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.Scheduled start 6:00 PM · clock-time estimates pending review
0:00 – 0:023 turns
Okay, hello everyone. Welcome to the Tuesday August 11th regular City Council meeting roll call please Mr. Montgomery
Roll call, called by Weston Montgomery · 1 under review
Show transcript
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled, click to expand
On the agenda I have one change I would like to propose and that is, I would like to move up number 14 to be our first discussion item so it will come in front of number 8 Just so that our Chamber of Commerce representative cannot stay on the line for hours and hours, if everybody's okay with that?
I'm good with it.
Any other changes to the agenda? All right no objections we'll go forward. Any
Commission reports? None received Mayor. Okay City Manager's report
Mayor, just a couple of items this evening. First of all I just want to thank all of our public safety folks, first responders who participated in the National Night Out last Wednesday at Libbey Park. It was a great success, well attended. We got some great footage thanks to our own Christian Kubikub which is posted on social media so just thanks Chief for everything that you did to make that happen. Great event.
Secondly, this is just a little item that maybe a lot of you are aware of. Mayor, you and I met with the representative from the governor's office on Friday of last week and during that meeting he let us know that the state is pausing the Zone Zero implementation for the time being. And he didn't have a lot of details about that. He said this was in light of public comment and concern received, so we're going to continue to monitor that.
I asked him for is there a position paper or news? No, there's nothing yet that's come out. I searched around couldn't find anything. So we'll keep you posted but that's something he wanted to share with us. Thank you.
0:02 – 0:097 turns
So public communications, these are items that are not on the agenda. And I have a few cards here and then we'll go online after that. Ron Salarzano please? P.S., check out this new podium right here, look how beautiful it is. I was checking it out! Thank you James Hahn. Yes.
All right well thank you members of council my name is Ron Solorzano I am the regional librarian for the Ojai Valley and yeah so as of this month as of the first of the month the Ojai Library has closed for renovations we are doing some packing and taking care of things to make sure that we're ready for construction to begin At this point in about a week, they're going to be coming in.
So a couple of things I wanted to highlight with that going on first is that as of this Thursday the 13th, the Mobile Library will be visiting the Ojai Community Farmers Market every week on Thursday at three o'clock. There will also be a story time at 3.30 and you can utilize all of the regular mobile library services there that includes getting a library card or, you know, checking out items that they have there. You can talk to the staff there about other things that you might be able to do with the mobile library as well. So that's going to be every Thursday, 3 p.m., at the Ojai Community Farmers Market. The other thing I wanted to highlight is that if you're going just by distance, the next closest of our library branches is the Miners Oaks Library.
And that library in addition to again having all of our regular library services and some of our staff out there as well helping out also has something that is a little less common which is express hours There are express hours at the Miners Oaks Library every Saturday from 10 a.m to 5 p.m. If you are a library user who has updated your card to an express card, you can use your card to scan in and enter the Miners Oaks Library on Saturday during those hours. The library is not...doesn't have library staff present at that time it's a security guard only But you can again pick up holds, you can check items out from the library.
Anything else you might need to do just get in from the heat. You can do that at the Miners Oaks Library with an express card from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.. That's all I have for now and thank you all so much!
Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Yeah. I'd like to just add something which is I just learned that maybe it's more out in the public than I'm aware of. But in addition to the library remodel, they're totally reimagining the courtyard in front of the library. They're going to do a native plant installation and cultural aspects to it. It's going to look totally different than it does today.
Yeah, no, absolutely. Stay tuned for more information on that project as it develops there. They're going to be looking for to get the word out a little more soon.
Thank you. Appreciate it. Next I have Nicholas Wiseman and then Candace Mennegan.
Good evening City Council members, Mayor Gilman and city staff. My name is Nicholas Wiseman I'm the president of the Ojai Film Society. I'm here tonight speaking on behalf of our volunteer board to help ensure that this 38 year old valley institution can continue presenting free summer films at Libby Bowl for our community As you may know, the Ojai Film Society began programming at The Bowl coming out of the pandemic with a simple idea to make use of the Ojai beautiful summer nights and create a place where community could come together for outdoor films. At the time former Parks and Recreation lead Renee Peace and the city generously invited us to use Libby Bowl as our venue. Now in our fifth year, the Summer Series has grown into a meaningful tradition for all ages with 27 screenings to date and an annual attendance of over 3,000 people.
You can still attend this summer we're showing Arrival on August 20th and Jurassic Park on August 27 The reason we're here tonight is to request that the new Libby Bowl Management Agreement, and specifically the challenge date system within it be reviewed by the City Council in the September regular council meeting. The Ojai Film Society is joined in this request by the Ojai Band also known as the Ojai Summer Band which has been performing at Libbey Park for 35 years. The Ojai Pops Orchestra now in its 10th year performing on Sundays at full and the Ojais Storytelling Festival which has served this community each October for 26 years All of us with deep roots in Ojai and long histories of creating accessible cultural programming for thousands of members of the public for reduced costs or free.
Under the current challenge date system, community organizations cannot reliably confirm dates far enough in advance to properly plan, fundraise, contract with artists and vendors, promote events, and serve the public. Under the current Tier 1 process from May to October, a date may not open until 60 days before their event followed by an additional 48-hour right of refusal time which puts most organizations outside of the city's designated window for fee waivers.
Prior to this new system, organizations could submit their dates in September of the prior year giving them nine to 10 months to plan. Events at the scale of the Libby Bowl's capacity require months of advance work and the uncertainty created by the new challenge date system makes responsible planning extremely difficult. We believe the experience of these four organizations is exactly the kind of community feedback that is relevant for the City Council members to review this ahead of the November 15th deadline.
So our request tonight is straightforward. We are asking the City Council to begin that review now rather than waiting until November, to reconsider the challenge date system that the community organizations can request and secure dates with enough lead time to plan and to consider recognizing the Ojai Film Society, the Ojai Band, the Ojai Pops, and the Ojais Storytelling Festival as legacy Ojai organizations with consistent annual dates and fee waivers.
This would equate to 20 dates of the total 180 days available in tier one. All right,
thank you we got it and you've submitted a good document that's detailed so we have that in here okay thank you all right Candace Menigan please thank you and then Randy Cox
0:09 – 0:144 turns
Good evening Mayor Gilman and City Council members. My name is Candace Mennegan, I am on the board of Friends of the Santa Clara River and Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources. Friends of the Santa Clara River is a local non-profit that protects and does natural resource protection and conservation as well as cultural resource protection Along across both Ventura and Los Angeles counties.
We are also a member of a larger group called the Biodiversity Working Group, and that has developed a community vision and policy platform to support biodiversity across California's Central Coast And really, I'm here today to say thank you because I believe a few weeks ago the city actually did adopt a biodiversity resolution. We started with the adoption of these resolutions in the county of Santa Barbara and we really are now focusing on Ventura County and we're happy that you have been early adopters along with the City of Fillmore And I just wanted to say that we heartened and we are looking forward to working with you, what you said about the nature garden in front of the library. It's these opportunities by adopting policies like that that we can really embolden and I'm just here today to say thank you on behalf of those 50 organizations across the Central Coast that are doing this type of work.
To protect our biodiversity during a biodiversity collapse and during global climate change And so the action that the city took was really a big one and a welcome one, and we just are very grateful Thank you very much
Appreciate it. Thank you. Yeah, it's very nice Randy Coggin please and then Pat to my mate
Good evening, Mayor and Council and staff. While I previously sent you an email to each of you, I'd like to read this into the record for the benefit of those that are here tonight and those watching online. There are significant concerns that are being raised in the community regarding the lack of information about evacuation planning for the city. In the event of a evacuation level major emergency such as a wildfire, earthquake, flood or the like.
As you know evacuation planning is the responsibility of the Ventura County Office of Emergency Services OES which is a department of the Ventura County Sheriff's office While actual evacuation routes cannot be determined until the time, type and location of the event are known there are some actions that could be taken that I believe can alleviate some of the community's concern.
Accordingly, I would like to make the following recommendation to City Council One, the City contact the Sheriff's Office and as part of the city's contract with them requests that OES perform a scenario-based evacuation planning for the city. If it has already been done then OES can simply share this with the city and it could be shared with the residents. With proper caveats, the results of this scenario based planning can then be shared with the city's residents to illustrate that the city is being proactive in this regard I also sent you some information about C-SAFE. And C-SAFE is a comprehensive framework for developing emergency evacuation simulations to enhance pre-disaster preparedness. This isn't rocket science, and a number of organizations are doing it.
Two, that the City acquire and test message boards can be deployed if any of the four primary evacuation routes to the city are impassable providing directions for evacuees to passable evacuation routes or temporary refuge areas. I believe that in completing these steps, along with the City hopefully due to Ben's efforts obtaining the grant to install the two planned warning sirens.
This will go a long way in alleviating the community's concern about evacuation planning for the city of Ojai. And in the couple minutes I have left, I just want to make a comment to what Ben said about the state and Zone Zero. Those of us that are close to it knew this wasn't going to happen. The state's gonna probably be two or three years from doing anything but a reminder and I don't see anybody here for fire tonight because Nick I think is on the Foxfire up in Washington State but the county has its own zone zero so even without the state there is the county's own zero to follow And again, thank you for your time.
Thank you Mr. Coggin I appreciate it. Pat Tumamite please and then Cara Martin
0:14 – 0:2110 turns
Good evening Council, Mayor, Andy Glimp. The reason why I'm here tonight is basically to have a grievance about this consultation list that the city has with Native American people such as myself and my sister Julie. Since my sister and I have basically left the Barbarino-Venturino band of Chumash here in the valley, the new chairman has asked the city council to remove us from the consultation list of the city.
And beings that were local residents and people who have the experience and the knowledge of the valley It's really beside us that we're not involved. We no longer receive any notices of projects that are deemed sensitive to cultural resources in the valley. Some of the work that's being done now, especially this One Dignity project that's going on, they're having problems with finding native people to do the monitoring. We had one person that they were able to contact a relative of ours, Frank.
Or a Dondo and because he's not on the list they couldn't hire him. So my sister and I they certainly aren't going to hire us because we're not on the list as well. And it's not like we're not involved. We're definitely involved with what goes on here in the valley. You know, and I find it really biased and actually hypocritical of the situation because it's funny that I received this award of preservation in 2024. For what reason?
Was it a going away gift? No, I'm still here. We still exist within the city of Ojai. And I feel that The non-residents that don't know this valley, don't know it like my sister and myself. So it's besides me to feel and think that the city would follow within a policy that basically doesn't involve your most important expertise with issues of cultural resources in archaeological sites and knowledge of the history of the valley You know, Ojai is a.
A native Chumash name and it represents our people, and I would certainly like to see change come within the city and address this with you know, with this group, the Barbarian Venturino Band of Chumash Indians and. You know? Ask Matthew. Thank you. Thank
you, sir. I appreciate it. Kara Martin, please. Yes, did you have something? Oh go ahead.
No no we were looking at each
other. I'm just wondering when this happened and why and how.
And what can we can we have a discussion about? This would be my request to get. Yeah,
I would recommend this could be a future discussion. There is a city council resolution that governs how the list is established in the city coordinates with the chair to establish the list so we can we can put this on a future agenda if you like.
I would much appreciate that. Yes, I think it's a discussion worth having. Thank you. Great. Thank you
for bringing that up. Karen Martin, please. Thank you. And then Russell Spinney
Good evening, Mayor Gilman and members of the City Council. My name is Kara Martin and I am director of Performances to Grow On, the non-profit that produces the Ojai Storytelling Festival. I'm here tonight to talk about how the city's contract with Ojai Valley Music has affected our organization, specifically our ability to plan the Ojai Storytelling Festival and hold it at Libby Bowl where it has taken place since 2000. The year 2000.
Putting on an event like this takes extensive, advanced planning. We book performers of national and international standing, arrange their travel and lodging, build out our marketing for months ahead of time, sell tickets, line up volunteers and vendors, pursue sponsorships and grants, and commit funds long before the festival itself begins. This year, as we started marketing on our usual schedule I learned that another non-profit had been given permission to use the bowl the same weekend that we have used it for years.
Ojai Valley Music had granted the use of the bowl for a fundraiser without following the standard application process required of everyone else. As a result, we've had to relocate our Friday and Saturday night shows. But there's a deeper problem. The city's agreement with the Ojai Valley Music allows it to deny any groups except those with legacy status, the use of the bowl up to 60 days before a scheduled event from May through October.
That means nothing can be finalized until 60 days out. We had already begun booking performers for 2028 when we learned of this rule. Instead of planning confidently several years in advance as we used to, we now can't even count on a full year. Not knowing our venue or expenses early enough creates a cascade of problems. It delays when we can contract performers, apply for grants, approach sponsors with a real budget. It pushes back our advertising and tickets that makes securing housing for the performers harder and it undermines our ability to make sound financial decisions.
For international performers it's a deal breaker. 60 days simply isn't enough to apply for and receive a U.S. work visa. A simple solution for all of this is to grant us legacy status along with the four organizations named in the contract. Ojai Music Festival, The Tennis Tournament, The Lavender Festival and Ojai Day. The Ojai Storytelling Festival is a local non-profit that has been part of this community for 26 years. Every dollar we raise goes straight back into producing the festival and supporting Performances To Grow One's arts education program. We recognize the city has a responsibility to manage Libby Bowl well and love what Ojai Valley Music has brought to Ojai, but I hope the city will take a close look at the unintended impact this agreement has had on longstanding local nonprofits events and work with us so that organizations like ours can keep planning with confidence and remain part of Ojai's cultural life.
Thank you very much. I would say to Ms. Martin but also to Mr. Wiseman, it will be something that we will be bringing forward just so you're clear. Russell Spinney please and then Scott Weiss
0:21 – 0:273 turns
Thank you, everybody for this opportunity. It's my first time to be able to speak here. Welcome. And in support of Patrick Tumamaid who you just heard speak and his candidacy to be re-added to the consultation list along with his sisters' candidacy and other local native consultants. Who am I very quickly? I'm a PhD in modern German history. This is my 30th year of teaching at 11 different institutions, universities, high schools, and places like Baltimore, Santa Fe, and here It's my eighth year here in Ojai, and at the Thatcher School I'm the head of the History Department and the Global Studies program there.
In these eight years that we've been here lots of local connections working with coaching my own kids in the AYSO program and volunteering for OIES when they are in that program But particularly more recently with the Women of the Valley Project and the indigenous work that I've been doing along with other work. With Matthew Vestuto, who I worked with before in our science program, and Patrick and Julie Tumamate in history and ethnobotany, with Lanny Kaufer who will speak here later in a few minutes. I'm going to start by saying thank you to all of our panelists for being here today.
I'm just, in my work, I've worked at Santa Fe, in Santa Fe where I started working with indigenous communities and developing indigenous studies. And so at Thatcher, I continued those things. And what I've learned along the way is that historical exclusion of indigenous peoples from democracy is a long result of all this. And I've seen divisions in different native communities that I've worked with like the Pueblos and I sense also here in the local Chumash band. So surprised to learn that the Tumamates are not on the list for local cultural preservation work Also, there's that history of divide and conquer and working with one group of Native leaders at the expense of others. And because of this it is something I think that is very important to be very aware of and mindful of.
And I also want to support all Indigenous efforts in those ways. And with the Tumamates personally, I have spent the last few years getting to know them. Meeting with them for coffee in the park to build trust, to listen to them and to support their efforts. Both are called cultural knowledge keepers. Their father Vincent, there's a trail named after him and there's long deep roots here. And I know of Patrick's recent award from the city for his experience in cultural preservation and have seen him doing that monitoring work at Thatcher.
And with Julie, as many of you may or may not know she is a cultural resource in the valley for the Chumash world. Especially for children that she reaches out to and works with a lot. And she's even been recognized and you can find her in a National Geographic a few years back where she was representing Ojai indigenous work here. And I speak with passion and that's coming forth. And I apologize for that emotion, but it reveals the importance of this. And so I just ask honorable council members that you would consider this history and you consider these people in your work.
Thank you
sir. Scott Weiss please? And then Clay Creasy.
Good evening Mayor Gilman, City Council members and city staff. My name is Scott Weiss. I've been with the Ojai Summer Band since its inception 35 years ago. I am the co-manager trumpet player and one of the conductors. I'm also the founder and musical director of the Ojia Pops Concert Series and Ojia Pops Orchestra. This year will be our 10th anniversary season. There are four long-standing valuable community organizations before you asking for legacy status. We're asking to include fee waiver and priority scheduling for our events as part of the legacy status.
The Ojai Band has been creating free Norman Rockwell-like concerts in the park bandstand for the last 35 years on Wednesday nights. This Wednesday night, the concert will not take place. It was preempted by the Gypsy Kings and Ojai Valley Music Event. This should not happen again. The Ojai Pops concert series has been waiting for the 60-day window for our October 4th concert date to be released. It was released on August 4th, 60 days before but the problem with this is we don't...we have an event in the end of September So we actually have only 26 days to do our booking of events, to do our marketing, and to do our planning. And it's just an impossible way to work basically. It'll be very hard to get anything ads in the newspaper let alone get all of the groups booked.
We've brought a woodwind quintet, a professional woodwind quintet up from Los Angeles We have a French horn quartet that comes from Santa Barbara County. We have the pops orchestras, about 45 musicians with singers and we have jazz groups that are presented as well. In 35 years there've been numerous city council members, city managers and city attorneys. We hope that these organizations will outlive all of you and all of us You have the opportunity and responsibility to shine, and to provide for a vibrant future for these four organizations by providing legacy status to these organizations. We ask that you pass a resolution to provide legacy status at your next City Council meeting I have provided Weston with a document that has a draft resolution that I'd like you to look at, and also a draft section E of the contract challenge system.
