[13) a. Discussion and Direction to Staff regarding the Veteran Salute Banner Program, and Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines (CEQA); therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15378, no environmental review is required.]

MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS.

NEW BUSINESS. ITEM A 13 A DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE VETERANS SALUTE BANNER PROGRAM AND FIND THAT THIS ACTION IS NOT A PROJECT AS DEFINED UNDER THE CEQA STATE GUIDELINES.

THEREFORE, PURSUANT TO STATE GUIDELINES SECTION 15378, NO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED, MR. HURLBERT. YES, HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL MEMBER MARTINEZ PREVIOUSLY AND OTHER DISCUSSION WE HAVE HAD PREVIOUSLY ON THE VETERANS BANNER PROGRAM.

SO TONIGHT WE BRING YOU THAT THAT PROGRAM AND A COUPLE OF TALKING POINTS TO DISCUSS ABOUT DIRECTION FOR STAFF IN BRINGING FORWARD POLICY AND PERHAPS, DEPENDING ON THE DIRECTION OF THE DISCUSSION, A BUDGET FOR CONTINUING FORWARD WITH THE PROGRAM.

AS YOU MAY RECALL, THE PRICE FOR THE BANNERS, THE COST TO THE CITY WENT UP THIS YEAR FROM APPROXIMATELY $80 TO

[00:10:04]

$105. WE HAVE ABOUT HALF OF THE MOUNTING POLES AVAILABLE.

ANOTHER ANOTHER WAY TO PUT THAT IS ABOUT HALF OF THEM HAVE BEEN HAVE SPONSORED BANNERS IN THEM.

THE THE BANNERS THAT WE HAVE NOW ARE A COMBINATION OF FAMILY OR FRIEND FINANCED OR SPONSORED BY OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN, IN LIEU OF PAYMENT FROM THE FAMILY.

IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONS AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING, WE DID SOME RESEARCH.

THERE ARE A VERY WIDE RANGE OF OPTIONS AMONGST OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE A BANNER PROGRAM FROM IDENTICAL TO OURS TO FULLY FUNDED BY THE CITY AND EVERYWHERE IN BETWEEN.

ANOTHER ISSUE THAT CAME UP DURING STAFF DISCUSSION OF THIS WAS WE HAVEN'T QUITE GOTTEN TO THE END OF LIFE ON THE FIRST WAVES OF BANNERS THAT WE INSTITUTED.

SO THERE ARE SOME QUESTION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS AT THE END OF A BANNERS USEFUL LIFE WHEN IT BECOMES WEATHERED OR FADED.

AND HOW DO STAFF WANT TO HANDLE THAT SITUATION WITH THIS ORIGINAL SPONSORS, AND WHETHER THE BANNER SIMPLY PUT OUT OF SERVICE, OR WHETHER IT'S RETURNED TO THE FAMILY, OR WHETHER WE WANT TO PROVIDE A WAY FOR IT TO BE RENEWED AND CONTINUE ON.

SO TONIGHT, I THINK THE DISCUSSION I HAVE SOME BULLET POINTS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT THAT WE CAN USE AS A GUIDE.

SOME OF THESE ARE PRETTY SIMPLE QUESTIONS.

THE ANSWERS MAY NOT BE SIMPLE, BUT THE THE QUESTIONS ARE BINARY.

SO UNLESS THERE ARE SPECIFIC AREAS WE WANT TO DIVERGE FROM THIS, I'D LIKE TO JUST KIND OF WALK US THROUGH THIS AND THEN INVITE THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AMONGST THEMSELVES AND PROVIDE AT LEAST INITIAL GUIDANCE TO TO STAFF.

DOES THAT ALL MAKE SENSE? OKAY. SO REALLY THE FIRST QUESTION THAT WE HAVE THERE IS WE'D LIKE TO PROPOSE CREATING A FUND WITHIN OUR CITY BUDGET TO HOLD DONATIONS OR INTERIM HOLDING OF PAYMENTS FOR SPECIFIC BANNERS OR EVEN DONATIONS TOWARD FUTURE EXPENSES WITH THE PROGRAM.

AND SO THAT'S REALLY OUR FIRST ASK IF IF THE COUNCIL AGREES THAT A PLACEHOLDER SIMILAR TO DONATIONS WERE RECEIVING FOR OTHER DEPARTMENTS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE BANNER PROGRAM.

AND AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT VOTING ON ANYTHING TONIGHT.

JUST KIND OF LET ME KNOW.

AND THE REST OF STAFF, IF THAT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD IDEA, WE WILL INCLUDE THAT AS PART OF OUR PROPOSED PROCEDURE AND POLICY GOING FORWARD WHEN WE BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL.

