<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Los Gatos — City Meetings</title>
    <link>https://transparentcities.org/los-gatos/transcripts</link>
    <description>Summaries and topics from Los Gatos's city council and committee meetings, sourced from the city's official YouTube channel.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <atom:link href="https://transparentcities.org/los-gatos/transcripts/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Town Council Meeting / August 4, 2026 / 7:00 PM</title>
      <link>https://transparentcities.org/los-gatos/transcripts/TPHoMyaFat4</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://transparentcities.org/los-gatos/transcripts/TPHoMyaFat4</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2026 18:20:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>The Town Council meeting included a presentation from Friends of the Los Gatos Library, which donated $75,000 to the library. The council approved the consent calendar, adopted the 2026 weed abatement program assessment, and continued an ADU ordinance update to October to allow the town attorney to respond to a Housing Defense Fund letter. Public comment centered heavily on beach/cut-through traffic gridlock affecting downtown businesses. The council also introduced an omnibus code cleanup ordinance and directed staff to draft an ordinance allowing electronic pet containment fences in hillside areas, and began reviewing supplemental sustaining grant funding and Cassie&apos;s grant eligibility.</description>
      <category>Friends of the Library donation</category>
      <category>Skipped Silicon Valley Clean Energy presentation</category>
      <category>Consent calendar and public comments</category>
      <category>VTA youth Clipper cards</category>
      <category>Holiday event traffic control contract</category>
      <category>Beach/cut-through traffic gridlock</category>
      <category>Homeless encampments and creek liability</category>
      <category>Resident driveway and tree repair</category>
      <category>Weed abatement program assessment</category>
      <category>ADU ordinance update</category>
      <category>Omnibus code cleanup ordinance</category>
      <category>Electronic pet containment fences</category>
      <category>Supplemental sustaining grant funding</category>
      <category>Cassie counseling grant eligibility</category>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Speaker 1:
Skip the second one. Unfortunately, Elaine, who is going to be recognized by Silicon Valley Clean Energy, is sick today. Um and so hopefully she'll come back, but we do have a very, very exciting presentation from the Friends of the Los Gatos Library. So please come on up, Friends of the Los Gatos Library. As you can see the Los Gatos Library has many friends.

Speaker 2:
[laughter]

Speaker 3:
So before the big reveal or or or during the big reveal I'll just say a little bit about the Friends of the Los Gatos Library. So for those that don't know Los Gatos is very very fortunate and a little bit unique in that we have a foundation that supports our library. They create and fund many of the programs that you all know and love from our library. We're very very fortunate for that and each year they donate tens of thousands of dollars to the library. Which we are so incredibly grateful for. They run one of Los Gatos's three bookstores. They have a used bookstore just above us or or just adjacent to above us. And I'll just tell you a little bit about the Friends. So they put in over 5,000 hours of volunteering between all of them which I think is is incredible. Yes, that deserves a round of applause. Absolutely.

Speaker 4:
[applause]

Speaker 5:
They have 96 volunteers and are always welcoming more volunteers. I highly recommend the Friends of the Los Gatos Library as a way to get involved in the community and give back. They from my understanding are relatively flexible and you can come in you know at your pace and you can staff the bookstore and and do other things and they fund over 700 they fund exactly 764 programs at the library in just this last year. If you divide that by 365 that's about two programs a day. So thank you very much for that. And they raise money through sales of their second hand bookstore, used book sales through Amazon, they receive direct donations and produce fundraising events in cooperation with town of Los Gatos businesses and I will not steal their thunder. So, would you like to announce how much money you'll be donating to the Los Gatos library this year?

Speaker 6:
Yes, this year it's my pleasure as current president of the Friends of the Los Gatos library to give this check for $75,000 to Ryan Baker. It's 5,000 more than last year and we hope it'll be 5,000 more next year. Anyway, thank you for donating those used books. We really appreciate it and thanks for buying used books and attending our fundraisers. I know a lot of you do attend and we really appreciate it. Also, become a member. Go to our website. We have a new website as of January. Friends of Los Gatos library, you can just Google it.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much. Here. Do we want to all get in the picture?

Speaker 2:
Yes, everybody.