Thank you very much.
0:27 – 0:336 turns
Mayor and City Council, I prepared a document that Westin has taken and it shows the pacing of financial reporting that has happened over the past several years in Ojai going back to 2018-2019. If you look at these numbers, we have two major financial reports that we issue. One to the state of California and one published generally the financial statement audited statement each year as you can see from this report for the first three years in my charts from 2018 through 2021 we were pretty much publishing on time After that, what you see is an accelerating pace of late reporting. The State of California report, they call it Financial Transaction Report or FTR, we used to be on time which is January 31st back in the good old days through 2021 but since then we were 48, 62, 74 now 181 days late.
So the last four years it's been late and getting later and we owe the city or owe the state a relatively small fine when you're late and frankly I don't even know for sure whether they assess it or not but in theory there is some financial consequence with being late. The financial statements, the audited statements I've also been later in an accelerating way your policy, the financial policy that you adopt as well as the state guidelines say for each fiscal year you should have that statement published by the end of December. So year ends June 30th, you got six months to publish.
We are still in a state where we haven't even published the audit from the year that ended June 30th of 2025, so you're over a year late with that. I'd love to point fingers and find villains but the truth is I think life is just getting a lot more complicated and this accelerating trend predates your new city manager it predates all your finance directors and by the way you're on your fourth one now in the last 17 or 15 months, excuse me.
So my recommendation if I was CFO of this city, I would have two job requisitions in now one for a financial planning manager and another for an accounting manager because you're obviously understaffed Maybe in the old days, five people was the right number. Now it's obviously not and if you go four years and it gets worse every year at some point you can't blame turnover anymore. You just have a basic structural under engineering of this staff.
And the final notion is if there's a job that takes five people and there's only four people to do it, those four are going to be pretty stressed. And one or more is going to drop out. Then you've got three and you've got two and the whole thing falls apart. So add two people to finance is my message. Thank you.
Thank you
sir.
Lanny Cofford please and then Delaney Labar.
Hi Mayor Gilman, Council thank you for this opportunity. My name is Lanny Coffer and I have been leading ethnobotanical interpretive walks and hikes in Ojai since 1976 so celebrating 50 years this year. I first moved to Ojai in 1969 so I will never be able to say I'm a native But I've seen a lot here. And because of the nature of the work that I do, ethnobotanical work, I'm here to on behalf of Patrick and Julie Tumamait.
I knew their father Vincent. In fact there's been discussion about legacy events in the bowl. My brother Michael Coffer And his friend Kerry Sterling co-founded the Ojai Bowl Full of Blues, which occurred here for 25 years. And they started a legacy tradition of asking Vincent Tumamite to lead a Chumash blessing to open that event. Something that's become almost a routine thing when you see city events, non-profit events, private events. This interest in acknowledging the that the Chumash are still here and asking their blessing on the uses of our land here So, continuing that tradition all these years have been Patrick and Julie Tumamait.
And as Pat said there's nobody that knows this valley that knows the Chumash culture and traditions that's trained as archaeological monitors, as cultural consultants the way that they are. So when I learned that they had been removed from the consultant list, I was shocked. And I just had to come down here and find out how that happened. So I was hoping I could even get an answer tonight but I know things have to take their time to work out.
But I think this is a...I don't know what's going on within that organization And that doesn't really concern me. What concerns me is these are the two most qualified people who have given of their time and their lives to this community and to the Chumash people, and if anybody should be at the top of that consultant list it would be the Tumamites.
Thank you. Thank you sir. And then just to be clear not removed by us but we'll figure it out. Delaney Labar please and then Larry Steingold
0:33 – 0:438 turns
Good evening, Mayor, Council, staff, one and all. Delaney Labar. I live here on Blanche. And just a quick thing to get on the radar. I don't know how many of you might be aware that the flock Cameras are taking a lot of heat and communities are dropping their contract. There are other companies who also do the same thing, but Flock in particular has an extremely bad reputation. And you may have seen the article in the LA Times this last week that meaning no disrespect to our law enforcement here, but 50 Police officers have been arrested for abusing the system and stalking women, ex-wives, cute gals they'd like to get to meet whatever their thinking is.
So I don't know if we have this contract in place. Word on the street is there's a Cameron Miners Oaks are in Oakview. I don't know but I think it's something we want to be aware of and think about whether we want this because especially with the immigration, it's a real problem because it's getting the license plate, it's getting the picture of the person behind the wheel And it's just more data collection on private citizens who are simply driving to work or taking their kids to school. So I wanted to bring that to your attention, to consider whether or not we have one contract that is and perhaps we don't want it if we haven't at least you would want to go with a more reputable company at this point.
OK, thank you so much. Thank
you so much. I appreciate it. Larry Stangle, please. And then Leanna McNeely.
Hi, Larry. I want to thank the mayor for the assessment meeting we had at St. Thomas. Where we had a good crowd, people from the insurance companies. And the mayor made a suggestion that we should waive fees for fire hardening, fire trimming, anything related to fire. That's something you can do today or next on the agenda meeting or however it works out. I know it's not a lot and maybe a lot to somebody but it's $225 for me for each time we had to redo the tree.
And I think it's something that will be helpful. It shows immediacy, it shows something is being done now and it doesn't amount to a lot of money in the scheme of things. After listening to the people regarding the theater, the Playhouse, Libbey Park maybe it's time to re-look at the contract. To see how we can make it better, make it different, make it more acceptable for the legacy for other groups, for new groups.
And one last thing, please move the agenda to Thursday. Just instruct the city manager to make it happen because when we have a Monday holiday they still get it out on time so maybe we pretend a week and he gets it out on Thursday. I mean it shows transparency you want engagement, you want people here. I mean not everybody can read the agenda on their phone And it's really no fun. It's actually nice to read it in the paper occasionally, and then you have to follow up. But it gets people here. So please move the agenda. Thank you.
Good evening, my name is Leanna McNeely and I'd like to begin by thanking the mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and council members for their service to Ojai. We know you don't have to be here and you deserve our respect, our gratitude whether we agree with you or not. With this administration, this Council Building on the work of past councils has achieved more than any council I can remember in the last 40 years.
You deserve thumbs up for the work that you've done, you've done good things, you've made big commitments and you've made me proud to live in a city that works so hard to make life better for all of its citizens. Tonight I'm speaking as a member of the Ojai Rhetory Club of the West We've supported the Ojai Summer Band program since its inception. The contract signed with the promoter, as you've heard, Ojai Valley Music gives them priority over 164 calendar dates.
Everyone understands that booking groups to a small venue is no easy task and anyone who's paid attention to the recent concerts is happy to see a more vibrant group of performers than we've had in the past. Also as you've heard, this agreement impacts multiple longstanding and cherished programs. The Ojai Pops, the Storytelling Festival, the Ojai Film Society, the Summer Series Ojai Band Concerts and many other worthy non-profits.
These groups deserve legacy status and protected dates for their programs not because these programs have been around for decades Mere existence does not earn a right to legacy status, but because they represent the best of what Ojai is. Most of the impacted programs are entirely or partially free to the public. They build community and they reinforce what makes Ojai, Ojai. These programs represent the inclusionary ethos of our town. Not everybody has $150 to see The Gypsy Kings but people can afford a 50 cent balloon for their child to take care, to carry in the balloon parade and I'll bet that tomorrow night The night that would usually host the band concert, you will see people of all ages many with children in tow confused because there's no band concert and no balloon parade.
Ojai is a welcome oasis of small town values, evidenced by so many of the events that the city celebrates. Whether our parades or public concerts, Ojai Day, the list is long. The city needs to support the organizations that bring value to all the citizens of the valley by giving them the protection these groups, the protection of legacy status. Thank you.
Thank you. Elena Rios, please. Hi,
Council. My name's Elena Rios and I'm an Auxiliary Battalion Chief with the Chumash Fire Department, Santina's Band of Chumash Indians where I've also received training as a cultural specialist from tribal elders and archaeologists which has really enhanced my perspective on what it means to be in relationship to land and place I'm also a Nature Connection Guide and a cultural practitioner myself.
I remember when Julie Tumamaia created the non-profit that is called the Barbareño Ventureño Band of Chumash Indians about 20 years ago, I've been living in this valley for about 30 years or so. And so I think it's worth mentioning that the BVBMI started out as a nonprofit. And as a nonprofit, all of the descendants of Barbareño-Ventureño Chumash Indians did not necessarily join the BVBMI. So it's important to note that the BVBMI doesn't necessarily represent the views of all BVMBI members, as all are not members of the nonprofit.
So this invites us to think a little bit more deeply about what it means Also in my work in the fire department and as a board member of a non-profit called Sacred Indigenous Preservation, I've learned a little bit more about some of the things that we're talking about. And I know that the nonprofit that Julie started helped the BVBMI gain state recognition from the California Native Heritage Commission.
And so I understand some of the parameters of that, but I hope that Because I know Julie and the Tumamayo family are true locals here, that the city can come to a conclusion that is fair for all native cultural consultants especially ones so deeply tied to this land like the Tumamayo family. Thank you.
Thank you. I have no more cards anybody online for general comments? Yes Mayor
we'll move on to Zoom. Okay first we have Eric. Eric you may unmute and you have the floor.
0:43 – 0:5213 turns
Hello Mayor Gilman and members of the City Council. My name is Eric Cardenas, I am working at the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden and like Candace Mennegan before me who's in the audience there, I just wanted to come on here and appreciate offer gratitude a couple of months after the fact for your recent passing of your biodiversity resolution on June 23rd. It was something that as Candice mentioned We have been pushing and promoting throughout the region to really start to uplift the importance of biodiversity, to highlight the fact that we are in a biodiversity crisis. And that there's a lot of really really important work happening throughout the cities and the counties on the south central coast to address some of these issues Tried to try to have some positive impact.
So your leadership in elevating this resolution and adopting the resolution a couple months ago is really, really important as we build a movement and we continue to build a conservation movement in support of biodiversity. I am the chair, the current chair of a Biodiversity Working Group which is made up of 50 organizations including the Ojai Valley Land Conservancy, the Ventura Land Trust a whole sort of organizations throughout the tri-county region.
And if the Botanic Garden can offer any resources, particularly around native plants which I've heard referenced a couple of times at this meeting already we would love to be a resource for you. Our other colleagues who have spoken before and who I think may speak after me are also here to support their expertise however they can so thank you for your leadership. We really appreciate it and let us know how we can help in the future.
Thank you. Next we'll have Brie. Brie, you may unmute and you have the floor.
Hello and thanks for your time. My name is Brie Sliker and I'm the Director of Grants and Engagement at Farmhand Foundation here in Ojai. We're an agricultural nonprofit with a demonstration farm in Miner's Oaks at the intersection of El Roblar and La Luna. I'm here as a member of the Biodiversity Working Group, as well, and we are a network of like-minded organizations across Santa Barbara and Ventura counties working to advance solutions for protecting and enhancing biodiversity in our communities And this collaborative working group, we bring together our collective expertise and fire wildfire resilience wildlife and habitat connectivity. And in our expertise as farmhand foundation agricultural and agricultural landscapes, and so I'm here representing with Eric and Candace who spoke before me.
And thanking the City Council for your leadership in adopting the recent biodiversity resolution. And this is just a critical state and going forward to elevate biodiversity, and how we plan manage and invest in it in our communities across the central coast. And we are a local partner here in the valley who are involved in this effort and like Eric offer our assistance and expertise in any projects going on throughout Ojai. Thank you all have a great evening.
Thank you. Our current last raise hand, we have Martin. Martin, you may unmute and you have the floor.
Good evening. Good evening Council, Mayor. My name is Martin Fleischman. I am a partner of Ojai Valley Music, been listening with interest to previous speakers. And I think it's no secret that the Libby Bowl concert season used to consist of not much more than journey tribute bands. Now Ojai Valley Music has brought world-class artists like Laurie Anderson, Mavis Staples, Jacob Collier and Big Thief to the bowl.
And as people pointed out, tomorrow night Gypsy Kings. There's still a few just a few very few tickets available if I may plug and it's no coincidence that we have Ani DiFranco on Friday either. It's not something that can happen if our booking process gets unnecessarily cumbersome Um, we've worked with the petitioning organizations among others over the last two years waiving our contractual rights to accommodate their needs. We ensured that the Ojai Film Society got their six dates by mid-February leaving a full five months ahead for planning for their series.
I did hear the gentleman from the film society say that it takes months of planning for his events and I agree and he had five months so To me that seems like months plural, more than two. We have also done the same for the POPs although I have to concede that we did hold off for a while on a few of the requested dates. We ended up booking artists on several of them and the last one yes we granted two months out and that speaks to the process My questions for the petitioners, especially the OFS are what aspect or aspects of this year's process need adjusting? How was the series negatively affected by this year's process and if there were indeed issues with this process why was no attempt made to reach out to us resolve issues before coming to the Mayor and Council.
Our booking process requires flexibility, we hold blocks of dates for artists sometimes in a week or two weeks and have to wait usually several months for the artist to decide which of those dates works for them to route their tour. And if anyone needs further explanation I'd be happy to sit down and tell them how this actually works. There's also our productions which need lead time of a day sometimes two days And we have potential solutions that we'd like to bring to the table and explore further in a non-political and neutral fashion.
At this point, for us to get locked out of 20 dates at prime time is not gonna serve anybody well. So let's talk about this further.
Thank you sir. No more raised hands on
Zoom Mayor. Okay, something I want to depart from the usual just a little to say this. Sometimes we have comments on consent calendar items that don't get pulled sometimes there are comments after they're pulled so want to try something hopefully you'll agree Is open up just public comments for consent calendar items to the public they can speak on any of them They wish then we can decide whether we want to pull them or not. Does that seem okay?
Everybody any objections to that,
okay mayor. I just have one comment before we embark on that there were a number of Comments during public comment, you touched on some but I think it's important maybe that I- Go ahead please. Provide some input to the council on some of these items though. Go ahead. We are bringing a discussion item regarding the legacy events pursuant to the OIVAL music contract back and that's pursuant to contract requirements. It requires it before November 15th 2026 we will certainly do so. Yep. It won't be at the next meeting and it might not be in September but we are going to bring it back as required.
It's important to know that the city receives the cultural monitoring list from the tribe. We do not establish the list ourselves, okay? And I understand the issues. I clearly understand the issues but I just think it's very important for the council to know that's how we obtain the list. We do not create the list on our own and nor does the resolution the council passed back in, I think in 2018 allow us to do that. We can certainly revisit this as a topic but that's what you need to know.
There are no flock cameras in Ojai. There are flock cameras in the unincorporated areas outside of Ojai, but none in Ojai. And pursuant to council direction we are going to be bringing back a concept review item on agenda timing and just general agenda management that will come to you in September. Thank you.
Thank you. I appreciate that. Any comments?
Yeah, I mean, I definitely don't want to get into a discussion. But at some point, I think to figure out how we move forward with the contract, you know, it would be very, very helpful. I think it was mentioned. I think everybody wants to come together and figure this out. You're talking about OBM? Yeah, OVM. So I mean this isn't a discussion item but potentially we need to have a discussion or figure out the best way to broach this so that no one feels like they're being told from above.
There is a I think you know a cooperative solution here that we should all work towards and I totally figure out what that process actually looks like. I agree.
I think we all agree with that
yeah
Okay, please. I also think I appreciate the city manager's report on the flock camera situation. I think it'd be useful at some time just to get a presentation so that we understand it is a big issue among the community and concern I've received I was planning to ask to put it on the agenda tonight. If we don't have flock cameras, then we don't have to go through an action item but I think it would be good to have an informative presentation so that the community hears where we are.
0:52 – 1:0135 turns
If I might suggest, I would also broaden it a little. We heard a little at that night about some new technology that some communities are using just to... It's a technology update and privacy update?
Yeah, absolutely. I can put something together for everyone.
No problem doing that. Thank you. Thanks for bringing that up. Okay. So if anybody in the audience wants to comment on a consent item please give Mr. Montgomery a card. Mr. Stengel, do you have three? Can you consolidate them into one comment? Please try. Thank you. Okay,
for city warrants. Number two, thank you. Okay for making a column and putting that all into groups so we can see exactly what is it possible for the next month, next agenda to have a rolling total on each one? So now we have a separate column that says 30,000 went to this attorney this month and then we gave another 30 so that total will be 60. And we'd see a rolling total of every spending item which would make it easier for you And it would make it easier for us. Number four, the Ojai Municipal Code putting something on I guess they wouldn't call it a zombie ordinance they would just you're just putting it on the shelf and temporarily however you might want to talk to your attorney or how they're suggesting it because Laws on the books that are not enforced chill people, they chill things.
People look at it and go well it's there when are they going to put it back? I don't want to get caught in betwixt and between because somebody sent me this information on Petaluma and regarding the gas reach code and there was a lawsuit that they put it on the books and put it on the shelf, and it's unenforced but it's still there. So the Department of Justice sued them and Petaluma took it off so now it's not there in one other town does. Okay.
Last one, number five the MOA. I sent you letters on this it is not the amount of money that i'm concerned with it's the justification that city staff says just pay it. It's the attitude it's our money it's your money And it's like, oh just pay the bill. Don't look behind the curtain. Don't look at how much it costs. Don't look at why it's going up. Don'y look at anything. Trust me. Just pay it and my guess is they're probably right. The cost of getting a new number and all that may be cost more not worth the effort but you have to justify it to us that they're saying to you just pay the bill Don't look, I mean if this was your home money and somebody said oh just pay the increase don't ask why.