SO YOU'RE ASKING BASICALLY IF WE SHOULD CREATE A PLACEHOLDER IN THE BUDGET? YES. AND I THINK THE CONSENSUS IN OUR STAFF DISCUSSION WAS IT PROBABLY A NEW LINE ITEM IN THE COUNCIL'S BUDGET, SIMILAR TO THE WATER SUBSIDY AND THE COMMUNITY EVENT FUND THAT IS AVAILABLE TO HELP COVER THE COSTS OF COMMUNITY WIDE EVENTS.

SO THIS WOULD BE A SIMILAR LINE ITEM THERE.

ANY THOUGHTS, GENTLEMEN? I HAVE A QUESTION.

SURE. SO IF THE CITY WERE TO FUND ALL OF THE BANNERS EVERY SINGLE BANNER THAT WOULD BE PUT UP.

HOW MANY BANNERS WOULD THERE BE AND HOW MUCH WOULD THAT BE BASED ON TODAY'S COST? RIGHT. BECAUSE IT WOULD CHANGE AS THE YEARS GO BY.

NO DOUBT. SURE. DO WE KNOW HOW MANY POSTS LIGHT POSTS WE HAVE? AND. YES.

AND HOW MANY BANNERS DOES EACH ONE TAKE JUST ONE BANNER? THAT'S HOW IT HAS BEEN CURRENTLY, YES.

BUT DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY WITH THE NEW POLES TO HAVE TWO BANNERS? WE COULD DOUBLE UP.

WE BELIEVE WE COULD DOUBLE UP WITH THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION.

THERE ARE 45.

PREVIOUSLY THERE WERE 45.

I THINK WE HAVE AT LEAST THAT MANY ONCE THE RENOVATION IS DONE ON SEVENTH STREET.

SO ONLY ABOUT HALF ARE OCCUPIED.

SO BUT THAT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS HERE IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT WHAT THE COSTS WOULD BE.

RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING.

BECAUSE WE COULD SAY, YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PROCEED.

BUT THERE IS A COST TO IT.

YES. AND AND IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT THE ENTIRE COST, NOT JUST 1 OR 2, BUT THE ENTIRE COST OF THE PROJECT.

RIGHT. AND SO DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT WOULD BE? SURE. IT WOULD BE FOR THE REMAINING UNUSED POSITIONS $105 TIMES 22, LET'S SAY

[00:15:03]

$2,500. OKAY.

IF THAT WAS IF THE CITY COVERED THE ENTIRE COST OF THE BANNERS, IF WE WANTED TO IMPLEMENT SOME SORT OF RENEWAL PROGRAM WHERE WE'RE GOING TO ESCROW MONEY AWAY, I WOULD THINK THE BANNERS OUR BEST ESTIMATE NOW IS AT LEAST A FIVE YEAR LIFESPAN FOR THEM.

SO ABOUT 20% OF THE BANNERS PER YEAR WOULD BE IN A ROTATION FOR REPLACEMENT.

OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BUMP UP AND DOWN, BUT ON AN AVERAGE, WE'D BE LOOKING AT $1,000 TO $1500 A YEAR, PROBABLY ONCE WE GOT INTO A 20% CYCLE.

RIGHT. AND WE STARTED THIS PROGRAM IN 2001.

SO THE OLDEST BANNERS THIS YEAR ARE FOUR YEARS OLD OR THREE YEARS OLD.

YES. AND AND THE ADOPTION HAS BEEN FITS AND STARTS.

IT HASN'T. YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY SOMEWHERE UP ON A SATURATION CURVE FOR HOW MANY ARE ULTIMATELY GOING TO BE INSTALLED.

IN MY VIEW, IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL IF WE COULD DOUBLE UP AND THAT EVERY POLE WOULD HAVE A BANNER.

IF THERE ARE, IN FACT, THAT MANY VETERANS TO BE REPRESENTED HERE IN TOWN, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

BUT WE HAVE THAT OPTION OF DOUBLING UP, I BELIEVE.

SO ABOUT $5,000 I'D MAX TODAY'S COST.

TODAY'S COST WITH THE TODAY'S NUMBERS.

YES. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WITHIN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, THE VERY FIRST ONES LIKELY WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED.

AND REALLY, THE GUIDANCE WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN CRAFTING A DRAFT POLICY OR PROCEDURE HERE IS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A FEW DECISIONS TO BE MADE THERE.

DO WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL REQUESTER OF THE BANNER AND ASK THEM IF THEY'D LIKE TO REPLACE IT? OR DOES IT AUTOMATICALLY GET REPLACED OUT OF A CITY FUNDS OR SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN? OR THE CONCEPT WE HAD WAS FOR FOLKS WHERE THE COST IS A BARRIER.

THEN THERE WOULD BE SOME MECHANISM TO HOLD FUNDS, AND WHEN APPLYING THE FOLKS WHERE FINANCES ARE A BARRIER, THEY COULD ASK FOR FULL OR PARTIAL SUBSIDY OF THE COST OUT OF THAT FUND.

