the three maps tonight and defer to a future meeting, the sequencing question. You could select both the map and sequencing tonight or you could make no action and defer all of this to a future meeting that's also on the table we have two more council meetings before the statutory April 17th deadline And with that, I'll answer together with the staff any particular questions.