Just pay and I think that's the wrong attitude you're stewards of our money. You're stewards of the city good bad or indifferent we got to live with what your decisions are and the attitude. We don't have enough money to spend for everything but every dime is precious so... Oh one last thing The cash investments, great. A million four looks like is that for a yearly number or that's the number four we've earned so far on the warrant? The amount of investment I'm sorry, the cash investment.
Sorry and that would be- Okay thank you sir. Anybody
online for consent items?
Double checking Mayor. No, no raised hand.
Okay moving on to the consent calendar does anybody want to remove anything? Yes go ahead.
I'd like to just pull five and six
okay okay
and I'd like to pull two
okay Anything else? Okay I'll move that we approve consent items one three four and seven
I'll second that.
Okay, well any discussion? Roll call
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 move that we approve consent items one three four and seven I'll second that. Okay, well any discussion? Roll call · 1 under review
Show transcript
okay so let's look first at number two
Yes, so this is just very brief and I'm just pointing out something. It's on page 35 which is our total legal expenses are $194,000. $41.57 this month, I'm assuming or is it this warrant? If we were to put that out let's just up it to 200,000 and times that by 12 and you will see where we are at costs. On legal expenses, and that's not to say that these legal expenses aren't justified or aren't needed.
They're just really high and I would caution the council about moving forward with being able to bring these down at your earliest convenience
Am I correct in, I'm seeing on the warrants that we see some items that are listed twice and I made an assumption that is because of our break?
No Mayor, that's correct. This is for matters related to the TOT, well sorry ones related to the TOT hearing right? Where's the twice under the legal that you're saying?
Well for example no like I'll use it one example if BKS law firm yes and I see there's two items for BKS law firm am i seeing that correctly hold on a second Oh, there
might be two payments but I'm looking at the disbursements
by
category.
I was seeing two payments because I've thought we were... I'm seeing May and June here payment so I just made the assumption that since we did not meet.
And we have Ms. Palmer on the line. Okay. Ms. Palmer can you hear us?
Hi yes good evening. Thank you Yes, Mayor. Your assumption is correct. It's because we had the break so the warrant is a little bit lengthy this time just to kind of catch up from that last meeting. So yes, we have multiple months within this one warrant.
For example there are two sheriff items in the warrants?
Yes, correct. They're not duplicate. We just have two invoices. Right.
So I was hoping that the large bottom line was for that reason. Not to say we can't do better
I think we would have to go back and actually, you know, tease it out to say what time span it actually was because sometimes we don't get bills. You know, when bill every two months. So in that case, it wouldn't be a double time span. It won't be the same time span only. We just got the bill. Yeah. So, you know, it's clear to say this time span may be over two months, but we still may have only gotten a bill for one month in that two months span. I
hear what you're saying.
OK. I hope I understand.
So, I would say that we can't devise a plan for reducing our attorney's fees unless we understand on kind of a comprehensive basis where they came from why we incurred them and so I'm would be happy to get a report from our city attorney to address you know Should we expect this going on and adjust our budget, or are there ways that we can create efficiencies? And we may have to make some decisions about things. But that's the right way to approach if we're concerned that our attorneys' fees are excessive.
That sounds reasonable.
And I will just say that there are other totals here that are also extremely high, that we might need the same understanding for. Looking at the attorney legal fees and Bethany, I love you.
It's not personal.
We're happy to bring back a report.
But I like this suggestion and I like the sentiment of course and I want that too so I wonder if we can bring that forward to say we may ask the firm, does this look like a trend? Do we need to look at this again or how can we mitigate our course?
1:01 – 1:0414 turns
Thank you. Anything else on number two? Just want to make sure Mr. Montgomery caught that as a potential thank
you.
That was all for me.
No thank you okay so motion to move consent item number two.
I'll make the motion.
Okay second that Should we just do them as they go through? Yes, Mayor.
Mayor Pro Tem Ming. Council Member Lange. Yes. Council Member Whitman. Yes. Council Member Ruhl.
I seconded it but I can say yes.
Roll call.
No,
you're voting just yes or no I guess.
Oh okay so seconding it doesn't assume a yes? Correct. Okay yeah Susan used to say that. So given all of that i'm going to abstain.
Yes for me. All right now on to number five the ratification between the county And the and the sanitary district.
Yes, okay I pulled this because I actually toured the Sanitary District and learned about the algae the new regulations and about their Entirely new equipment that they use to To clear it clean the out of the algae there's been a lot of upgrades there and so I wanted to just speak to the public comment about the fact that Those were two of the reasons, and correct me if I'm wrong, but those were two of the reasons why we have the additional amount. And this particular algae from what I understand is really hard. You have to have UV, you should see these processes.
It's like I was so blown away and in awe of how much goes into cleaning our water, but particularly this algae is difficult. So you have to have all these UV lights and all of these All of these non-chemical processes and vats full of bacteria and bugs, it is the most interesting science experiment that I've ever seen. And also, I will say that the sanitary district received $30 million grant I believe it was to build all these new facilities, to keep up with the regulations from the state and from the Los Angeles water basin.
And Ms. Palmer feel free to correct me or jump in here. But it, so there was a lot of grant funding that went into these facilities and unfortunately with the regulations related to PFAS, the forever chemicals, this kind of algae and really the environmental changes with our warming climate. These are unfortunately costs that we're going to have to incur
1:04 – 1:1016 turns
Anything to
add?
You did a great job.
No, but I would like to add to that we have Haley Luna on on Zoom today and she's the deputy director of the Watershed Protection District at the county of Ventura so she can speak to anything technical and I can speak to the process if you have questions. But the reality is is I know that the public comment stated this went up like 80 90 percent some crazy number it's gone up 10 percent over the last four-year term to this next three-year term. So it's only gone up 10%. So not a significant amount. This is an MOA between the City of Ventura City, Caltrans OVSD sanitary district in the city's city of Ventura. I think I got it all.
And this is just this is a mandatory. This is a required by state law that we cost share in this. It's not required that we cost share. We could we could go out on our own and do it. But that's not probably the prudent decision. So the county has agreed to administer this program for us and for these agencies. So there's two parts to it, one is and Haley would be able to speak to anything we have in terms of this but there's actually two parts to this And one is the monitoring cost and the other is the sampling. So taking the samples, and these are all required in terms of our MS-4 permit. So I can answer questions if you may have some, and Haley's online as well.
So, I was going to pull this item also coming from just a little different... I was struck by the idea that we're paying the same amount that Ventura is. And I'm not saying that there's not a rational basis for that, but I don't get it out of the staff report so I want to know why we're paying the same amount when we're a tiny city and Ventura is a huge massive megalopolis.
And of course, this is the first year that I've been involved in this. This was originally it goes way back 15 years or so and in 2020 there was a negotiation of this MOA and it was prior to my time here And then it was, then we're at this three-year term that we're looking at right now. So in 2025 and of course those are questions that I had too. I'm like well that doesn't seem right but our MS4 is divided that way too. It's not population based. Each agency is equally responsible is what it is. It really is. We're equally responsible. It doesn't seem fair. I understand that. I don't know if there's a way to negotiate that or not But perhaps Haley can speak to that. But that was something that I thought was interesting, but again our MS-4 permit, this stormwater stuff is it appears that each agency has just this equal responsibility in doing the testing and all of these things.
And I guess my thought is that on an agency by agency basis that seems fine but that means that our resident taxpayers are paying for this at a rate of about 10 times that residents of Ventura are paying.
Yes, and I don't disagree with yeah
and I am I guess if we have an agreement in place I'd like to see us at least look at doing some you know bringing the issue up in the future
so I guess what I could add to that so The agreement tonight, it's a three year term. And so we're in the second year term and we will be renegotiating. The county will be going out to bid next year for proposals for a new three-year term. So I think that would be our opportunity to bring this matter up.
Okay. Great. Yeah, so I was just gonna anything to add to that that kind of when we come back and renegotiate. We would want to look at some kind of proportional sharing if
we could
When we reopened the MOA to negotiate the next term, we're definitely open to concepts. The way that it's been structured in the past is that we've equally cost-shared those receiving water costs because they're not based on A number of samples per jurisdiction, we're sampling in the river. And from that perspective you know how high is in the upper portion of the watershed you know so Ojai theoretically influences most of the monitoring points that we have along the main stem of the river.
But ultimately the monitoring program was established by the TMDL requirements that the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted. We're required to conduct this monitoring, it's a requirement of our MS4 permit and so we've in the past equally cost-shared but when the MOA is up for negotiation we're open for all ideas and willing to discuss any points that the city has.
Thank you I appreciate that I think the spirit of Mr. Steingold's request was simply we wouldn't have to have this entire conversation, but a few lines to explain the cost increase would've been sufficient if I understood it. So that's easy enough. We can take that. Okay.
Okay, I'll move to approve it.
Second
Roll-call vote Passed 5–0 move to approve it. Second that. Roll call. · 1 under review
Show transcript
1:10 – 1:1419 turns
Thank
you that was good I appreciate that okay now no number six the interagency agreement with BCTC
Yes, for this one I brought it forward just to draw everyone's attention to it. And also we are receiving an award of $877,000 from VCTC. I am the liaison on the board and I just wanted to give a huge thank you to the agency, to Martin Erickson who is the executive director General manager and and just acknowledge the receipt of this so that it's on record And with that I'll move approval
Yeah, second that This is great news.
Mm-hmm.
I Have a question. Maybe I don't know that we can answer it but It's for rail and transit And obviously we don't have rail. And so I'm interested in what the transit component of the grant is for, you know, what types of benefits are we gonna get?
I'd love to have Miss Cervantes answer this question.
Yeah, so for this particular grant we do have the EV trolley that's on order that's part of this grant We do have other capital improvements like electric battery charging infrastructure operational support and Other operational needs they got a new vehicle for the transit supervisor things of the sort So it is Mostly based on capital improvements like vehicles and infrastructure for that but also it does cover some operational costs.
Do you want to hit on the cost of the EV trolley?
$581,000
Right, yeah. Well it makes me feel good that we're asking for and receiving money.
Exactly!
Okay we have a motion in a second. Full call thanks. Councilmember Whitman? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem May?
Yeah.
Council Member Ruhl?
Thank you everyone. Okay, we are moving on to discussion items and our first discussion item we are going to take on number 14 professional services agreement with the Ojai Valley Chamber of Commerce
Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to tag-team this item with Norma and I'm seeing that we have our Chamber Executive Director on the line. Ms. Karla, can you hear us? I just want to make sure we have a good... I can hear
you,
yeah. Okay great. She's calling in from the East Coast so we thank her for being here. Okay. Normally let's just jump in on this, if you don't mind. This is a proposal to renew the city's agreement with the Chamber for professional services for this fiscal year. There is a scope of services attached to this. This will become a professional services agreement between the Chamber and the City and this is for Continuation of the good work that the Chamber did last fiscal year. What type of work does the Chamber do? Well, in summary they are an advocate for our local businesses.
What I mean by that is they are coming to us with their concerns or questions or needs Presenting that in a manner that we are able to respond to them, looking out for their interests. The chamber also actively recruits and pursues things like vacancies and appropriate tenants. On that note I want to call to your attention a revision to the scope of services that we need to make and forgive us for this. Yes on page
1:14 – 1:3022 turns
251
We call out a couple of specific addresses which is incorrect and also as a former business. We'd like to change on page 251, this is item let's see G1 continue to research and recruit possible tenants for commercial properties That's really what the Chamber does, one of the functions that they do. And this should not call out a specific address or a former business because they do this throughout—anywhere within the city limits. So forgive us for that mistake. That should not be there.
The chamber also answers planning and building related questions. They often come to the counter with applicants acting on their behalf to interface with our staff, to make sure that the process runs smoothly and efficiently. They put on special events, special events that are catered to our local businesses and our local population. So I'm really pleased in the short time that I've been here since we entered into a professional services agreement with the Chamber. We didn't have one when I came here. It really seems to me like we're more connected with our local business community.
I feel like we're able to respond to their needs better, and I feel like they have an advocate working for them, and we have somebody that we can go to make broad dissemination of information or requests seamless. Please, Norma, what else am I forgetting here?
Marketing
please go ahead
website improvement. So they are Very collaborative with not only the city, but the other businesses in the area so it is a very important partnership that we have established with them so and I'm sure that the Businesses in the community also feel that
We'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you very much, yes.
And if I may before we jump into questions one point of clarification I just want to make when the city provides or enters into agreements like this and you have several with other organizations Those agreements, while we require the party receiving the city funding to sign an agreement so that we have something binding that they are required to comply with and deliver on certain deliverables.
These types of agreements are really in the nature of what I would call sponsorship. And so, you know, the City of Ojai like other cities does enter... You do formalize that through a written agreement which is a good best practice But I just wanted to make clear that this is not a traditional services agreement where you're contracting for services. It's really more in the nature of a sponsorship,
okay?
So that actually piggybacks on the question I was going to ask because I received a public comment about this About so we don't need this wouldn't be the kind of if we're doing a sponsorship type of contract We don't have to go out for an RFP. Is that is that correct? Oh
That is correct. And so if I mean the city's you could like so, for example, your Arts Commission grants or sponsorships that go through a competitive process. But I think historically for other city sponsorships, you haven't you haven't done that and you're not required to.
OK,
thank you.
Other questions for staff?
Yeah, no. I just wanted to say I think that it's a good discussion just to have. So thank you for that so that, you know, because of the grand jury report and the sole sourcing, it's good to distinguish what this actually is as far as other questions. I think I can wait until we get into discussion. Thank you.
OK. OK, I have no public comments on this so far.
And we have no raised hands on Zoom here. OK, so discussion? You want to start?
Sure. So I just wanted to say hi to Carla, thanks for joining us. And so this expansion, I'm very pleased with it seems like it's a deal for the city for sure. And I just want to acknowledge that that what we're getting for one hundred and fourteen thousand dollars seems to me to be of great benefit. And you know, we're supporting and acknowledging our business partnerships The scope of the work is pretty broad and it's kind of diffused as well. I mean, there's seminars and business consulting and workforce housing and new events so you know I just want to be clear that I hope that we're not asking too much Thank you.
Speed on, you know what's actually occurring not only are you doing your job? But you know to inform and educate us as to what's actually happening. So You know I think it I think it's great and I am have confidence that this is something worth We're supporting and so I do support it
Thank you. Yeah, I was going to bring up just one example where it would have been difficult for the city to step into this role but it had to do with signs in the arcade and in the arcade area that means behind the arcade and across the street where what the chamber did was gather the businesses together to talk about the issues then to work with the staff around at least something interim until we understand there's some possible ordinance reconciliation or revision that might need to happen. In any case, that was a role where there's an arbiter who is representing sort of the interests of the business wanting to do something that's amicable and compromised so I felt like we're in the midst of something that would have could have been very difficult.
That's why the business advocacy is exactly what I believe we should be supporting and sponsoring
I just wanted to add, to piggyback on what everybody else said that Carla works tirelessly and so yes this is a very broad scope of work but this is all what they're doing right now. And so yeah, so Carla, I second Council Member Ruhl's comment that if this becomes too much we can review it but I've really seen how the local Longtime businesses in Ojai have benefited from this and from all the renewed growth and interest in the chamber. And I see how new businesses and individuals coming in as entrepreneurs are being nurtured by the chamber, and supported for everything from looking for grants to going and getting permits Finding customers and marketing themselves. I just I think that the chamber is doing an excellent job and all of the workshops and and Events that they've had educational events have been very beneficial for For founders and and anyone who has a small business so I am very much in support of moving forward with this and
I have a few comments and concerns. With respect to the sponsorship versus services issue, there was, city attorney wouldn't be aware of this but there was a lot of discussion back when James Vega was the city manager over whether we should be sponsoring nonprofits and whether that should only occur in circumstances where they were providing a service that the city would otherwise be providing.
And I think that's why there may have been You know, orientation towards service. And I also have some concerns because my first orientation on hopefully everything we do is Does this benefit our city residents and and you can't necessarily say it It doesn't just translate this benefits business. And therefore it benefits City residents, and you know just it really struck me the idea that That we would be paying for property owner, to find a tenant.
I was having a hard time saying well now how is that benefiting the resident? It's certainly benefitting the business and you know they're going through the long list that we have and I appreciate the work that was done to do that but There were a lot of items that would fall into that same category where I was trying to figure out. And so for me, I would want to spend more time probably talking to Carla maybe Norma and Ben as well So that I got a handle on the idea that okay, this is a benefit that you can tell your resident who's saying why are you spending our money on those businesses?
Spend the money on me. And so I will in saying all of that, I'll also say that you know I supported a short term funding because I was very impressed With Carla and Carla. And I have had many conversations, and I do believe that she has a very strong instinct towards benefiting residents. And I think she also has done from what I can see, and not an expert on this, but she's done a great job of getting the chamber itself to orient towards that, you know, partnership relationship. So I would feel more comfortable If I had time to understand more of these things that were being done and potentially air down the list To things that I felt were really I could solidly say this is good for the residents.
I might offer you two quick responses one would be if we use Suzanne's old location as an example That in a couple of ways when the business or the realtor is representing can work with Carlo work with city staff to say Here are the kinds of people who are interested in it. We can see how does that fit into Ojai's character and mix and needs? So, in that sense you could say well is a time well spent to benefit somebody who owns a property not as much as how can we help influence businesses that we think would be good for residents here so I that's where I see that overlap But the second thing I would suggest, I heard it from two people here is that the list is very long. So I would encourage her and I hope she's hearing us now when we get our updates you know when when we get these reports let's understand that we want to have check-ins with you how is it going?