SO THOSE THAT JUST WANTED TO SIMPLY MAKE A CASH DONATION, NOT FOR A PARTICULAR VETERAN, BUT JUST TO THE CONCEPT, THEY THEY COULD DO THAT AND THE MONEY WOULD BE HELD IN ESCROW UNTIL IT WAS NEEDED.

IN FACT I THINK THAT IS A GREAT IDEA BECAUSE I KNOW OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO PUT MONEY INTO THIS EFFORT, I IMAGINE. SO I CAN THINK OF THE ROTARY CLUB AND I WILL SPEAK TO THIS ON MY PERSONAL COMMENTS, BUT THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS I PROPOSED TO THEM THAT WE ASSIGN SOME MONEY TO THIS EFFORT, AND WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED IT, AND WE ARE PURCHASING FIVE BANNERS, AND I'M WORKING ON ON WHO WILL BE HELPED BY THIS EFFORT.

SO I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE AS WELL.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO BEAR THE ENTIRE COST FOR, RIGHT? OKAY, SO ON THE QUESTION OF SHOULD WE ESTABLISH AN ONGOING FUND? I WOULD SAY YES. OKAY.

SO I'M HEARING YES, THAT WE NEED A PLACE TO HOLD FUNDS REGARDLESS.

SO WE'LL TAKE THAT AS A YES.

AND THAT WOULD BE ONE OF OUR BUILDING BLOCKS HERE.

THE OTHER FAIRLY SIMPLE QUESTION THAT FOLLOWS IS ON THE REQUEST FORM ITSELF.

SHALL SHALL WE CONSIDER ADDING A CHECK BOX THAT SAYS I'M REQUESTING SCHOLARSHIP OR SUPPORT OR PARTIAL SUBSIDY OF THE COST FOR THIS BANNER THAT I'M REQUESTING.

AND THEN WHAT FOLLOWS IS THE MORE COMPLICATED PART IS WHO'S GOING TO REVIEW THOSE REQUESTS AND DECIDE IF IT'S VALID AND AND ACCEPT OR REJECT IT.

AND THAT COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS LIKE WE DO WITH OTHER REQUESTS FOR ENCROACHMENT COSTS AND WHATNOT, WHERE THE CITY MANAGER HAS AUTHORITY TO WAIVE. OR WE COULD MAKE IT AS COMPLICATED AS A NEW STANDING COMMITTEE THAT WOULD NEED TO MEET AND CONSIDER THESE ON SOME SORT OF BASIS.

THE THING THAT I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO AVOID, I DON'T WANT THEM TO HAVE TO SUBMIT INCOME PROOF OR ANYTHING LIKE, NO, YOU KNOW, AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED IT.

I JUST THINK OR I MEAN, I GUESS IF WE REQUESTED IT'S AN AUTO APPROVAL TYPE THING, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE A, LIKE A HONOR SYSTEM TYPE DEAL, LIKE THERE'S PEOPLE WHO WILL BE MORE THAN WILLING TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN, BUT A LOT OF THEM WILL BE HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, HUMBLE ENOUGH TO JUST CHECK THE BOX IF THEY NEED THAT.

[00:20:06]

YEAH. AND THAT'S GREAT.

YEAH. IT SEEMS REASONABLE TO ME BECAUSE WE ARE DEALING WITH IF THEY'RE STILL ALIVE, WE'RE DEALING MOSTLY WITH HONORABLE MEN AND WOMEN THAT HAVE SERVED IN THE MILITARY. SO I AGREE THAT WE DON'T NEED A COMPLICATED PROCESS TO DECIDE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THEY GET A SPONSORSHIP OR NOT.

NOW, THERE IS ALREADY A LINE ON THE APPLICATION THAT ALLOWS SPONSORS YES, TO PAY FOR THE THE BANNER.

YEP. SO THIS ONE WOULD BE FOR THE PERSON ACTUALLY REQUESTING ONE.

THAT IS NOT CORRECT.

THAT'S THAT'S NOT CURRENTLY ON THE FORM.

SO OKAY.

WELL I'M HEARING YES THERE.

YES. GOT IT. OKAY.

SO SHOULD THE CITY CONTRIBUTE TO THAT FUND FROM GENERAL FUNDS THROUGH THE AS I PROPOSED THROUGH THE COUNCIL'S BUDGET EITHER JUST UP FRONT TO SEED THIS OR ON A RECURRING BASIS, AND WHAT IS A REASONABLE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS IN THIS REGARD? I WILL JUST THROW IT OUT THERE.

I THINK AT ONE TIME, SEED FUND MIGHT BE GOOD.

AND THEN IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE THE PROGRAM SHOULD THERE NEED BE A NEED FOR MORE FUNDING.

ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S ALREADY COMMUNITY ACTORS WHO WANT TO CONTRIBUTE, THAT MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE.

I AGREE, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

SCOTT DO YOU KNOW IF OTHER CITIES CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PROGRAM WITHIN THEIR BUDGET? YES, SOME COVER IT COMPLETELY.

NO COST TO THE VETERANS.

I'VE EXPRESSED THIS BEFORE.

IT SEEMS LUDICROUS THAT WE WANT TO HONOR THIS INDIVIDUALS.

AND WE'RE SAYING, WELL, COME UP WITH THE MONEY TO PAY FOR THE BANNER.

AND SO I AM IN FAVOR OF ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, STARTING THE SEED MONEY AND THEN USE IT AS IT IS NEEDED.

WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE MAY BE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WILL ALSO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS FUND.

SURE. WELL AND AND SO THE CITY'S COMMITMENT CAN BE AT ANY LEVEL.

IT CAN BE FROM NO NO GENERAL FUNDS TO FULL COVERAGE OF THE ENTIRE COST WITHOUT EVEN EXPECTATION OF OUTSIDE DONATIONS OR CONTRIBUTIONS.

SO WE COULD START WITH SOME SORT OF FIXED AMOUNT ON A ON AN ANNUAL BASIS THAT JUST IS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET OR WHATEVER THE COUNCIL'S PLEASURE IS.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, IS THAT WE SPONSOR A, YOU KNOW, A SET NUMBER, LET'S SAY 10 A YEAR.

AND THEY WOULD GET CHOSEN BY THE OLDEST YEARS OF ACTIVE SERVICE.

THAT WAY WE HAVE AT LEAST A SYSTEM FOR WHO WE PICK.

IF WE HAVE 11 APPLICANTS, THE OLDEST SERVICE MEMBERS GET THEM FIRST, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THEM BEFORE THEY PASS.

YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOME OLDER FOLKS THAT AREN'T WITH US ANYMORE.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

WHETHER IT'S 10, 15, WHATEVER WE DO 10 WOULD COST, WHAT ABOUT $1,500 BUCKS? [INAUDIBLE] BUCKS SOMETHING.

SOMETHING. YEAH. AND I THINK THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DENT TO THE CITY.

WE'RE NOT GOING BROKE OFF OF IT.

YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU BUT AGAIN, I DO WANT TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS, OF COURSE, PARTICIPATE IN BECAUSE THEY WILL DO IT.

AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO TO DO THAT AS WELL.

RIGHT. AND IT WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF CITY FUNDING AND SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS FUNDING.

WELL, IF WE BUILD IT, THEN THEY WILL COME IS THE CONCEPT, I THINK I THINK THAT'S THAT'S PART OF THE, THE THOUGHT.

AND WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO SPEND THIS CITY FUNDS IF THERE WERE ENOUGH OUTSIDE DONATIONS TO COVER THAT PARTICULAR YEAR.

SHOULD WE NEED TO FILL THE GAP, IT'S NOT A BIG PROBLEM.

YES, BECAUSE NO ONE'S OPPOSING IT, I DON'T THINK.

GREAT. OKAY.

SO THEN THAT THAT BRINGS UP THE NEXT KIND OF CATEGORY IS WHEN BANNERS DO AGE OUT, AND WE STILL DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW LONG THAT WILL BE.

BUT IF I'M IF I'M CORRECT IN GUESSING FIVE YEARS OR SO, THEN WE WOULD FALL INTO A CYCLE O NCE THEY'RE ALL TAKEN, YOU MAY HAVE ONE DROP OFF AND NEW ONES COME ON FROM TIME TO TIME.

BUT LET'S SAY WE USE ALL 45 SLOTS AND WE DOUBLE THEM UP AND WE'VE GOT 90 BANNERS OUT THERE.

SO THAT'S WITH RISING PRICES.

I'M GOING TO ROUND THAT UP TO $10,000 TOTAL INVESTMENT ON THE POLES, 20% OF THAT PER YEAR IS A COUPLE THOUSAND DOLLARS TO, TO MAINTAIN THE ONES THAT ARE AGING OUT.

[00:25:02]

SO THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER DISCUSSION.

AND WE'VE GOT SOME TIME BEFORE WE REALLY HAVE TO MAKE THAT FIRM DECISION.

I THINK THAT SINCE ALREADY AN INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE ON THOSE INITIAL BANNERS, I AM REALLY FOR THE CITY REPLACING OR NOT REPLACING THEM, BUT RENEWING THEM BUY NEW ONES IS WHAT I WANT TO SAY.

SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO BE DISPLAYED.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE IN MY OPINION, THE BEST APPROACH.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A VERY MINIMAL AMOUNT OF THE TOTAL.

AND YOU KNOW, TO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE INITIAL SPONSOR OF THE, OF THE BANNER MIGHT NOT BE THE BEST IDEA. I MEAN, I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE FOR THE ONES THAT HAVE ALREADY HAVE BANNERS, BUT FOR THE NEW ONES THAT AREN'T GOING TO BE PAYING AS MUCH OR MAY BE GETTING SPONSORED IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER PERHAPS A SMALL LIKE RENEWAL COMMITMENT OR ON THAT FIFTH YEAR, OPT IN TO TO RENEW, BUT THEN A SMALL CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS THAT COST TO [INAUDIBLE].