Is this manageable where do we need to tailor and modify? I mean I think we're all open to That's where I like the sponsorship idea actually little is that it makes it that we can adjust on the fly a little if we need to based on our need. So, yeah.
Yeah, I would say that you know we are in fact contracting out services that you know an in-house sort of business development would actually handle. So I see this as actually contracting out those services that the city normally would handle if we had the resources, if we have the size and I actually prefer this model where there's sort of an outside vendor.
The issue around not directly – I mean, I understand what's being said about the issue not directly benefiting residents. I don't necessarily agree with that but I see the point So it could also be that, you know, Carla hears this and also reports back to us about how this might directly affect residents. I mean it was the same thing when I used to do Thank you very much.
A student that also sort of received, you know, the potential for training. So I kind of see it the same way. It's a one to many and how direct that relationship needs to be, I don't know but we can, I mean, I'm sure Carla heard Councilman Whitman's concern there so it can kind of skew that way So that's kind of my perspective and I do, I mean the amount of work that they did given the last contract.
I really don't, it's kind of unreasonable to expect them to go full bore at that same sort of rate but I know that they can do it because based on what I saw them do before. the willingness to do that. And in my conversations with Carla, we have always talked about how we can help individual artist residents, like what do they actually need in order to be able to build their little cottage business?
Being very open to that. Like if you're an artist yet you don't have a high quality printer, you can't actually build your business because you can't actually print your stuff. So I see her to be very open to actually supporting the residents through, you know, providing certain understanding what residents need in order to build their own little cottage industries which is something that we've talked about in diversification of economy.
So anyway, that's kind of my feeling on the matter. I still support moving forward with this and I think that I trust that the concerns that have been stated here will actually find form in the work and in the feedback. Everything you want
1:30 – 1:3717 turns
to I would just I agree with what you say, but me personally I would rather get that feedback from her and have it in the document if we need to scale it down She can be successful without questions. You know what? I mean? I think that's just the road I would like to take I don't think there isn't a hurry to get it done tonight is to get that feedback so we could be successful
III Think there is well There's an interest in continuing the contract which will end and then secondly, um, I don' think she's concerned about being successful
And I would say once again this kind of, I find it happening over and over is that we push things off. And we put it back into like do we truly need the clarity? Yeah you think that we do. I don't necessarily think that we do it's just a sort of return Like pushing everything down the road for another meeting, for another discussion when we can actually work through it right here and right now.
But it doesn't give you the clarity that you want but then again I don't need that clarity so yeah it's just a way to think about things.
Council, I'd be happy to work with Carla. And if you wanted to improve it with the caveat that there's gonna be a revised list returned to you in 30 days, we're happy to do that. Thank you.
So my thought is that I'll probably be voting no tonight but only because of the process that we're selecting cuz it sounds like we're gonna approve Um, I will say that I have talked to Ben not a great length about the idea that maybe as opposed to contracting. The chamber, we ought to look at retaining Carla and creating a scope of her work that is really very much tailored for what we want and need. And I guess my only other comment is that way too often Don't distinguish between residents and unincorporated area when we're looking at allocating our resources.
And I feel very strongly that to be sustainable, So I'm much more in favor of working with a local artist who happens to be the president. And it's a harder place for me to go to say, I should be helping somebody in Oak View or using city tax dollars to help a business. So Those are my comments. I it's not like a condemnation of what we're doing. It's that I understand
yeah, well, I'd like to move that we We approve the 26 27 professional services agreement between the city and the Ojai Valley Chamber of Commerce. I I
am hearing all of my colleagues' concerns, and I think I mean, personally, I do see it benefiting a lot of Ojai residents because when I go to the events, it's Ojai residents that I see there. And I also don't want to see us cancel the contract because it would stop some of the momentum of what they're doing. But I am in support of looking at the list and refining the list.
And seeing, making sure that we have, that we're getting exactly what we want and what is going to meet the needs of Ojai residents. So I would support I mean, we're going to have to have a second reading of this anyway. No? Okay.
So Ben's offer was to come back with a revised list if you feel that's tailoring it. The reason why I'm slightly surprised is that I thought the work that the chamber has been doing this year has been trying to also do check in to say, is this adding value? I personally see huge benefit to residents. I've not seen that issue personally so I guess there might be a differing of opinions about a business in the arcade that they'll say yes during the week it's residents and on the weekends it's tourists and if they give a percentage like 6040 or 7030 is that not benefiting residents? I don't see that argument the same if that's an argument. I'm not saying it is but if it were so to me, it's I James Vega remember when he said that he said we We use nonprofits to offer services that the city can't do because of its size this to me as our economic development Engine, so that's why I support deep
Yeah, and this chamber is very different than the last chamber. It's what she's done to bring people together to recruit Artisans people who live here locally, you know where their addresses are But also to do community oriented events like I led a creative economy workshop and And you know it's I just I would hate to I would hate to To stop the momentum with what we have
So
Rachel,
I think the mayor was looking for a
second. Okay, I'll second. But yeah, but I'm really processing...I really want to take the time to listen to what the new information that you brought in and as I'm talking it through and processing it out loud in front of everybody, I'm realizing that yeah, I do support this.
Okay mayor we have a motion and a second to approve the professional services agreement and as I heard it with a revised list returning to council in 30 days.
Yes, is
that reasonable? Okay roll call. Councilmember
Roll.
Roll-call vote 2–1 motion and a second to approve the professional services agreement and as I heard it with a revised list returning to council in 30 days. Ye · 1 under review
Show transcript
1:38 – 1:381 turns
Mr. Stengel I'm hoping that you will put in a card during that portion thank you sir all right moving on we could do let's see 738 let's take the tiniest break and then come back to our first discussion item the site after 14 which is number 8 grand jury report so five minute break
1:49 – 1:547 turns
Ready? Okay.
We're back! I know, yeah we had a lot of people here it was great okay so we're on number eight County of Ventura civil grand jury report regarding Ojai Permanent Supportive Housing Projects
Good evening, Bethany Burgess City Attorney.
Thank you
and we are here tonight to present the first draft of the response to the Ventura County Civil Grand Jury regarding the Permanent Supportive Housing Project as the council knows but maybe some members of the public don't know in June of this year the city received A report from the civil grand jury regarding the selection of the city's development manager and primarily focused on, on the lack of a an open and competitive process.
In July, the City Council directed the city attorney's office to prepare a response for council discussion and deliberation. Tonight we are here with that response and I would just note that while we have noticed this for purposes of the Brown Act as a discussion and approval item It is perfectly okay. We do have time for this to be a discussion and provide feedback and further direction item.
We do have time to go back and make additional revisions to this response before it would be approved, but in case we don't need to make significant changes I wanted to make sure that we have the ability to approve it tonight if everyone's okay with that to be mindful of future agendas. With that being said, before we dive into each of the findings and recommendations.
The first thing I will note is that I was not here in 2023 or 2024 or 2025 until December of 2025. And so, I do not have the personal knowledge and history of everything that occurred or transpired in the past. And while I will note that the city manager did review this and provide some limited feedback as part of the agenda review process, this is my work product. So if something is wrong it's probably me who got it wrong There's no pride of authorship. This is why we're here So, you know I just want you to understand that this is this is a discussion item? I want your input if you are uncomfortable with some of the responses my hope and desire is that we talk through those tonight and You know at the end of the process that we have a result that you know everyone on the council ideally is supportive of but At the end of the day, because we do have a number of findings and a number of recommendations.
One recommendation I would have is that while we need consensus on each of the responses if we reach a situation where there's not unanimous support for us A particular response, I would look to the council ultimately to vote on that response and we will move forward based on a majority of what the council wishes to do. With that being said, I think there is some room. I think there's room for compromise here if there are things where you know some members of the council agree and some members don't agree. You know let's talk about it because at the end of the day this...I would love to get to a response where we have the entire Council in support of sending. So with that being said, I think the cleanest way to start is just to start at the beginning and we can go through each of the responses and the findings and recommendations.
If we need to discuss them, that's great but if there are some that everyone is okay with and we don't need a lot of discussion, that's okay too. And I guess the one thing I would note is before we dive into that, I would love it to make sure there are no questions from the council and then we can open it up for public comment before we begin the deliberations on each finding in rec.
The question I noticed in the responses that you offered so far, you have some different kinds of responses such as partially agree, partially disagree, agree and so on. So if I heard you right, let's say hypothetically there's one issue where let's say three feel one way and two feel another. Could we include something like the minority view in the response?
I would like to address that maybe on a case-by-case basis. I think that where the finding or recommendation may be somewhat subjective, I would be more comfortable with that. If it relates to specific facts, those could also be subjective because on some level truth is in the eye of the beholder. I would say let's address that as we go. And if there is a need to come up with a compromise response, we can talk through that together. My
1:54 – 2:0320 turns
other question along those same lines of kind of a process issue is We don't necessarily have to do that on a finding by finding basis. It could just be that we have an end document and then we're all voting just on the final... I mean, I do plan to make my comments and I think how I vote might I might be convinced to vote to approve of our response, depending on how some of the answers might be modified a little bit.
But ultimately, I don't think that the grand jury expects or excuse me, I guess it's a judge now who is overseeing it but there's an expectation that we have a unanimous vote to approve the response.
I don't think that they expect unanimous support. Again, what I wouldn't want to have is a majority opinion and then a dissenting opinion like when we're talking about a judicial decision or something like that. But I think that where there is a response, where different members of the council feel differently. Like for example one item relates to transparency and maybe more than one but there's one specifically that I think of related to transparency.
Transparency is subjective and what seemed very transparent to one council member may not have seemed as transparent to another council member So I would not have any concern or consternation with a response that is agree in part and disagree in part, and acknowledging that different members of the council feel differently on that issue. We also have the ability to, in the cover letter there's a draft cover letter that's very simple.
And while I don't believe that Grand Jury expects a lengthy cover letter we do have the ability in that cover letter to add additional information about where we could acknowledge if it's not necessarily the unanimous... It didn't have unanimous support from the entire council if that's something that members of council wish to do.
Thank you. Any other questions? I have no public comment cards, anybody online? Nobody online Mayor. Nobody with raised hands. Okay.
I would note that you did receive some public comment in advance of the meeting.
We did. So item by item is that the proposal?
That would be my suggestion unless just because we need to I would rather take them in order as opposed to jumping around. Yeah let's do it So for each one, I don't know that we want to read all of them at length but the findings themselves are pretty brief so maybe we will read those and then we can summarize some of the longer responses. So for the first one, you know the city of Ojai was exempt from obtaining competitive bids based on price when selecting a development manager for its ERF funding or encampment resolution funding grant application.
And so the response to that was agree because you are exempt from that I would assume this one doesn't need a lot of discussion
Okay,
no discussion.
Please speak up if you want to talk.
Yeah. Finding 2 City of Ojai was required by law to conduct a fair and competitive selection process based on qualifications and competency when selecting a development manager My recommended response here was generally agree. When you read through the report, they refer to two sections of the government code which have slightly differing requirements. One of them relates to selection of certain categories of consultants, professional service consultants through a qualifications-based selection process The other provision actually requires an open and competitive process. And so what I would say here is that the city arguably complied with the first provision of the government code, but did not comply with the second one. And so you know, I don't, I wouldn't say that we disagree, but I did think it was beneficial to make some distinction in the response.
So this one is much longer in case there's some discussion. I
thought that on page 164 where we are, I thought a distinction that was made was The second to last line, the city recognizes that there's included responsibilities. The dignity moves is required to perform construction management and oversight is required and for this reason the city agrees that in retrospect there should have been a competitive procured competitively procure the services so the construction I saw as a content that would have put it in a different category so I thought generally agreed does make sense We also acknowledged in your language that there are other items that would not have fallen into the gap.
So I'm saying, I agree with you nothing to argue about that. And
I agree with you too, because there were volunteer groups. It was a community-wide effort to find an organization that could manage this kind of project but it wasn't a formal process so I generally agree with your assessment as well.
And I don't think that there was a process that I was part of to determine that Dignity Moves was the only one who could uniquely do this process. I don't know where that happened, and I don' t know who was part of it. It never came in front of the Council and I was never part of it. It may have been that it was a ad hoc group of community volunteers who were very invested and made that decision, but that decision never came before council. It was never discussed with council.
It just appeared in a document that they were uniquely qualified. So I would say that to me is very problematic to say oh no we did deep due diligence. It was a community group. Yet it never, never bubbled up to anything that was formal. So informal
best is what I
heard. I
think
yeah and so
that's a very accurate summary of what happened.
Yeah and I'm not happy with that but that having been said I agree with this statement to the extent that I do.
So I have you know kind of just this is just the way that I would approach it. Because in litigation practice, they have these things called requests for admissions. And my strategy is to unequivocally admit those things that I have to admit and then deny the things that I think have been embedded in it. So a lot of times, it looks like they're asking you for one thing but there's actually two things you respond to I think in the position that we are in, and I think what both the public and whoever else is reviewing this would want to see is that you are unequivocally supportive of the idea that we have to engage in these open competitive processes.
So my thought would be that we agree With an explanation. As opposed to generally agree, which sounds like we don't totally agree and I think we need to totally agree but there's a reason that we didn't.
2:03 – 2:1031 turns
Well, if I can respond maybe slightly differently. If we look at—I'm jumping ahead a little bit—page 169 where we see recommendations and then when we say is agree in process, I'm looking at that first response. The council's provided authority and direction to the city attorney to prepare revisions for purchasing ordinance, for example. I guess if you said, I'm not sure you were proposing this exactly but if you said we went through where there's a narrative and we say here's why we did what we did and it's, I can't imagine that being short. It seems to me we're saying we agree that there should have been competitive bidding on this part especially related to construction and we've authorized the city manager in the recommendation already to do with that.
If I may, I think all that counts and you can correct me if I'm wrong is that all that Councilman Whitman was suggesting is that instead of the generally agree at the beginning of this response change that to agree. If that's
all then great.
Which I mean I will say it's not factually accurate to say.
It's a little more complicated. I would just strike out the word generally say agree include the explanation but if you're worried they're not going to read It's an
accurate statement that you did not engage in a fair and
competitive process. I think it's 100% accurate that there was an absence of a discussion about the concept of competitive bidding, and that the idea This organization, Dignity Moves was special and unique appeared in a resolution that was never like really brought to our attention and we never discussed.
I misunderstood what you were proposing but I agree now I think if I do understand which is the description that is here and striking generally?
On all of these where we have kind of an unequivocal agree, we should be unequivocal and provide our explanation for what happened. That would be my recommendation.
So at least on F2, I didn't hear any objection to saying agree and include that? Is that okay?
Mayor, if I may? The clerk's seat is here. I have the document open to scribe all these changes. Yeah
well the only change so far I'm hearing is on page 164 F2 we're gonna strike the word generally
and I would like to ask through the mayor and City Attorney Burgess is that five minute timer okay for this for each of findings and let me know if you'd like anything different. For each finding or each person talking? Each person talking for every finding
sure
okay I
don't know that we'll need it. No, hopefully it's like we're having more of a conversation.
If you'd like to
disable the timer in the back... Actually how about this? Try disable for now and then we'll decide if somebody speaks too long I'll ask you to re-enable.
And that disable is with Christian in the back. Thank You Christian! Okay
thanks yeah cool I like how it's going okay
So we have some consensus on number two. Number three, so number two and number three are related. Number two was that the city was required by law to conduct a fair and open competitive process. We said agree with the explanation. Number three was that the City of Ojai did not conduct a fair and open competitive selection process Again, the recommended response here was simply agree but also to then direct them back for the rest of the response on finding two.
Finding four is that...
Just going back to that I might say instead of CLEC response and finding two, I might say CLECE explanation.
We can say that.
Just to suggest.
Yeah, that's fine. For finding number four, the finding is that the recommendation by the Ventura Community Development Division or County of Ventura Community Development Division did not absolve the City of Ojai from conducting a fair and competitive selection process. My recommended response here was simply agree. Yeah
I agree okay
Any objections to that? No. Finding F5, the City of Ojai's claims of insufficient time did not absolve the city from conducting a fair and competitive selection process based on qualifications and competency. My recommended response here is that partially agree and if you look at the first sentence it says that the city agrees That the California government code requirements relating to competitive solicitation for this type of service do not include an exception where there is insufficient time to conduct a full and open competitive process. So that is the first part of the response. However, I would note, and I know that in the public comment there was a comment regarding these dates which we can verify But I did think it was beneficial because when to kind of talk a little bit about the timeframe, because this was this was before the grant application so we're talking about November 2023 to January 2024.
Generally, an open and competitive solicitation process for professional services takes longer than two months. So I mean, I think in the best of situations where you have your request for proposals ready to go and ready to publish kind of the day that you become aware of something, you could potentially complete that process within 60 days. But that would be a very aggressive schedule. So I do think even though I agree with the finding ultimately that this is not, it is not an, a justification for not following the law. I think it's helpful to have some explanation that this process that's being identified here potentially takes longer than the city would've had at the time.
What I thought Mr. Whitman at least offered was something like if it said I don't know if this is, agree with explanation. Because it isn't that you partially agree with the law and I understood you do agree with the law but you also want to explain the circumstance so to me agree with explanation or something like that
is
better than partially.
We could do that too.
2:10 – 2:2328 turns
That would be my preference. And as we're going through these, and I'm thinking about will I vote yes for this response? So far where we are being less equivocal or even using words that sounded more affirmative that we agree you get my support.