SURE. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO KEEP DOING IT WHETHER YOU WANT TO OR NOT, BUT LIKE IF YOU REALLY WANT US TO DO IT, THERE'S THAT SMALL LIKE COMMITMENT ON THEIR SIDE TO NOT A BARRIER BUT A YEAH, KIND OF BUT REALLY, REALLY I MEAN, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU, BUT HOW MUCH IS THAT REALLY GOING TO I MEAN, LET'S SAY WE CHARGE $20 A PIECE. IT'S LIKE $200 OF CITY'S BUDGET.

IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO TAKE MORE IN ACCOUNTING TIME, RIGHT? WE'D SPEND MORE MONEY ACCOUNTING IT THAN I DON'T EVEN WANT TO LOOK AT MY FINANCE DIRECTOR ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

JUST THE FACT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE HUNTING PEOPLE TO ASK THEM ABOUT THIS QUESTION.

SO IT WILL TAKE SOME STAFF TIME TO DO THAT.

SO, BUT ON THE APPLICATION, DON'T YOU COLLECT INFORMATION LIKE FROM SOMEBODY WHO'S GOING TO BE AROUND.

YEAH. YOU COLLECT YOU COLLECT INFORMATION.

IF IT IS A SPONSOR YOU COLLECT INFORMATION FROM THE SPONSOR.

IF IT IS THE THE VETERAN WHO IS ACTUALLY PUTTING THE MONEY UP, INFORMATION WILL BE ON THE FORM AS WELL.

AS SOMEBODY MOVES, CHANGES PHONE NUMBERS.

WHAT EFFORT ARE WE GOING TO MAKE TO ACTUALLY TRACK THEM DOWN? BECAUSE I WOULDN'T THINK TO UPDATE MY CITY BANNER PROGRAM PROFILE, YOU KNOW, WOULDN'T BE SOMETHING I WOULD THINK OF WHEN I MOVE.

SURE. WELL, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT LEAST AN ATTEMPTED CONTACT WHEN RENEWAL MAKES SENSE TO FIND OUT THERE MAY BE SOME REASON WE CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD NOT WANT THE BANNER TO BE RENEWED AND STAY IN THE PROGRAM, JUST LIKE THEY COULD DECIDE IN YEAR THREE.

YEAH, I DON'T WANT IT UP IN THERE ANYMORE.

SO I THINK THAT THAT CONTACT AND WE CAN DECIDE EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT CONTACT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A LEANING TOWARD THE CITY, PICKING UP THE THE BURDEN OF RENEWAL.

WORST CASE FOR FOR EVERY BANNER.

AND PERHAPS IF THERE WERE DONATIONS FOR THAT PURPOSE, THAT COULD BE SPECIFIED WHEN PEOPLE DONATE, I WANT TO BE PART OF THE ENDOWMENT FOR KEEPING THEM GOING FOREVER.

NOT NOT A PARTICULAR NEW BANNER, BUT A BUT A MAINTENANCE DONATION.

SO THAT WOULDN'T BE TOO COMPLICATED TO KEEP TRACK OF IN OUR ACCOUNT.

YOU COULD ADD A BOX ON THE, ON THE ON THE APPLICATION FORM THAT SAYS, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW PAY FOR PART OF THE COST OF A RENEWAL? SURE. SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

AND THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, THOSE PEOPLE ARE ALREADY COMMITTED TO IT.

AND THOSE WHO MAY NOT BE JUST TAG EVERYBODY WITH AN AUTO PAY.

THERE YOU GO. I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR.

I WAS JOKING ABOUT MY ALL MY AUTO PAYMENTS, YOU KNOW, FOR EVERYTHING WHERE THEY JUST AUTOMATICALLY DEDUCT ME FIVE YEARS LATER.

THAT'S TRUE. WHAT'S YOUR VENMO NUMBER? OKAY. SO SO WHAT I'M HEARING THERE IS IF YOU AGREE WITH ME, THEN IS WE WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO MAKE CONTACT WHEN IT'S TIME FOR RENEWAL, OFFER AN OPTION BOTH ON THE FRONT END AND PERHAPS ON THE RESPONSE TO THE RENEWAL NOTIFICATION THAT SAYS, YEAH, I'M INTERESTED IN RE-UPPING.

YOU KNOW, CHECK THIS BOX IF YOU'D LIKE TO COVER THE COST OR IF YOU'D LIKE THE CITY TO DO IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, VERY SIMILAR TO THE WORDING ON THE INITIAL APPLICATION.

AND I THINK YOU HAD MENTIONED IN YOUR INTRODUCTION ABOUT WHAT WE DO AFTER WHEN THE BANNERS ARE REPLACED.

PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM RETURN TO THE FAMILY IF POSSIBLE.

I AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT INCURRING ANY SHIPPING COSTS OR YOU KNOW, THEY GOT TO PAY SHIPPING COST IF NEED BE.

BUT YOU KNOW I THINK THAT WAS OUR CONSENSUS WAS THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE PLACE TO GO THAT.

THEY DON'T DO ANYBODY ANY GOOD IN A BOX WITH THE CITY WATCHING OVER THE BOX, SO.

RIGHT. THE FAMILY CAN DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH THEM.

TOTALLY AGREE. OKAY.

THEN LAST ITEM HERE GENERALLY WAS THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT CITY EMPLOYEES THAT'S COME UP A YEAR AGO.

WE'RE GOING TO ADD 2 OR 3 MORE CITY EMPLOYEES WHO ARE VETERANS WITH OUR STARTING UP OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.

[00:30:04]

SO THERE THIS IS A KIND OF A COMPOUND QUESTION.

A DO WE THINK THAT THE CITY WANTS TO COVER THE COST SPECIFICALLY FOR CITY EMPLOYEES WHO ARE VETERANS? AND THEN, IF SO, DOES THIS ELIGIBILITY START THE DAY WE HIRE THEM? AND THE NEXT ROUND OF BANNERS, THEY THEY GO IN THERE.

DO THEY HAVE TO BE THERE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF YEARS OF SERVICE OR TIME? AND THEN THE THIRD THAT WASN'T ACTUALLY PUT INTO THE PRINT THERE IS THE CURRENT PROGRAM REQUIRES THAT AT SOME POINT THE BANNER HONOREE LIVED HERE IN, IN WASCO.

AND DOES THAT RULE EXTEND TO OUR CITY EMPLOYEES OR DOES THEIR SERVICE WITH THE CITY WAIVE THAT REQUIREMENT? SO DISCUSS THREE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

I WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT YOU SAID, BECAUSE I THINK THE FORM REQUIRES THAT ORIGINALLY IT REQUIRED THAT THE PERSON BE FROM WASCO NOT NECESSARILY LIVE IN WASCO, BECAUSE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE HAVE BEEN, HAVE LIVED HERE AT SOME POINT.

RIGHT. IS WHAT I, WHAT I SAID RIGHT, RIGHT. SO AND THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE TRUE OF EMPLOYEES.

THEY MAY WORK HERE, RIGHT, FOR WHATEVER SHORT TIME, LONG TIME, BUT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT LIVE HERE OR HAVE EVER LIVED HERE.

I'LL I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I THINK.

I THINK WE SHOULD DISREGARD THE FACT WHETHER THEY'RE EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY AND IF THEY QUALIFY FOR THE PROGRAM, WE SHOULD JUST APPLY ALL OF THE RULES THAT WE HAVE APPLIED TO EVERYBODY ELSE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO THE ANSWER WOULD BE NO, DON'T DON'T DON'T WAIVE THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT OR THE HAVING LIVED IN WASCO, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THIS EMPLOYEES THAT YOU SPEAK OF OKAY.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY, HOW MANY WE HAVE.

DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA HOW MANY WE HAVE? WE THINK 5 OR 6 OR THE POLICE ARE GOING TO HAVE A LOT MORE BECAUSE, WELL, A GREAT EXAMPLE IS OUR CHIEF.

CHIEF IS A VETERAN, HAS NEVER LIVED IN WASCO, BUT HE IS AN EMPLOYEE, RIGHT.

WOULD HE BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM OR NOT, BASED ON THE FACT THAT HE HADN'T EVER LIVED HERE.

OR FOR EMPLOYEES SPECIFICALLY DO WE WAIVE THAT REQUIREMENT THAT APPLIES TO THE REST OF THE PROGRAM? I WOULD BE FOR THAT.

I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO SEE THE CHIEF HAVE A BANNER DOWNTOWN WASCO.

AND OF COURSE, I'M BEING HONEST, YOU KNOW.

SURE. I THINK HE THE FACT THAT HE HAS DONE SUCH A WONDERFUL JOB FOR OUR CITY AND THE FACT THAT HE'S A VETERAN, THAT ALONE.

BUT BUT IT WOULDN'T JUST BE THE CHIEF AT THIS POINT.

AND I DON'T MEAN JUST THE CHIEF.

I MEAN THAT APPLYING THAT RULE THAT YOU JUST SPOKE OF.

OKAY. THAT, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AN INSURMOUNTABLE AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEES THAT IT'S GOING TO FILL UP BOTH SIDES OF THOSE LIGHT BULBS.

WE COULD BE SO LUCKY.

YEAH, EXACTLY, EXACTLY.

SO THAT'S MY THOUGHT ON THAT.

AND I BRING IT UP NOT TO POKE AT ANYTHING.