Yeah yeah.
And I just want to say one more thing about this item And this is my memory that the first time this came up in city council, we were told that there was a narrow window for the first round of funding. And there would be a second round of funding But there was no guarantee that there was gonna be money in the second round of funding and that our odds of getting a grant would be enhanced by being in the first round of funding.
What I have a little bit of concern about is that just because we're at the midnight hour, and I have a little deja vu on that of having issues come to us and saying, you only have so much time to do this doesn't mean that we're not expected to use the full-time even though we're not. So if it was a 60 day open period and we can't say that we couldn't have done this within the 60 day period I think we just have to say agree and provide our explanation
I like the way that this is going because I think we do need to take responsibility for anything that we can take responsibility for. And I think there are explanations, it doesn't absolve us from what happened and I think people understand time sensitivity right? We were time sensitive And for me, this is also a good starting point if we are indeed going to do a case study of some sort. The factors that played into the decisions that we made, the more that we put in the explanations, the easier it will be for us to kind of dissect this or tease apart this and find out what lessons and best practices can emerge from this.
I agree that this is heading in the right direction.
And I'll just say and I'm not saying this, you know. Majority or anything but. As each of these steps we're moving forward, it kept saying we don't have the information to know the scope of what we're agreeing to do here, and I just felt like we had a lack of information And I think that ultimately what won out is the idea that if we got this funding, we would be able to do this thing for the homeless situation.
To get all of the explanation and kind of do the long process of understanding it maybe we're going to miss out on the grant but that's what I remember happening.
And what I remember is yes, that we were pushed into this because we had an emergency. We had fires happening all over city properties. We had people on social media, on our emails saying there are people camping in Libbey Park and there was a group of volunteers who was meeting regularly Ruth, a man named George. There was Betsy Van Light. Several others were meeting with Mark Scott to try to figure out a solution.
And it didn't go through the regular, it didn't go through the process that it should have gone through. And it was an unprecedented time before the Supreme Court ruling when we really had no recourse. We couldn't just say to our unhoused, you know, go to Ventura. There was nothing. There was nothing available. And so while we're going to do this better next time and we're definitely gonna learn from these mistakes, I just think that we were dealing with...
We were doing the best we could with a very real problem.
I agree with that and I would also say that In 2020 hindsight, we should have scheduled daily city council meetings to hammer through like five days of discussion to understand exactly what it was that we were doing. I mean as it was, I remember really long meetings But I never felt satisfied that I knew what the hell was happening.
Right, and then there were also these community volunteers who were bringing Dignity Moves in to panel discussions that weren't city sponsored. And so there were some of us council members who were going to those meetings learning about Dignity Moves Hearing these conversations coming into our meetings with that information, but it wasn't a formal process. And so it was you know we piecemeal things together.
I hindsight is 2020, I would go back and I would change some of what we did. But when we had $12 million on the table, it was really hard to turn that away and say we still have this problem. And we're still spending a half a million dollars a year to try to address this problem. I want to just be clear that the problem—I call it the problem but really All of these individuals have names and stories and contributions to our community. And so that was the other thing it was just, it was so heartbreaking to, you know, to go through that, to go through that, that recognition of this real need in our community Real safety issue too and then here's a solution.
Okay, we didn't do it perfectly and we're changing that now, we're remedying that now.
Council Member Mang I
think
you had some comments about this one?
Briefly was the email from Mr. Creasy saying that the dates were incorrect and I don't know if that makes it We'll verify
that so that you know, of course that came in after the agenda was published But we'll double-check that before we
moving from November 3rd to yeah. Okay perfect. Thank you
I was
just going to say the sense of urgency and as you bring back up those times when we had people living all over the campus, fires. It was a very chaotic situation that needed to be dealt with and they weren't going to move to Ventura. That wasn't going to happen. They were going to move further back and up the hill. So, you know, I agree with you. We did the best we could do and it's like you never know how to do it until you've done it.
And we did the best we could do.
That being in the audience at the time, that's how it appeared and that there were also a lot of staff turnover at the time. So it was a chaotic time.
Yeah. And there are reasons and their explanations. And you know, and the state was no clearer on what they were doing. So there was no guidance coming that way. I mean, there is there's reasons but still in all areas to take responsibility.
I would say I would say it a little bit different because in 2020 hindsight We could have done better but we as a council We needed the guidance from somebody to tell us this is This is the proper way to go through this process and we really didn't get that And so I'd modify that we did the best that we could do. We, we could have done better but we weren't given the assistance that we needed to do better.
Yes. You did the best you could with the information you had-ish? Yeah
and I want to thank you for bringing up that point because if I had any knowledge that this, that this, that we were doing something incorrectly for our own code I would have, you know this would have been a very different story. But sure but we know we were we would have fixed it.
Yeah We would have done it according to code but we you know, we probably would have accelerated Accelerated we probably would have had those everyday meetings till we figured it
out I just want to move on to number six is interesting related to what we said about number five and
So for number six, it's worded a little bit differently. So you know words though there's some nuance in some of the findings that I was trying to acknowledge here finding numbers. So finding number five was that the claims of insufficient time did not absolve the city of Ojai and we discussed that that's going to be an agree. Finding number six is that the city of Ojia could not support its claim of insufficient time to conduct a fair and competitive selection process based on qualifications and competency I provided a disagree response again as a recommendation. We can modify that, but the basis for that is that there was a very limited time. So while I think it's like both things can be true you know it can be true that the claims of insufficient time do not absolve the city from compliance with the government code requirements But at the same time, I personally had a hard time suggesting that the claim of insufficient time prior to January or prior to submission of the grant application was unsupported by the dates.
To me, the key and at least from my ear, the word was support that I was finding the nuance in. So if it said the city of Ojai could not justify its claim That seems like a stronger threshold than support. So when you wrote disagree, I thought your explanation in number five was our attempt to our attempt to support why we had no time. So it didn't strike me as being inconsistent with number five.
All right. So my recommendation on that one would be to say great And I'm gonna probably say that on every one of these because I think that is our best way of showing that we're Committed to doing this but I would but I would say agree But the city did provide an explanation now, I I wasn't I Wasn't consulted I wasn't interviewed by the grand jury, but I do have an understanding that and it's inherent in their findings that we provided an explanation for what
happened.
They're rejecting that was a sufficient explanation I think we should just say agree, but the city explained why. This was done on... I would say maybe just the city explained why and then refer them to... Refer them to the response to number five because that's that's The only substance we're giving them is what's in number five
2:23 – 2:3546 turns
Did I Was my when I brought up the difference between support and justify. Is that why you said?
That is why cuz I believe that when you think about Support. I mean whether you sufficiently support it or whether you supported it to the status Satisfaction of the civil grand jury is probably a different question, but I do think that there's support With that being said, you know, I don't I mean to your point councilman, I don't know that the civil grand jury I Don't know if they interviewed staff. I know that they And the city manager may chime in here. But I know that they did request some documents, but they requested very specific documents.
Right. I mean, I think for the purpose of this discussion you're not supposed to acknowledge that you met with the grand jury, of course. But yes, I met with them at length to explain the process from when I came on board to current day.
So for
example, I'm addressing this idea that the city they're saying the city could not support its claim of insufficient time so My thought I'm just eating myself but my thought is that If this was my Response to propose to a client. I would say agree But the city did explain why it thought it had insufficient time. But you know, we the reality is that I'm not clear about all of timelines but you know, we've just been talking about the idea that it wasn't even on our radar screen that there was process follow if so this idea of did we have time or not?
Is kind of moot We didn't get that brought. We never said we have to do this process, but we don't have time so let's go get the grant. I
was just gonna say logically, I don't object to agree if after agree if it said I don't know how to say this, because if the synonym was the city of Ojai could not explain its claim of insufficient time. If that if it said that, I would say we absolutely did attempt to explain. So I'm reading support as synonymous with that. But if we said we agree because we could not satisfy the claim of insufficient time.
Explanation see above of
I mean, my thought is that we can say that. Without saying disagree and we can say agree and we can provide that explanation. I think that's the stronger way. How do you feel about approach this?
I don't have a preference. I mean, at the end of the day, this again might it's yeah, I don' have a preference as to whether it's an agree or disagree or a conditional agree.
I think they're finding is blending the law with the city's effort to explain what we did, and we have to agree with the law. No, you made your case,
I
think.
Yeah?
Yeah, I'm okay
with
it. How are
you feeling?
I'm okay with it as well. Okay.
So we'll say agreed.
With explanation.
With explanation in finding five above. I think Bethany probably needs to work with the language that you were trying to articulate, Mayor, and make that a... You
know? I mean, what I would probably do is change it to agree but then say however see explanation. However's great. Yeah.
However solves it for me. Okay. That's good. All right, so number seven.
All right, so seven is that is again a simple statement that city of Ojai was required by law to conduct a fair and competitive selection process when it awarded the development management agreement on May 27 2025. And I just said, agree with please see and we'll say explanation to finding two.
Yeah. OK. Yes. Right.
And the same token sort of hitting on it again, that the city of Ojai did not conduct a fair and competitive selection process based on qualifications and competency when it awarded a contract to Dignity Moves. I can agree. Then for finding F9, it says that the city issued a series of findings on page 20 of resolution number 25-19 to justify the awarding of a contract to Dignity Moves as its sole source development manager without conducting a fair and competitive selection process. This is one of those that is, there's, it's a factual statement and the resolution does in fact include a series of findings to that extent.
And then I included kind of a summary of what some of those findings were. Finding number 10 was that the city could not, again this is one of those could not support findings, the city could not support its claims in the resolution that Dignity Moves was uniquely qualified and that no other development managers could have been identified. I think this is probably one that will warrant some further discussion based on the conversations we've had thus far but my recommended response was disagree and then I just refer back to The resolution the findings in the resolution So
my thought on this one, is that? the word uniquely Is What causes the Problem here, because I think there was probably a general belief amongst the council that Dignity Moves was qualified to do. I know that I went to League of Cities and they presented on a different model Supportive housing, but I didn't know it was a difference at that point in time But I think That I would again say agree But you know that we didn't We never deliberated on the idea whether of that whether there was the possibility Of somebody else who could do the same services.
Mm-hmm
And frankly, I would have doubted that they were the only one because I think there were other like other panels during that same League of Cities conference where they were presenting on homeless solutions
Yeah, I mean the so this goes back to that volunteer group that we had working on working on this and And That group was working in partnership with the County of Ventura, the Continuum of Care. to us from the Continuum of Care, from Jennifer Harkey specifically was that Dignity Moves was uniquely qualified. So we were given information as to this is the best in the area, they have a project in Santa Barbara and so we didn't go out for an RFP, we didn't do it ourselves but this was coming from the experts that we were working with And so, I mean if we do, if everybody wants to agree on this then I would add that explanation. That we were told by the experts in the county that they were uniquely qualified for this.
So what if it said hypothetically agreed however
Dignity
Moves was presented to be uniquely qualified to provide the product and service set?
Yeah, I would be okay with that
Yeah, it was represented to us by
yes.
So presented represented
and I mean no, I mean no shade on Jennifer. She was actually helping us everyone of all the volunteers were helping and working so hard on this And so I am so grateful and I don't want to throw anybody under the bus
It's not here to see that she made it possible to get the grant. That's how it appeared to
be This is what I remember You know I'm mostly voting no, but I was paying attention to what was
happening.
Dignity Moves had a philosophy towards how these communities should be structured and constructed And it, you know, it centered around their kind of courtyard and communal. And they were trying to develop not just places for the homeless but a community with the expectation that that was gonna... So if you look, if you were focused just on that issue I would say they were uniquely qualified, but I think what the grand jury is looking at and maybe the law is looking at is this isn't really about philosophy in your approach to things.
It's about who has You know, the institutional wherewithal to take a project from beginning to end. And I don't think we could say that they were unique in their ability to do that. Are you OK with presented though? I'm OK with it. Well, I mean, I would once again Rick, let me say agree and give us all the explanations of where we were. I think what Rachel said is really strong as an explanation.
And I think I would add the part that I said about, you know...
The trauma-informed
care? Well this, yeah. Trauma informed care and the structure of the community, you know We were led to understand that this was unique.
And it probably was, it was proprietary but what we weren't given the chance to understand is this might not be the only way to do this. We were led to believe that this was the only way, the best way and you know that was That's how you sell your services. Yeah, exactly we were let down I guess, you know So what
if I read please I have some recommendations for modified language? What if we say agree however the city's decision was based on Representations from other agencies and experts that Dignity Moves was uniquely qualified to provide the products and services based on its demonstrated experience delivering innovated, dignified interim and permanent housing solutions in California. So basically just changing the first part of it feels
good to me too.
2:35 – 2:4231 turns
I don't know, I have problems with saying that Dignity Moves provides innovative blahdy blahdy blah. I mean, I hate to say it but I do actually believe that. But if we want to put blahdy blahdy blah...
We're not claiming the fact, we're claiming that other agencies presented it.
There were representations to the city. That's it right there. In ensuing days and years, we have come to believe that we were led down the primrose path. But thank you very much. I'm OK
with it. I keep going back to the idea that we weren't given the advice That hey, there's other businesses that you should consider and you actually have a legal obligation to give people an opportunity to sell you on their ability to deliver.
On their model, because Dignity Moves sold us a model that we bought into without understanding there were other models that we could have explored. But that's all water under the bridge.
And I'm enjoying the conversation and I was just trying to think how to respond appropriately. Yeah, I don't want to slag on Dignity Moves.
I think if we say however we were led to believe by experts... Well, that's why I say the city's
decision was based on representations from I mean if that's an accurate statement, even if later your perspectives on that differed. We're looking at a moment in time. We just read that
one more
time to make sure
we're clear before we leave
that question. So really what up to the words uniquely qualified it would read agree however the city's decision was based on representations from other agencies and experts that dignity moved was uniquely qualified
and then the rest
of that great
okay
I would agree with Councilmember Ruhl that it would be worthwhile to explain
that the uniqueness was more philosophical than it was about the capacity to deliver a product.
So, the trauma-informed housing first model is their philosophy? Well, that's what they call
it.
Mm-hmm. But I mean
that's We're not branding for them
no, no, I'm saying that we we were let we were told that this is the best way to do things I'm just I
understand what you're
saying language That's all it was saying and I'm just saying that I'm
I would say I'm OK with what Bethany said, but I'm error on the side of being more precise. Usually you guys all suffer
through it feels like content that doesn't inform the response really that much to me personally. But
it puts something in the record, but I'm fine with it just being what it is. I really am OK with that.
OK, so then I want to suggest we go on to F11
So then the next one is another one of these, the city could not support. It says the city could not support its claim on page 20 of resolution number 25-19 that it was obligated to award a contract to Dignity Moves because Dignity Moves was listed in the grant application. This one was another one for which I've recommended a disagree response and their reason for that is that if you look at the language Grant agreement what it states is that grantees will implement the ERF funded local proposals in Compliance with the terms and conditions of this agreement the notice of funding availability under which the grantee applied The representations contained in the grantee's application HCD guidance and directives and the requirements per the authorizing statute And so go on to say that by incorporating a grant applicant's application into the final grant agreement, HCD effectively contractually requires grantees to deliver the grant-funded activity in the manner articulated in the grant application.
The wording of the grant agreement is what it is. And so I think this is another situation from a hindsight perspective, you might look at it differently but I would also note and this is as recent You know, March when we were talking to HCD about the feasibility of looking at other locations. One of the things they have emphasized over and over again and they put this in writing in March is that they viewed these grants as being highly competitive And so, I could see that there might be reticence on the part of the city to have a conversation with the state about changing elements of the grant application that could potentially make it less competitive because we've been told by HCD that they would not approve those kinds of changes.
So, I struggled with this one because I do think that just from a strict contractual standpoint there was an obligation once the city accepted the grant funds to deliver the project in accordance with that application. The flip side of that for consideration is that we always have the ability to request an amendment to the grant. So, the city unilaterally could not have changed Dignity Move and we don't know what HCD would've said and we probably don't have any way to know what HCD would have said.
It was but they approved an amendment to the grant agreement that allowed a modification to the location
or
the project site. But as a condition of approving that change, they required basically it was in an example where they said okay we'll agree to a change but it's got to be a change that comes with something better.
2:42 – 2:5542 turns
So this is my thought about this. There's many, I have many examples in my legal career where there's one statute that says you have to do this and then there's another statute that says you have to do this and you cannot possibly comply with both. And so when I You know, listen to your explanation and read it. The way I see it is on the one hand we have the law related to the sole sourcing of services. On the other hand, we have a contract
with
the state that has a sole source. And so I almost say, you know, agree but had we written them out of the contract we potentially lost the ability to be awarded the grant. And I'm not sure that that...
So again, the way that the finding is worded this is why I struggled with this one. The finding is that the city could not support its claim That it was obligated to award a contract to dignity moves. So, I think there is support for that claim
my response to what you wrote there was that the error happened. or let's say the lack of the due process happened in listing dignity moves as the provider and the grant without, without the competitive bidding. But the grant was written, the proposal was written and then the grant awarded. So to me, the reason why I thought disagreed made sense here was because what logically follows from the first step, the second step did follow but I would say if the language were something to the effect The understanding that the council was working with at the time was that they were procedurally correct in listing dignity moves, and so the rest follows.
So disagree seemed logical to me with the explanation?
I agree with that. I mean, I agree with the recommendation to disagree.