I JUST TRY TO THAT'S MY JOB, YOU KNOW, IS TO ANTICIPATE POTENTIAL.

I THINK THE FACT THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE WORKING FOR THE CITY.

I'M FINE WITH WAIVING THE THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT.

RIGHT. SO SERVING OUR COUNTRY IS MORE THAN ENOUGH.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE TERM RESIDENCY DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE CURRENTLY LIVING.

YEAH. YEAH, THAT THEY LIVED HERE AT SOME POINT, GREW UP HERE, LIVED HERE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

AND OKAY, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE THAT HAVE NEVER MOVED TO THE BIG CITY.

YOU KNOW, HAVING THEM. I ALSO DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A CONTINUOUS EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENT.

IT'S A NOMINAL COST. IF SOMEBODY ENDS UP QUITTING AFTER SIX MONTHS, HOW OFTEN DOES THAT ACTUALLY HAPPEN? IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO WORK, RIGHT? YEP. SO EVERYBODY STAYS FOREVER.

YEP. SO I MEAN, IF WE HAVE TO EAT $100 BUCKS BECAUSE SOMEBODY LEAVES AFTER A COUPLE OF MONTHS ONE TIME, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD.

AND I THINK IT'S A IT'S AN APPRECIATION THING FOR OUR EMPLOYEES AS WELL TO RECOGNIZE THEM AND THEIR SERVICE TO THE COUNTRY.

SO OKAY, THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS.

THEY SAID IT ALL. I JUST COUNCILMAN MARTINEZ I DID NOT HEAR YOUR COMMENTS, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I SO I AGREED WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID.

I JUST ADDED THAT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A CONTINUOUS EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENT IF WE HAVE TO EAT THE COST ON A BANNER BECAUSE SOMEBODY ENDS UP LEAVING AFTER A FEW MONTHS, WHICH IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

WE'RE ONLY AT $100 BUCKS.

YEAH, NO, I GET IT.

YEAH, I'M WITH YOU.

OKAY. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU GOT YOUR DIRECTION FROM CITY MANAGER.

DID I GET ENOUGH THERE TO HELP US PUT A POLICY TOGETHER? OKAY. I THINK SO.

ONE, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THIS FOR THIS ROUND OF BANNERS.

NO. WHICH IS WHICH ENDS APRIL 30TH.

RIGHT? IT'LL BE AFTER THAT, FOR THE NEXT ROUND.

[00:35:01]

WE MAY TRY TO SLIP THE EMPLOYEES IN.

OKAY, ON THIS ROUND, BUT, NO, WE WON'T HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THIS PROCESS.

AND WE'LL DO A BETTER JOB OF DOCUMENTING IT ON OUR WEBSITE.

ONCE WE DO, WE'LL BRING THIS BACK TO YOU, GET AN ACTUAL POLICY, VOTE ON WHAT WE COME UP WITH, AND THEN WE'LL ROLL THAT OUT FOR FOR NEXT SEASON.

OKAY. OKAY.

SOUNDS LIKE A VERY GOOD PLAN. I APPRECIATE YOU SLOGGING THROUGH THAT WITH ME.

SLOGGING IS WHAT WE DO NOW.

[13) b. Review and Approval of Mural Concept for the East Wall of the Building located at 1140 7th Street and Find that this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines (CEQA); therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15301, no environmental review is required.]

LET'S MOVE ON THEN TO ITEM TWO.

WHERE ARE WE? NEW BUSINESS B 13 B REVIEW AND APPROVAL.

EXCUSE ME. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MURAL CONCEPT FOR THE EAST WALL OF THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 1140 7TH STREET, AND FIND THAT THIS ACTION IS EXEMPT FROM THE FROM THE CALIFORNIA [INAUDIBLE].

FROM THE CEQA STATE GUIDELINES.

THEREFORE, PURSUANT TO STATE GUIDELINES, SECTIONS 15301, NO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED, MR. HURLBERT, I WILL DEFER TO MISS COBB WHO IS PREPARED TO PRESENT.

YES. HONORABLE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THE CITY OF WASCO ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT ALL MURAL PROPOSALS BE APPROVED OR THE CONCEPTS BE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO TONIGHT BEFORE YOU IS A CONCEPT PROPOSAL FOR A MURAL ON 1140 THE THE EAST WALL OF 1140 7TH STREET FOR YOUR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION. DO ME A FAVOR.

WHERE? WHERE WHAT IS THIS? THAT'S. THIS WOULD BE TELOS BUILDING.

YEAH, YEAH. AND HE WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE TONIGHT, BUT CERTAINLY.

YEAH. YEAH.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HE WANTED TO DO AS PART OF THE UPGRADE TO HIS TO HIS BUILDING, SO.

BUT IT'S BEAUTIFUL, FOLKS.

DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? LET'S SEE ONE MORE.

LITTLE FURTHER DOWN. THERE'S ONE MORE DOWN.

THERE YOU GO. YEAH, YEAH, THAT'S PROBABLY THE INITIAL CONCEPT, RIGHT.

I'M FOR IT. I THEY ALREADY STARTED IT.

YEAH. YES, THEY THEY HAVE I WAS EXCITED.

BEFORE WE BEGIN, LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

THAT'S OKAY. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE MEMBER COMMENTS FROM THE MEMBERS.

MEMBER REYNA. NO, THAT'S OKAY MAYOR.

THANK YOU. NO, I WAS GOING TO SAY HE TALKED ABOUT IT WHEN HE WAS REFURBISHING THAT BUILDING, WHICH HE DID A WONDERFUL JOB WITH, THAT HE WAS GOING TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO TO THE HIGH SCHOOL ART CLASS.

KERI I THINK YOU WERE THERE ALSO DURING THE PRODUCTION.

YES. AND NO DOUBT YOU TOLD HIM.

YOU KNOW, THAT SOUNDS GREAT.

YEAH. NOW WE NEED TO GO TO THE APPROVAL PROCESS.

I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL CONCEPT.

AND AS I SAID, THEY PROBABLY ALREADY AT LEAST ONE QUARTER OF THE WAY IN.

AND SO I SAY, YES, LET'S GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT.

IT'S A WONDERFUL MURAL.

YEAH. MEMBER MARTINEZ LOOKS GREAT TO ME.

MEMBER MEDINA YEAH, I'M GOOD WITH IT.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.

IT'S BEAUTIFUL. LET'S LET'S HAVE BUTTERFLIES EVERYWHERE.

AND THEN MORE BUSINESSES VOLUNTEERING THEIR WALLS.

YEAH. MONARCH BUTTERFLIES OF ALL TYPES.

ABSOLUTELY. ALL OVER DOWNTOWN.

GREAT. SO THEN I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL TO APPROVE.

OH, I'LL SECOND IT.

IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND THEN SECONDED BY MEMBER REYNA.

MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE BY ROLE.

SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER REYNA TO APPROVE THE MURAL CONCEPT.

MOTION IS APPROVED WITH FOUR AYES, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER SALDANA ABSENT.

THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK.

[13) c. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager or designee to finalize and execute a Tow Service Agreement consistent with the California Highway Patrol Tow Service Agreement Model establishing a tow rotation with approved tow service providers, and Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines (CEQA); therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15378, no environmental review is required.]

MOVING ON TO ITEM 13 C ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE TO FINALIZE AND EXECUTE A TOW SERVICE AGREEMENT CONSISTENT WITH CHP CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL TOW SERVICE AGREEMENT MODEL, ESTABLISHING A TOW ROTATION WITH APPROVED TOW SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND FIND THAT THIS ACTION IS NOT A PROJECT AS DEFINED UNDER CEQA STATE GUIDELINES.

THEREFORE, PURSUANT TO STATE GUIDELINES SECTION 15378, NO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED, MR. HURLBERT. YES, HONORABLE MAYOR.

MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

YOU MAY RECALL NOT FAR INTO OUR PD START UP, WE HAD THE DISCUSSION ABOUT TOWING AND AND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO HAVE A GOOD POLICY AND, AND VENDOR SELECTION PROCESS IN PLACE.

SO FORTUNATELY, WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE CONTACT WITH SEVERAL OTHER CITIES AND FOUND VERY QUICKLY THAT THEY HAD ADOPTED THIS CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL POLICY PER VERBATIM AND IN MOST CASES, AND USING THAT SELECTION, IT WAS VERY CLOSE TO WHAT THE CHIEF AND I

[00:40:01]

HAD ANTICIPATED WAS A SYSTEMATIC ROTATION WITH A FIXED FEE SCHEDULE.

SO THERE ISN'T ANY QUESTION ABOUT ONE TOWING COMPANIES CHEAPER THAN THE OTHER, OR THEY'RE GETTING PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.

SO THERE'S A MECHANISM DEFINED IN THE CHP POLICY FOR THE REQUIREMENTS ON THE TOW COMPANY, HOW THEY'RE SELECTED ON A CALL BY CALL BASIS, WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY AREN'T AVAILABLE IN THE ROTATION? ALL OF THAT'S BEEN FIGURED OUT AND REFINED OVER, I'M SURE, MANY REVISIONS OF THE CHP POLICY.

WE HAVE WHAT WE BELIEVE IS NEARLY A FINAL DRAFT THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT OF THAT AGREEMENT.

WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TONIGHT IS AUTHORITY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY FINAL TWEAKS I'LL CALL THEM WITH THE WORDING TO MAKE SURE IT'S FITS WITH WASCO DESIRES.

MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY DOESN'T HAVE ANY HEARTBURN WITH IT AND MOVE FORWARD WITH EXECUTION.