Yeah, I mean I like the idea of...I think it's true. I think the disagree is the accurate statement just you know what was the truth of the situation but I would definitely put in between a rock and a hard place Once again, it was we didn't know what we didn't know. So as for explanation, the flip side of that of course is which has been brought up is that we did ask for amendments and we got them. And I know that we got them with conditions but we never asked for this amendment that might have given us conditions as well. We just didn't do it. So there's that sort of sense of responsibility is that we just didn't do it. We didn't ask.
So
if the language was added to say, we didn't understand the scope or flexibility to come back with changes until later.
Yeah, I think that's fine.
What if we added a sentence that says that the city recognizes that it could have requested an amendment for the grant? The outcome of which may have been uncertain. Mean because we don't know. I mean, I don't know
so my thought is that none of that and what and and and what's Troubling us is that this is kind of a chicken first day question because They're in the grant application that's awarded to And so I you know part of me might would say Agree, but they were But they were embedded in the agreement and we didn't have an understanding that we could award this to anyone else
That's the disagree logic though. Isn't it? And
we were told we couldn't. I mean, we were told that dignity moves was embedded in this. We weren't definitely told that.
You were told that even when the questions came up about vendors the connotation, if not explicitly was we received the grant because Dignity Moves was in the
grant. So
in a way it's hard to... Let's just say hypothetically that's correct. Hypothetically. Then essentially it's fixed.
Yeah and that was our understanding. That absolutely was our understanding. So that is what we were told.
That's what I mean though. The problem was prior to that Which was, if there could have been a competitive bid prior to the proposal obviously hindsight then it would have been easier because you wouldn't even be having a conversation about changing the vendor.
It did come up also, you know, could we change vendors? I mean that later while later. Yeah, exactly. Later it did come up. Right. So whatever seems I have to
disagree. I think it's OK to have a disagree response. It is OK. You know, I understand the desire to want accountability and to hold yourselves accountable. There were far fewer disagree responses than agree
responses. This is also an area where if they, and I know we're not supposed to talk about the investigation process but if they only talked to Ben and Ben wasn't a participant in how they got into the application then they're not getting a satisfactory explanation. I'm not sure that Ben could have given them.
Well, I knew enough that if I could just jump in, I'd heard enough about what had happened. I did my best to explain how it was related to me and also for my watching of meetings. But on this one, I will just say because I was the one having conversations with HCD and that was... And also at that time the governor's office had a homelessness
czar.
So between the homelessness czar and HCD, actually it wasn't even HCD then, BCH or whatever. Anyway they made it very clear to me that like hey Don't fudge around with your application unless you're giving us something way better. If you seem wishy-washy, we're going to give this to the next person. This is highly competitive if you all of a sudden want to go with somebody else. We awarded this because of what you presented. And we're not open to, you know, hey this location's got less political upheaval and this vendor is somebody else. They said no, we approved it based on what we saw.
That's what we did. And I guess listening to that I'm thinking about the idea that does your desire to be awarded the grant allow you It's I'm just trying to look at it from right.
I understand
that people
over.
I think the mayor
stated it succinctly Look, this was this is this junction in the process and here you are at this juncture in the process The error was here. You didn't do an RFQ before you submitted the application
but I just we don't have to believe at this point because it's a little tangential but it is like I write grants all the time and You don't want the grant to drive the organizational mission. You want to have a mission and have a grant support the mission, but it happens the other way all the time and that's not good. Anyway so are we okay with disagree as amended? I mean disagree and...
Explain. Yeah with explanation yes okay all right F12
So for finding F-12, it is that the city could not support its claims in the resolution. That it was obligated to award a contract because it faced a short timeline to spend 50% of the grant due to delays leading up to the deadline. For this one, I recommended a partially agree and then acknowledge that just from like a pure number of days standpoint that there was sufficient time between the date the city received the grant and when the DMA was approved to conduct a competitive selection process.
However, again kind of noting that the City was unaware at the time that HCD would consider changes to the City's consultant identified in the grant application and in support of this statement the City had been explaining some of what we just discussed. And then also noting in the second paragraph that during this period of time, the city underwent a significant process to evaluate multiple project sites because there were other things happening. What I'm trying to acknowledge is that there were other things happening during this time And I think one other thing that I may not have noted directly here, but I think Dignity Moves even without having the development management agreement executed continued to provide support through that process.
So they you know, they were acting as a partner to the city on and in furthering the project Even before that agreement was in place And so it's you know the timing the timing there is a little bit it's more it's not as black-and-white
I'm gonna say if you do if you take away partially and just have agree You already have a however in there after the first sentence. I think it's okay agree and you've got your however I agree. OK, because the explanation is clear and detailed.
And then for finding F-13, I suspect that you're going to want to also change this one to agree. So I've already made the note that the city's claims of insufficient time did not absolve the city from conducting a fair and competitive election process based on qualifications and competency when awarding the contract on May 27th, 2025. So I would, based on the discussion thus far my guess is that you would like to change that to agree partially. Yeah,
I
think so. And eliminate the partially disagree but
yeah just keep it as agree and keep the
explanation.
That would be
my preference. I think so too.
Then for finding F14, this finding was simply that there was significant turnover of staff and elected officials at the City of Ojai during this process which contributed to the issues in this report. So we did, I mean even though the answer to this is agree. I did think it was beneficial to note that one of the most significant changes here is in the role of the city manager and I thought it was beneficial to note this because we have received public comment on this point but also because you know, I mean in talking in my discussions with Ben about how we got here, one of the things he's noted is that if Like if the city had been more engaged, and I think what I take away from this is that if he'd been your city manager at the time, he might have been more engaged at what was happening with the state level enough in advance that perhaps the city could've done a competitive process in advance.
So I think it's important to note that you had a change in the person who was kind of at the helm of the ship in the midst of this process. Um, but in addition to that without listing them all out you also saw other significant changes like um you know the former public works director the former finance director. There have been some significant changes and key roles so
yeah
2:56 – 3:0118 turns
Is everyone in agreement with that? For finding F-15, there was a lack of public transparency throughout the process. And this is the one that I said is kind of subjective. I think transparency is another one of those things that can be in the eye of the beholder. I said generally disagree because you did have 22 public meetings and that was, the person in my office who was helping with this went back and double checked that count.
Which sounds pretty transparent but I also understand that this is subjective and open to your feedback on this.
I'm curious because as we discussed, there are some people who firmly believe it was very transparent and there are other people who firmly believe it wasn't transparent at all. So I don't know really what to do with this because we have both who were fully engaged you know so we have both sides of that coin and What how do you discount either one of those views because it is subjective
I think one way you could as you could that you could turn this into You know a partially agree partially disagree and then include a statement you know that notes that You know, for some members of the city council and community that the process was sufficiently transparent. And I mean maybe we just say that
if my thought is that if you're focusing on the selection as our contractor Then that wasn't the subject matter. So yeah, so I would say that we. Yeah, I'll give credit that we we agendized the heck out of this project and and and and we did, I think definitely added meetings with the idea to give more opportunity for public input. But if this finding is to say that we weren't particularly transparent about how we selected Dignity moves. I think Rachel's already kind of said it was in these informal. Yeah meeting setting that It was resolved that they were That they were the ones
and it's not that anyone was hiding anything. It's just like I said unprecedented Situation we were be working with experts And so The recommendation came to us without I mean really without any, yeah the recommendation for dignity moves was not as transparent as it could be.
So I might suggest saying agree that the selection of dignity moves did not have full public transparency but disagree That the project as a general concept did not have extensive transparency. I was just going to say that, but if we. But I also get I guess I do agree with the concept There's a wide range of opinions about how transparent.
What just, what about
this? Oh go ahead. I was gonna say what if we say agree as noted above the city agrees that Dignity Moves was not selected through an open and competitive process. That's what's already there. Then we say however with respect to the project more generally since late 2023 the city has conducted 22 public meetings regarding the process in the project Or it would just say regarding the project
I Guess here's I like everything that was said and I would suggest one thing however since late 2023 the city has conduct has the city as attempt has attempted to be transparent in the process by I Would throw in that word
Well I think, I don't know if we want to say process because I think that's sort of referring back to the project.
Transparency. I think it's important that we repeat that word.
So because we agree that dignity moves as the selection was not correct and we've also striven Involve the community over and over again.
And really remedy a lot of the aspects of the process that weren't
transparent. What if we say the city has, so however since late 2023, the city has endeavored to provide transparency And this, again, is not passing judgment on how effective that was. Yeah, we've been endeavored only to transparency through conducting. Yeah.
And the rest I'm totally OK with that.
Mm hmm.
Is that OK with you?
Yeah, that's OK with me. OK.
3:01 – 3:0824 turns
Yeah. We all good. Yeah
yeah. I'm I'm good with the agree however.
OK All right Okay 16 we're gonna do it. Wow, okay
Then finding f-16 There was a lack of alignment within the Ojai City Council and between the city and local residents Resulting in delays that impacted the progress of the project I'll be very honest. I struggled with this one as well because I think that To the extent that there are delays based on a lack of alignment, it's because we had council members who wanted more information or more discussion.
I don't love the suggestion that... It almost reads like there should be more unanimous votes on the project and I think that Not how city councils work. I mean, it's great when you can get to a unanimous vote but the process is designed to work without that and so... Yeah
if the statement is pejorative, I would say that it's not acknowledging the idea that there was... You can't fault us for not Grinding through the whole set of issues, with the exception of we selected as our contract. I agree.
And this one is not specific to Dignity Moves. This is the progress of the project, the project overall.
I don't get that statement either because the progress broken ground and built units at this point
in time? Every time an alternate location brought up, you heard pros and cons for each one. I'm emphasizing the cons from community members though to say there should have been more community alignment I don't see how you could have a project like this and not have people not wanting it in their area.
And it is the democratic process to engage and wrestle with the question, yeah, and potentially find common ground or not. And then you go to vote. I mean, it's the process. It doesn't as you say. So I don' know how we actually couch that to say that this was the process that councils go through normally to come to next steps?
Well, and so that's sort of where I came to. And this is one that I think Ben may have weighed in on. He noted that over 10 different locations were vetted. So like that is actually when you look back at what happened between when the grant was awarded and when the development management agreement was approved Most of the time that City Council spent working on issues related to the project were related to discussions and evaluations of different project locations.
But, you know I do think You know, again just so in the response it's a partially agree, partially disagree. I mean we acknowledge that the decisions have not been unanimous with many decisions being approved with a 3-2 vote. Council operates by a majority vote.
I'm okay with your answer on this
one
personally. But I think the way that we've handled that on some of the others is saying agree however And provide the explanation
I just don't know if I would agree that that was the thing that resulted in impacts to the progress of the project. It's that last part of the finding.
Also, I would disagree with the fact that it's that the delays have all been about the alignment of the council because some of the delays have been staff delays. Some delays have been vetting other properties so it's not us being not being able to work as a team And I gathered that the lack of alignment within the city council, it wasn't that. I disagree with that.
If the finding had ended at the word residence with a period, I would probably have said agree. But... I don't know if that resulted in delays. That's the part that I struggled with.
Yeah, I agree. There was a lack of alignment but That's not unusual. It doesn't result in any delays that were any more so than any other like deep discussion on things. You know, I don't believe that a lot of the delays were the result of you know locations.
No, I mean we had a whole month of delays just on the soil testing.
Yeah
like
I don't and I still to this day don't believe that we truly vetted 10 properties. I just don't believe that but that having been said um I'm not willing to like this is once again you know not really relevant to the answer to this question but i i don't believe that you know that about the 10 the 10 vetted properties were the thing that held us up above, even comparable with the other delays that we've had. But that having been said...
The other thing I would note and so maybe as we're talking, maybe I also disagree with the characterization of some of this stuff is actually being delays for the project because the reality is you're still set to deliver the project within the timeline required by the grant I think while I know the city manager would love to and other members of the community would love to have the project completed as expeditiously as possible so that we can you know move the residents at Ojai Tent Town into a different facility.
You're not necessarily delay, you're not We're still
on track to meet.
So maybe we say notwithstanding the council voting history related to the project, the project is still on track to be completed within the timeline required by the grant.
3:08 – 3:1315 turns
So did we agree? Are we saying partially agree, partially disagree? I'm hearing two that's the case but not necessarily.
What this finding sounds like is that it's all the disagreements that have led to delays and that is all the contention and that's not true. That it's that there are these very tangible factors that have led to delays, but actually it's not delayed at all. So I agree that there has been a lack of alignment, but I disagree that we have delays and that any of the lack of alignment has resulted in delays.
So, I think we need to say disagree because that clause is not coming out. And you know, I actually I mean, yes that's true. Resulting in delays that impacted the progress of the project but everything that we've done, everything that you do results in delays that impact the progress of the project. Everything that you do this conversation is impacting. You know what I mean? There's just nothing that you do that doesn't impact the progress of the project if you look at it in those terms, right?
So your suggestion is you say disagree and then the rest, the City Council acknowledges etc.? Yeah exactly.
And I would say another way to approach it I agree that disagreements may have delayed the project to some extent or contributed to delay, but the reality is there's so many other things. that have affected the evolution of the
project.
Asked me why it's been you know, two years since we started this process. I Wouldn't say it was because That it was slowed down by
Disagree
I mean there there were lots of people who wanted the Process to be slowed down Mm-hmm and I don't think they got anywhere with that, you know with And I don't even think it slowed down, but we did have public hearings on the idea of changing the location to two different locations. Two different hearings. Not sure that even that slowed down the progress.
Yeah. It wasn't a deep dive into that. But anyway, that's not relevant to this particular question. So did
I hear you agree to disagree then? Did I hear you agree to disagree on? I'm fine with that. Okay, yeah.
And then I think the recommendations will be well at least the first two recommendations I think were pretty straightforward for the first one was the city of Ojai should develop policies and procedures that support conducting a fair and competitive selection process in all cases moving forward Um, the response was agree this is in process. And that you know Council provided authority and direction to city attorney to prepare revisions purchasing ordinance and solicitation templates.
And That these are expected to be completed by January 1 as a practical matter We're planning to bring these back for the first presentation to Council in October,
okay
So I don't want to commit to an October date until it happens. They're only asking for January 1st
so I'll just make As soon as Your firm was awarded City Council. You began talking to me about the need to revise our procurement policy, and so your response makes it sound like maybe we did this in July only.
3:13 – 3:1614 turns
Well, we didn't seek formal council direction until
July. One of the first things that I said when the grand jury report came out was I shot a note to the city manager and said, You know, the city attorney has been working on these revisions for
months. What we've done so far is we... And so this is actually kind of going back a step. The very first thing that we did with the City Manager and with Norma's support was provide new contract templates. So that started immediately. We also have started rolling out new solicitation templates. That's already in process, you're already doing that. It's just that we didn't actually begin work on ordinance changes until we came back to council and got direction to do
that. But what I'm saying is that developing the policies and procedures started long before That's July 14th, you know, recommended.
I mean, I've been thinking about them for months. I just haven't put a
pen to paper yet. And you've been talking about them and I've been happy to hear that we're
doing that. So we can say it. We could give
ourselves more credit. I think
we should.
Well, I'm thinking we should bolster that response by saying that this has been a... You know, you can even mention that your firm is new and has been working on this since Since being,
since being retained. Yeah I mean we were assessing the situation. I think it started to give the city manager credit. It started with him asking some questions and you know kind of beginning the discussion about what do we need to do to clean that
up? Can't you say you could start off by saying agree in process since coming on board and then add some language like you've been looking at those processes. And then on July 14th, you can list that then the council provided authority. Yeah, that makes sense
I mean in our discussions it wasn't necessarily focused on this project like in general we need to tighten up our procurement policies
So what if we say since January 2026 The city has been evaluating the need for revisions and updates to its purchasing
3:16 – 3:2112 turns
ordinance.
And then we say on July 14th, the City Council formally provided
authority.
And then
for what that does for me, that I think is important. Is it we were working on this before the grand jury report? Absolutely. Yeah.
And then for the next one on the city should implement a plan to improve its public transparency throughout the selection process agree and process As noted in the response to recommendation number one, the City Attorney has received authorization and direction to prepare updates and revisions. These are expected to better ensure public transparency in city purchasing and contracting activities. I love it. In recommendation number three, What I've, this one was a little bit different. It says the city of Ojai by January 1, 2027 the city of Ojai implement a plan to gain alignment among employees elected officials and local residents before initiating large and complex projects I don't disagree with this in concept, but I do think that you've already been working on this.
And again still being fairly new here, but you've been working on this robust council goals and tactics process that I think was intended to facilitate more alignment amongst the city council in the priorities and work that you're doing That's been a public transparent process. You have actually an update on those next week, and so I think you're already working on this.
If there's more that you would like to add or we can do that but I really was trying to identify that you're already doing this.
I've been advocating for quite a while for the idea that we need greater support on staff, meaning we need more staff and more resources put into our ability to function. I see it to a great degree in our reporting. And I've talked to Ben at length that, you know, I understand that it's not because there isn't an effort to give us reports but there is such a massive volume of stuff to consume And and then, you know to deliver to us so it It it hurts the way that you know That our ability to analyze and function and then it then it and when we get big projects That you know on the bike. We're we're You know, we're not equipped like a city of 100,000 people to Well, and I.
You know, the analysis. I think it's a major investment that we need to make as a council to get from where we are and recognize that something like this is gonna happen again unless we're really up our game.
I do think, and Ben can speak more to this. He mentioned earlier that he has a future concept review he's going to be bringing to the City Council to talk about agendizing things and structuring some of those future items a little bit differently than they've done in the past to try to facilitate that. I don't want to steal his thunder and you know, that's not on the agenda tonight It's kind of
it's with it's accomplishing the same thing that you're speaking of councilmember but in a totally
So so with that being said I guess we're now
we're making the reports
It's gonna be the same meeting twice a month so discussion all the same items
3:22 – 3:2833 turns
Where
we have
more concept reviews, I think
is correct. So let's hold that discussion but I guess the point is that I do think that
you know the City Council has taken great strides to try to improve alignment in the execution of council priorities
However, I do include in this response that you know with that being said like each city council it should have said City Council
member
Works to represent the many facets. I mean you have you have a diverse community and you have differing perspectives In your community that you as the City Council represent so You know to suggest that the City Council will be unanimous on all issues when you have dissenting voices in your community, I think is not a fair expectation. I
thought that the two tree workshops were in some sense of an example of what we could be doing so you had a lot of community input on one and then you had, I would call them like expert witnesses giving feedback where the council was hearing it and we're waiting to come back. So I would say our goal and the workshops that are in our goals moves us towards that.
That's how it appears So I think that's
good. If so, then that's the end of this item? Yeah. Well, I guess actually not the end of this item. The question is, does council...so we have two options either we can bring back a cleaned up version that incorporates all the revisions for you to vote on at your next meeting or you could make a motion to approve the report with the revisions that we've discussed tonight and
My suggestion would be that we put it on the consent calendar for the next one. We see all of the revisions and then, if there's something worth discussing and that would also give members of public if they wanted to, they see the finalized response and they can come in and talk. That gives us sufficient time for our filing
Yeah. So what we will do is then there's no action needed tonight, we will incorporate the edits as discussed and provide a direction by consensus and we'll bring that and put it on consent.
Great work guys! That was really good.
I just want to say thank you Councilmember Whitman for kind of leading us through this. That's a beautiful moment! Well, we really did get led through this process by you and I much appreciate that. And Bethany, but Bethany gave us the skeleton.
I do this for a
living. I have to
help my clients explain things within their rules, so...
I found it very helpful.
Thank you,
Leslie.
I
agree. Thank
you. Thank you very much.
I do spend a lot of time with words in my career. Thank you, Bethany. We'll
move on to number nine while we still have time.
Approval of the amendment to the development management agreement.
Wait, can I ask a question? Oh, what? I think we have a public. We have somebody in the in the in the public who might need to is there an item that that you're here for now? No. Yeah. Uh huh. OK, got it. Got it. OK. Just wanted to make sure that that we were going to get to something that you were waiting for. So, OK, then never mind.
Well, this would be one of those actually.
Yeah,
OK. Amendment to the development management agreement.
OK, yes. Continuing on the topic of the permanent supportive housing project when the bid selected by Dignity Moves through a competitive process was awarded. Council ratified that back in April. You will recall that there was considerable discussion about winnowing down the project amount and at that time refusing a donation So since that time, a couple things have happened. There have been ongoing discussions between Dignity Moves and this potential donor and other donors. And discussions with the City Attorney and Dignity Moves attorney about how we could possibly modify the development management agreement so that if we are in a situation where we could accept a donation How could it move forward in a manner that doesn't require every single potential donation to come back before the Council for review and approval?
Being consistent with what the Council wants to see for this project, of course. And so I think where we've landed with that is what you see in front of you which is a minor modification to the Development Management Agreement that allows for the acceptance of a donation so long as it doesn't cause an increase in costs to the project. There were a number of items at the
time this bid was ratified that were
excluded from the project or winnowed down. What I mean by that is the project currently on the Dignity Move side has a 4% contingency. The landscaping that was included was removed, other items like screening around individual HVAC units behind the housing were struck, the gate was modified, on and on and on. We are aware, and this was affirmed as recently as this week that the $1 million donation that was previously offered is still available. And it is available currently without any strings attached.
It's just towards the project. However there is a reluctance from this donor and from some other donors about having to go before the council each time to offer Donations to the project and I think that this is where we work closely with the city attorney And what the attorney for dignity moves with language that we just discussed that might put you in a position To allow for that.
So this is a proposal. We're here to talk to you about it Please let us know how you feel. Thank you
3:29 – 3:3617 turns
Questions we I don't have much.
I don't have questions Okay, any public comments? Nobody online nobody here Okay, so I'm looking at the language on page 173 as the critical pieces I guess so I've seen like three one one one acceptance of donations and expenditure funds Shall not result in any additional financial or operational obligations critical. I'm just saying what you said again 3 1 1 2 Amendment all other amendments to the development budget that result in an increase to the development budget shall require approval of the City Council in advance and that There should be no donations persuaded to and meetings the requirements of this subsection so no donation can add any Requirements to the project or increase in the cost without the council's approval. That's right.
That's I'm reading that
So for instance, if Dignity Moves secured a million dollar donation and if that donation was used to significantly increase their contingency from say 4% to 10% or 12% or something along those lines. And if we were able to add back in the native drought tolerant landscaping and if we were able to add in things like screening around the HVAC unit and so on and so forth I would see those as items that don't cause an operational cost
And there can't be any obligation about who gets to stay or anything like that.
Right, there's no conditions, right
exactly.
To be clear whenever it says you know it's not saying that there wouldn't be additional costs because obviously if you add something to the project there will be a cost in terms of the construction of the project but what we're talking about is operational
costs.
So for example...
We want to build you a pool
Yeah, something that would incur like a significant ongoing maintenance cost or obligation for the city. That's what I was trying to address because I think if I were the council you previously approved a project obviously you also then affirmed a construction bid that included some tweaks to the project But at the point in time when you signed off on the final plans and that's the scope of the project, you approved a project. And so it as long as it's consistent with the project that was approved by city council what we're trying to do is add some parameters so that this isn't just if Someone comes in with donations that were, you know, require again for you to add a swimming pool. That's going to be an ongoing operational cost city.
Now that I think thank you for that. I can't see a downside to this right now. So I
there's a couple of things. My wife works for a conservation organization and they Receiving he's involved in you know acquiring donations and The organization has problems People who are associated with Degradation of the environment making big donations to their own Project so I understand. So I I think that we have to see who's making the donation and Decide yes, we want this donation my other concern is and we had a public comment on this is that you know We have a contract with dignity moves I'm very leery about modifying the terms of the contract until we get a strong hold on how we're moving forward. And, I know we're moving forward with all of that but I in my mind, I really want to focus on bringing the contract.
I understand the purpose is to make it easier to accomplish goals of the contract that have been eliminated but I'm concerned that we're also creating almost an out and that we need to continue working with Big New Moves on bringing the contract in within the scope of what we intended at the beginning. So, I have those reservations about approving this.
I hear what you're saying. I'm trying to think of a way I understand like an oil company is what I said, if an oil company wants to donate to the land trust you have hesitancy about that as one should. I'm trying to think of a way that someone could be interested in the project and want to donate money to something that we already know we want like landscaping that got cut and not have to make a presentation in front of the council and have us deliberate.
If I could avoid that I would
Well and if I could jump in, that's a problem with donors too. They don't want to offer up a donation and then have to prove themselves to the council that they're worthy of giving the money to the project. That's a problem.
So the one time it came up on this project, the issue was Not the donor. It was that they were kind of changing the scope from. And you know and I guess we'd still be considered that would be something that would have to come in front of us but I As opposed to modifying our contract with Dignity Moves, maybe we oughta work with them on a process for... I'm glad that they're soliciting donations but maybe we oughta work with them on a process for a friendly safe environment for donors to make those donations.
I mean, I'm all in favor of it that we would get donations but I'm leery about changing.
I want to
3:36 – 3:4517 turns
I want to draw that distinction. I think it's important, but I will tell you like it or not and this is nothing that you don't know we're all very accustomed to the public process and public meetings but to those who are not it's not a friendly
environment. When we get to that item when we talk about somebody wants to donate 30 beds I don't personally want them to have to come in front of us. And that's a separate item, because that's not the first priority. That's as a case in point. Yeah.
Well one thing that has happened when I worked at a non-profit a number of years ago, one thing that happened for us is that we did receive a big donation and found out that there was a problematic, that the donor was problematic in some way contrary to our cause and we gave the money back I mean, that is always an option if a big oil company donates to the project or something else.
That's one way that we could handle it if we don't want to have somebody, a donor coming into the process of- You
could insert language if you like. I'm just freestyling a bit. I mean, I'm just trying to prevent us from losing Opportunities here that I think are I think it's real that we could and I don't I think this is gonna benefit the project in the community And that's why I'm trying to see if we can make this happen You couldn't trust me in the city attorney to review each donor and check that they've got their proper, you know Registration with the Secretary of State's office and all the paperwork. We could do a little mini, you know, background check on each one if you like and make sure that they're aligned—their goals and missions align with the city's and the project. Some type of language like that but you're right there always is—and you read about this all the time—there are things that happen along the way after a donation is sometimes made where there's a scandal involved with somebody in that organization, it's something they didn't know at the time the donation was received.
You do run that risk but I don't foresee Chevron coming forward and saying here's $500,000 for this effort just simply because it's not in their charitable contribution lane.
Plus you would vet a non-profit or a foundation through the Secretary of State but not an individual.
I
have a question for our city attorney. Is there any danger in amending the contract or changing the contract? Does it open up any other can of worms by virtue of amending a contract?
I think as long as both parties agree to the amendment and like there's not this one. I mean, this is one that I think Dignity Moves is supportive of it's not like we're trying to make a unilateral Contested change to the contract that were you know kind of pushing down that they don't agree to? I think they would agree to this I think You know, we've had some initial discussions with their legal counsel And, you know, they agree in, like they're in agreement in concept. They're still providing kind of their final review of the exact wording and they wanted to obviously hear how the discussion goes tonight but I think their primary concerns that we heard from Dignity Moves is that You know, from a just a construction project logistics standpoint.
If they do receive a donation, you know there's kind of like it from a timing sweet spot when it comes to adding back some of these project elements that are not in the approved or affirmed construction bid. You know you kind of want to get some certainty around that so I think one concern we heard from them is If we were to make a change like this, they would like for the city to...
And I'm speaking for them when I say this so hopefully I'm not getting it wrong. But they don't want us to wait too long. Because once the project, we're still in the process where we're having some of the initial project studies completed. We're not fully mobilized on site but as the project starts, the construction is underway there will be things or elements to the project that if they're not included won't be included like you're not going to go back and replace something But with that being said, I think the primary purpose of any additional donation funds that are received would be funding project contingency. So obviously that goes through the entire project. I think landscaping which wouldn't be installed until after the project is constructed though irrigation lines might be And then I think if there were additional funds that were not applied to the construction of the project, then you know the city would probably.
I mean I think we would look to having those used to fund those furnished by owner items. But
if you recall the discussion it was around a million dollars that we trimmed and we happen to have a million dollar donation lined up. I think the other big concern that they have and I'm speaking for them is they didn't want to subject their donors to coming back to a council meeting and having to prove their worth
Well, and donors don't want to go public. They don't want people knocking on their doors saying can I have a bed too? That's why you always have the option to be an anonymous donor because you just don't want people knocking on your door. But my question is, I'm trying to understand what Councilman Whitman's, does the contract become more amorphous? Does it start to have Breathe in different ways because of this.
In my opinion, it does not. But I do think you know that is something that you always want to look for when you're considering amendments to a contract because again we don't have authority to unilaterally or legally under contract law one party to a contract doesn't get to unilaterally amend the contract. Right but
we
have. But they're in agreement
with us and we're looking at a potential donation of a million dollars Okay, there we go.
So I have a couple of more comments one is that there was a public comment that said That there's a there's a clause in the agreement which basically Does you've complied with everything already or up to this point in time? And I I think that's a fairly gratuitous statement make and I don't I don't know that it endorsed the idea That we that, you know, so it's basically we're, we're, we're almost like saying okay this part of the contract is done now.
We can remove that provision in the
amendment. But my other thought is that From a very broad standpoint, we're under a microscope for not being as transparent with the public as we can or should be. And this contract amendment is really about not going through a public process because it's uncomfortable for donors. And I think we're doing the opposite of what What we're kind of dealing with on a really big Progress I'm so my suggestion would be it that That maybe the right way to approach this is to make a list of Items That we potentially benefit from donations and create some type of a streamlined process for that.
But I don't, I mean I don't see a donor needing to come in Right, but I don't but I'm but I'm not sure where the need for doing that is it's up to Really kind of up to dignity moves if they acquire a donor to say
3:45 – 3:5127 turns
Because the project the DMA limits the amount of money that may be spent on the product
So because ten if you did get this million dollars then the project would be 10.5 with the extra million But what was the line? That was
It's about a million dollars. No, so you have this contract that says very explicitly what you're allowed to spend and here's the budget that was approved and here's the schedule and that's what you approve. So you didn't approve additional things?
But they didn't come in and help me here. So they didn't come in with what they agreed they were going to do. They pulled away from the scope that we were buying.
Sorry, we made many requests that they met some of those requests from the original and then trimmed others that we finally agreed to.
I agree with the idea that we didn't unilaterally I mean, no they didn't unilaterally say yeah this is going to be more expensive. We did it through planning process like the Planning Commission.
I feel like we're off topic Ben. Because we're talking about how much the project's costing and we're talking about getting, if we have the opportunity to get more money, how we're going to manage that. But can I ask you what line was it? I
disagree that it's off topic.
Oh OK. Why not? Or tell me how it's on topic to accept donations
or not. Because we'r e talking about a contract that was formed a long time ago and now we're making fairly radical changes And what I was discussing with the, you don't see
that as a radical change. No no no, I said I don't disagree with that part. I thought when you were saying well what did they agree to in the beginning? That's not being delivered. That part I thought was not what we should be talking about.
So under the development management agreement, the way that it's written right now, you know, Dignity Moves has to submit updated development budgets for the city. Dignity Moves is not authorized to expend funds in excess of the approved development budget without authorization from the city and so part of what this is intended... This is trying to address That situation because today if dignity moves received a million dollars.
For you, you know earmarks for use on the project they would have no authority to increase the development budget to include those funds which which is then needed in order for them to you know roll out Whether it's a change order to the contractor for you know, adding in something like landscaping whether it's a You know the increase of contingency whether that's within or outside of the contract with the construction contractor But at the end of the day they so they would not be able to Accept those funds and come unless they came back to City Council for approval of an amendment to the development budget I
mean, to me this kind of feels like a no-brainer. They have $1 million. They're asking to have the flexibility to accept a million dollar donation. Our commitment is still the same. We know potentially who the donor is and we have the opportunity of denying the donor if we find anything out about them that's controversial But to not go forward with this is basically to say, no we don't want the landscaping and we don't want the contingency.
You know what I'm saying? We're basically turning down an addition to the project that we would That we would like to have.
And I don't understand what the risk would be to us to do that, I haven't heard what the risk is so. Like except for potentially that clause that says you've done everything that you need to do up till now. I'm not sure I'd agree with that but and you know other than and I'm not even sure that's what I heard but it's in the template. That's in the template amendment. But there you know I don'y know that seems too So
is there a timely I mean, is there a time limitation on when You know is this something that can Because you know we had a lot of stuff in front of us and I read parts of the contract But I can't tell you I understand so I would like more time and if I
don't I think you're sending a
message. I don't want this to come back.
One thing I'd like to add, too, is I think to Councilman Whitman's point about the donations we do have the donation and naming policy where we can go in and adjust how we handle this as a larger process. I feel like this is an isolated incident, isolated donation, isolated opportunity. The donor, if it's the same donor as before they've removed a lot of their Limitations around the funds and so I feel comfortable moving forward with this
as well
and taking some of the concerns about this donation and applying them to The next agenda item that we're going to talk about or the if we don't get it tonight about the donations and naming policy
So,
okay. I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve it
Approve the amendment to the development match
with the revision that was discussed
with three vision that was
discussed.
Second that.
3:51 – 4:0041 turns
Yep. Council member rule
yes
mayor pro tem may
know.
That's number one now. That's number lane Yes Mayor Gilman Yes motion passes 3 to 2 OK
Is everybody up for? We just made a million dollars.
I hope so. What I will say is that before we would, you know, approve any, before the city manager would approve an adjustment to the development management or development budget to reflect that amount, we would request to see, you know, any agreement from the donor with the donor and documentation to review that. So I don't want to suggest that that's a done deal.
I think we would request that it be presented to the city and I would review that. And, I mean, I would have to review it and make the confirmation that there would be no additional obligations to the city in accepting those funds. I just want to make it very clear that if we receive a copy of an agreement that reflects that donation, that comes with additional conditions, I'm going to tell everyone it needs to come back to City Council.
And I trust that will be the case, that you will not move forward if you have any qualms about what it says or what it means.
OK, so we're under our constraint here. So it's nine fifty three. We'll take on at least one more. So I'm looking at item number ten.
Between 10 and 11, I think would you rather do eleven?
OK. I probably would rather do ten because I think it's going to be a longer process potentially.
OK.
That's my feeling. But council can obviously decide which one they wanna hear. I mean,
I would be asking the same kind of question. Operational need, what makes more sense?
Yeah, it's arguable. They're both... I don't think they're both gonna be long discussions. I think we could knock them both out if you guys were up for that. Because 12 and 13 could be later.
Not
today. Yes, I would agree with that.
And
what about 15? 15 will be out of contract. We already are
out of contract, but I mean it can go two more weeks. OK. So do you want to go to 10 then?
Whatever Council wants to do, I'll present on either one. I think they're pretty straightforward. The first one, if you want me to dive in 10, Council for some time has been talking about having an RFP process to determine an operator for the permanent supportive housing project once it's developed. And this would be an operator to provide or connect to all the types of services that will be needed by the residents within the development. This is a different setup than what we have currently within OTT. OTT is not a permanent supportive housing development, as you know it's a sanctioned housing excuse me homeless encampment. We have separate contracts for things like case management or benefits and social services or case management for mental health where this differs is you have an independent operator who either provides connectivity to those services.
That's the allure of these types of firms that provide this type of service. It is an all inclusive offering. There are organizations that run these types of institutions throughout the state and we would want to put out an RFP to solicit interest in this. Some of these names are companies and groups. You've heard of many mansions being one of them, but there are certainly many others We understand that you might want to tweak some of the wording within here we understand that some of you Notably the person to my left Has experience
I know has experience
with similar type Contracts through the nature of what he does and we just full disclosure We put this together with the assistance of the County of Ventura and dignity. Mm-hmm We asked you know, what can we see some samples? Can we get wording and so but it doesn't mean that it has to
mm-hmm
So I think it's going to be we're going to want to have a fairly at least a 30 or 60 day, probably a 60 day window maybe to get the type of interest in this. We want where we don't want to go through a full process and come back to the council for review. And this is you know when I think you're gonna get and this is why I'm anxious to bring I have always put this number at around $500,000 a year. I could be wrong about that, right? We could get proposals that are 600, 700 or we could get some that are less but that's from talking with those who run these types of things and come up with that number.
But this is how you'll truly know. You'll get your proposals, and you'll be able to vet them. Dignity Moves and the contractor has said what they normally do when they build these projects, once they know the operator, they bring the operator in. Because sometimes there are minor tweaks to the project that allow it to operate more efficiently or in the manner that the operators used to providing services. Maybe they use key card swipes on certain doors and bolt locks on other doors. That's just a dumb example but you get what I'm saying. They generally, if the project is being built they get an opportunity to be involved in the process so they can help inform minor decisions.
So I'm happy to answer any questions on this. That's what I was hoping to talk to you guys about today. Okay.
Questions? I have no public comment card. Anybody online?
No raised hands Mayor.
The comment that or one comment I had was If I look at page 190 where I see The weight of these items, the ability to collaborate locally being 5%, I guess.
All subject to revision.
No, I understand and what I'm, I understand. I'm not trying to be so like objective in this sense but I'm interested I guess is that we do have and I'm not just saying that because she's here but like help of Ojai as a continuum of care provider and not to say that they're trying to bid for this project but more I guess I'd be eager to find out how well these vendors would be able to work with somebody like Helpline. It would be something that would be important for me, and more than 5%, I guess. Absolutely.
Everything here is you can change whatever?
Yeah. So that's the only- And
we haven't gone out for this type of bid before. Right. What we would say We might not we don't want to set an amount but we could say something like, you know The city received a twelve point seven million dollar ERF grant of which Two million dollars has been set aside for future operating subsidies and the thought was this would help To offset the cost once the project is built something like that.
My only recommendation about Identifying what your budget would be is that this will be a competitive process and you want the pricing to be competitive as well. And so if, what I will say is that generally when you're talking about competitive solicitations, if you say what your budget is The proposals you receive will come in at your budget for sure. They're not going to come in less. However, what I would say
just to add to what I said is what I probably wouldn't put in that statement is it was intended that this amount would endure for four years because we've been very public saying we've set aside this money for future operating subsidies and we can just leave it at that.
And then with, so with this scope of service, with help of Ojai helping out what they're doing now then. So then we'll, the contract that we pay them will that lower in price because we now have
a... Yes, so you went and Jane and I've talked about that. Sorry
Jane.
How do you feel looking on the spot? No, I'm just kidding but come forward. unless they decided to compete for
this.
Right, exactly but similarly you know so Ventura County Behavioral Health
4:00 – 4:1651 turns
See that? But while she's coming up, what I'm interested in is an organization that opens up a possibility for a continuum of care representative through Help of Ojai to collaborate.
Put
that in the RFP.
So what it would look like and partially like Help of Ojai is not interested in property management. That is not what we do, not what we're interested in period. The scope of the supportive services, which is required for PSH, right? Permanent Supportive Housing. This is required through this type of housing. It is a complete duplication of service of what we already do, right? So you would have a population of 22 people plus whatever who would no longer really utilize help for that service anymore, which in theory fine, but would have then a different and new service organization TBD of weather and like how successful that would be considering these are people we've worked with for as long as we have.
But it's definitely something to consider, if you will in terms of what that looks like. So we would no longer be like the COC agency supporting they would be people who we work with theoretically in this field right but it would not be the same anymore.
Thanks, I appreciate that. That's useful. I guess it'd be interesting to see anybody that would reply to this request with that understanding that there are people that are in basically our right now that would be interesting to know how they would work
Sure, I mean similarly also we're not envisioning you continuing the security contract.
Right.
Now council after this thing is built wants like a temporary security presence there for a short time but it's a different makeup. It's got walls all around the perimeter and secure the doors have locks on them there's an onsite manager just a different arrangement.
The manager will be onsite living onsite?
Well, that remains to be determined a little bit because I don't the short answer is probably not. But we would like to come back at a future agenda item and talk about workforce housing that could include a component for somebody in this role.
But that's not here in what? That's
not
right. Right. So my my orientation on this is that I'm I'm really not sure how many Uh, service providers or consultants we may need in order to get this done. So first of all I'm not certain that the property services component and the Delivery of services provider component are the same person. And then I see a really big third component, which is somebody who knows the funding system on a multi-level concept because we... So I've done a little bit of research on this and I can't say that have any understanding or expertise. The clients that I represent, they have really just one and sometimes two funding sources and it's all, it's you know Medicaid and Medi-Cal.
Well we've got HUD and And it's a completely, so we can't just take a bucket and say here agency reimburses. There's a lot of the stuff that we're gonna be expected to do under the grant that actually has a funding source out there but we don't, the city doesn't have the wherewithal To understand, you know, so I talked to Bethany about this for a while. I mean, you know in the field that I come from there's always a person who can kind of guide you through what you need But I think the thought process here is putting it out with an RFP is the best way to start getting an understanding of what our operational costs
are.
But I'm I do have some concern that putting an RFP out that's in articulately Put together. I mean just like the reaction That Jane just had well, I don't want to having to do with property management. Let me jump in there so III think this this this person who can explain to us the funding services and And I, I think that there's a couple of like local cities who are further along in the process than we are. And I don't know if they'd be willing to share with us because I think that you know while I'm scared to death about how much per year this might cost us it's also possible that there's a funding source for a great extent of what we're going to have.
But it but we have to We have to apply for it in the right way if we ever want to be reimbursed. And if we apply for it in the wrong way, they're just going to say you don't qualify. So maybe that's part of this RFP and that we're looking for somebody to give us detailed expertise on how to fund these operations.
I mean, the word grant is several places in this and also the portion around assisting the residents and how they pay. So there's a couple of key pieces on that too.
That's why we reached out to the county on this because we know that there are other developments like this in the county and we wanted to see how these agreements were, these RFPs were put together and this was their advice. It's mostly it's not so much HUD money, it's more state
That's what I'm seeing, like on pages 193 and
194. And state money trickling through. And
for me it's reimbursement. And what are all the sources of reimbursement? How do we go about doing that effectively so that City taxpayers are carrying the least burden that we can achieve.
Well, when you said that it might not be the same person, it's hard for me to imagine somebody who's basically managing this property also writing grants and not pay for the expenses but it may be that that's another person?
I don't think really the
concept
is writing grants The concept is we're providing this service and And we qualify for whatever funding you're providing. And that's going to a combination, I think it's right that it's primarily the state and this is a state obligation area. And in some, and it's, I think we're also applying to the county. Yeah. Right. So you're eligible for funding that you're
not eligible for now?
Mm-hmm, right. We've we've
heard that a couple of times now And so Kimberly Albers is the person that I think if you want some type of explanation on how That works She's probably the best person to come in and provide that I can check on her availability and she can do that But again, she was the one who reviewed this RFP and said yep This is gonna get you something. This is gonna get people that are interested in it starts not people It's firms. How's it
gonna say? Go ahead. Can I can I I have a proposition After hearing what Jane said, I have some real concerns about leaving them out of the process. I would like to have a more thorough conversation about like what other options there are. I'm going to propose to put this on hold and
bring it back. Yeah. Do you mean other ways to configure this particular Yeah, offer or request. Right? There could be other ways to configure it for
instance. Yes. For instance having like maybe it is an option to have a property manager do the property and help of Ojai do all of the case management and the grants and the things that they're already doing.
That's fine.
I mean, I think what we're trying to- I'm going to drive the city manager crazy but...
Yeah, I'm actually trying
to...
What we're also trying to do is shield the city a little bit, and it would be nice to have a comprehensive contract for this facility where I don't have to manage three or four different
entities. That's part of
our challenge now.
I really hear you, and if an organization like Mindy Mansions could
do
that— And they're
very interested.
—I understand how that would be a benefit, but what I wouldn't want to do is for us to go in that direction and harm our partner to this point in the process.
So I, that was part of my confusing statement at the beginning which is you know my orientation and the work that I do is always find that person who really knows how the system works, who can then devise and recommend to us how we structure this. And then we start asking for the people who are going to fill those roles and actually try to find one who fills as many of the roles possible But I think there are going to be, there is going to be the potential that we're not going to be able to do it as effectively all through one contractor.
Yeah and you know I've heard amazing things about many mansions. I know they do great work so and other organizations like them. What caught me off guard tonight was just the fact that we wouldn't bring in our current partner to this process of navigating how we move forward with
this. Does she see a role for help of Ojai? And I kind of got this sense that you did, but not as doing what you do now. But certainly not managing property, but providing the services that you do now. Is that correct? Yeah please. You can just say because obviously We would go with the known, we would go with you guys.
And like that is not my intent and that's not what like why I came. Um, I think that because obviously like this is significant to us right? If another agency, you guys know Help of Ojai is the sole social services agency in our community full time right? Um, we have clients who have moved out of the area and they work in there in many mansion locations We work with lots of different permanent supportive housing programs, right?
But then we no longer have those clients. They're no longer our people. They move, they transition. So there's this bigger piece of philosophically what do we think is best for our community and our clients, right? Continuity of services is a huge part of that but We don't do permanent supportive housing, like this is not the work that we do in terms of the property management piece. But a lot of that has relied solely on the fact that like there's never been PSH and oh, that's never been a thing so this is new collectively as a community as well.
It will be very hard, I think for the population we work with to try to do a warm handoff in terms of the way they're supported. And then that also creates challenges for us because it is a significant duplication of service right if people are coming to us and they have another agency they're working with And that's just something we will navigate. That is not the worst thing ever, but I think there is bigger picture conversation and whoever... We partner really closely with Area Housing Authority. We have a MOU where we provide case management services to residents within their housing facilities here, but it's not permanent supportive housing, right? It's different in terms of the services we're offering.
We would love to be involved and I think that innately, whether we want to or not, we will be in terms of my advocacy. And I just My hope is that there is a really streamlined process than this of how it works. I'm not familiar with many agencies who do both the property management and the supportive services. That's a really narrow window of orgs in Ventura County, you'll see in the other programs that like Dignity Moves has built they of course are not the service provider and so they I think Naturally, are connecting with similar orgs again and again. And that to an extent makes sense right?
But yeah so like we want to be involved but I don't know what that looks like obviously for us just based off of what once this is up and running it looks like
Thank you.
Do you have the ability to help us figure it out? Figure out what this looks like, like if we're going to reconfigure.
Absolutely
because
I would love to do that and I think it would mostly from us probably come from a space of here's what anecdotally we know in terms of what PSH looks like how it works what would be great here right because that is our experience our experience is getting people into housing and observing sort of what happens after that, right? Whether it's with us directly or not. And I think that is stuff we can share with you guys. It's been my... You know, I've offered many times to talk to you guys about PSH so I'm happy to do that and talk about what this looks like because this is gonna be a really significant transition for a lot of the residents here. Many people who have not been housed in many, many years and what this will look like to keep them and retain them
4:16 – 4:2228 turns
Does it make sense to have an ad hoc that would work with Jane to try to figure this out, staff? I don't know how to move this forward because I understand that reconfiguring, rethinking, reenvisioning, learning all of this stuff can be time consuming and we need to move forward.
Or, or I'm not I'm opposed to that or an alternative it would be that Jane works directly with Ben and tailors this RFP in a way that involves
done.
No, I know. Knowing and helping crafting are slightly different.
I'm happy to join in the meetings or Rachel is happy to join in the meetings we don't really have.
And it'll come back to us anyway.
Yeah, we don' have much to offer other than you know being there. I mean, I don't have much to offer for understanding other than to be there and want to understand. Right? So I'm happy to be part of that. I'm also happy to let other members of the council who would want to be part of it to be part of it.
It's fine. I would actually suggest, I mean it's fine to...I think that you might also want to have the county involved in this? Mm-hmm. I would recommend, I mean Jane and Kimberly both I think would be helpful because, you know, Jane said it, I mean they don't do permanent supportive housing. Kimberly is very familiar with them. That'd be really good. Yeah, I mean... You know from what
I can tell there's a handful of agencies that are Wasn't exactly clear if they're public or quasi-public, but their existence is all about how to compose Permanent supportive housing Structures and I would I actually made an inquiry to one of them. I haven't heard back yet Just to say what what we're doing you guys Can you guys help us? Because I think that they're So if I think before we go out To bed, we do need to have a better understanding of what it is that we're doing. So I would say that we work on, and I'm happy to participate in it with it. We work on finding the person or group of people who can give us the clearest picture of a start point. And then we, I also think that what Ben said is very important, which is that the earlier we get that kind of structural component together and a potential contractor or contractors, the sooner they work with Dignity Moves as they're going through the construction.
And it all potentially there's areas where those things have to meld
Well, it seems like so team with the county and help with Ojai and a couple of. So why
not? How about this if you give us a comeback in September? OK, I can meet with Jane and Kimberly. We can go through this. We can provide a more more robust informational presentation that goes along with this. We can revisit components of this to better make sure that we're aligning with local providers where possible to the degree that they want to. It's going to be right.
We can do that. We come back
Do you object to a couple of council people?
I don't.
Yeah, seems like there's a request.
That's fine.
Yeah. Yeah.
Great. Do we want to just nominate?
Well, I saw you two gesture and then I heard Mr. Whitman gesture. So there's three. OK.
You know, I'm interested because I'm just interested in how it... Of course. I mean we're all interested but I'm interested in how the you know our local nonprofits can fit in here and then just getting a general picture of how this is actually going to find form.
And my only thought about being involved is because of my background not that I've done Financing of any of my facilities, but I certainly have I mean My clients have been sued saying that they maliciously Distorted the funding so I've had to learn something about their funding And so
I'm Yeah So we're saying that'll be Leslie
I think bringing the concern about funding and fiduciary concerns to this is really important. And I don't necessarily have that in that way.
Okay, thank you. Thanks for being flexible. Yeah. No, thank you. It's all good Do
we need
to
come
back? Um, I wouldn't we never mind a motion sure
go ahead We form an ad hoc committee with council members rule and Whitman To work with cities with the city attorney to revise the RFP with a group of experts and come back in September.
4:22 – 4:2717 turns
Okay,
well I think I think we collaborate with whoever We figure out yes. I don't even know that we know all the people we need To talk to
yeah, and we don't need a repeat of second Yeah,
that's great. No thank you appreciate that okay Thanks
Roll-call vote Passed 5–0
Show transcript
Can we try to knock out 11 real quick? I mean, as far as I'm concerned if you guys want to that's fine but if you want to call it at this point...
I think 11 is gonna be a longer discussion. Okay then let's
okay all right then okay Are we good with everything else for now?
I think so. If we need to have something special, like a meeting. You already have one on Tuesday, next Tuesday. Any council member reports?
Yeah. So I was the liaison to the Planning Commission meeting last week and they tackled two really complicated projects, one... And so I'm not going to say much because Both potentially coming to us. But they were, it was the largest group of people attending a city meeting that I've seen since the Becker stuff. I showed up and could not find a place to see anywhere in our former chambers.
And what I want to bring up on my report is that the Planning Commission did a fantastic job of Walking through the concerns of the business. I'm now talking about the project with roots and it's complicated because they're A business concern that potentially impacts residents because they've got lots of close residents. And I just really want to bring attention to the really hard work that they did and really a wide board commissioners all presenting ideas about how to make that project better.
And so I want to give my props to citizen committees, and it's a great process for us to have. It'll make it easier when it finally comes to us.
Well, similarly the Public Safety Commission met for their first time. They're basically going to move to the third generally the third Wednesday there's gonna be actually sorry the third Monday but they're having a special one on August 24th and they're taking the speed hump policy and trying to expand it a little to have a general And then the only other thing I was going to bring up is the water adjudication. If you look at the paper last time, it's posted there that's going in front of the judge so you can read it for yourself and see what's being proposed. It's a lot of pages but if you're interested go for it.
And there was a few of any more. There was a couple future items that we said in the course of our meeting, we had talked about the cultural monitors at least is talking about that. We talked about the review of the OVM contract or just this check-in and then we oh another thing that No, no. That's just to say it's on. Just I've just said that we had talked about that and then those were the two biggies in a
presentation from the explaining flocks and that other issue which
data collection by privacy. Yeah. OK.
Yeah, OK. I have one more marked mayor from our warrants discussion through council member rule coming back Clarification on the warrants report. Okay, all right Well
in the bringing back a report with more detail on legal spending.
Yeah Legal spending and the Trent Thank you for that.
Yes,
okay meeting adjourned