Speaker 3:
[applause]

Speaker 4:
We might need a few folks on that sign. Thank you and and truly all of that could not be possible without the Friends of the Los Gatos library. So, if you participate in our library, if you go to any of your programs or any of your kids did, please consider supporting the Friends. Thank you all very much for being here this evening. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
[applause]

Speaker 6:
Okay, so as I shared we'll be skipping our second presentation this evening and hopefully Elaine will be able to join us at another meeting. Which brings us to the consent items. Um, consent items are genuinely considered routine um and non-controversial and may be approved in one uh motion. And so, before I move to public comments on consent, um does any member of the council wish to pull an item from the consent calendar? Okay, seeing none, I will move to Gus Who, who has a comment. You will have 3 minutes.

Speaker 1:
Gus Who. Uh Okay, I sent in uh a couple uh uh emails. I'm not a public speaker, but uh you know, uh is they're in the uh supplemental, two of them, but um for the record, um one doesn't even have video and or audio and it says it says member of the public and it says you know, you you can't even know I don't know what was said. Nobody knows what it was said because there's no record of it. Um and then uh one, let's see, uh I'm doing three, four, uh five, seven. Uh let's see. Uh um amendment to services, there's transparency uh transparency needed. There's a uh um you know, you're you're you're contracting out these things. Nobody's really the public's not looking at it. Staff is the only one looking at it. I don't think you guys look at it in detail. Uh the number three, like holiday traffic, you know, I'm pretty sure you know, who is that cops or you know, that's a lot of money and and you're paying paying a lot of overtime in cops. It was 100% and so, is that part of the you know, the public should know? Is that part of the police force you know, that money? Or is that a separate? Number seven, you know, I I um I tried to appeal the the WVMA um stuff and this is a part of that. That's cup. Um I I'm in the process of submitting forms to San Francisco and I'm I'm it's not for money, but it's you know, the the right to appeal. And I I had to include the the San Jose you USDC court because I was just getting the runaround. And that's you know, because you know, they just were little peons here. And I think we have a right to appeal or express our grievances. So, that's $10,000 on this cup thing and that's that's the blow up, you know, it's it's it's you know, that's something that's to have to be discussed in federal court. Thank you. That's my Those are my comments.

Speaker 2:
Thank you very much. Um it looks like we have two hands raised for consent. So, just to clarify this is for items that are on the consent calendar, not for verbal communications. Um if you would still Okay, so we have looks like one speaker, which is Yamamoto.

Speaker 3:
Hi, good evening. Can you all hear me okay?

Speaker 4:
We can, thank you.

Speaker 5:
All right. Hi everybody. Um I believe this is going to be item number 13 on the VTA. I'm not quite sure what all you're agreeing to when I was reading through it, but I know we do have a problem with the VTA in trying to get our kids um youth Clipper cards and I just want to say we need somebody in Los Gatos that can help our kids actually get their cards to in order for them to ride the bus in town, especially since school is happening next week. And I still I have tried about 4 hours on the website, thought I did it right, and I still haven't received the card. I've tried calling. I've tried everything. So, having somebody in Los Gatos that I can communicate with to try to help our kids get a bus pass would be actually beneficial. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. Yes, Vice Mayor Ardo.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Um I have a question for Ms. Yamamoto if she's still on. Um and I could be wrong, but my impression is to first get a um Are you on, Karen?

Speaker 2:
Yeah, I'm on.

Speaker 3:
Okay. So, when I've gotten Clipper cards in the past, so my impression is especially if you're a senior or a student for a discounted rate, you have to go in person, and I thought they were available at Walgreens. Have you looked into

Speaker 4:
find them.

Speaker 5:
Okay. All right. Well, we'll see what we can find out. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Um Okay, it looks like we have one other hand raised for consent, um which is Nima Ruhi.

Speaker 2:
Yes, hi everyone. Can you hear me?

Speaker 3:
Yes, we can.

Speaker 4:
All right. Um this is a personal matter uh that I'm in discussion with Parks and Public Works Department. I don't know if it's related to this session or I have to wait.

Speaker 5:
Yeah, so if it's not on one of these items that's on the agenda, you can speak in just a few moments when we go to verbal communications on non-agendaized items.

Speaker 6:
Okay. Um so,

Speaker 1:
This is So, so if that's if that's what you'd like to do, um uh you just put your hand down and I'll call on you in a few minutes. Okay. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Um moving on. Um we I will entertain a mo- a motion on the consent calendar. Yes, Councilmember Vedami. I move to approve uh consent items 1 through 13. Vice Mayor Ristor. Second. Um can I ask a question? Please. Um I just wanted to ask the town manager to clarify because I think a member of the public brought something up that clearly didn't read the report, but I just want to make sure members of the public understand item three, which um is the Halloween and Christmas rental that we do for roadblocks. Do you have any clarification on that? This is uh I can turn over to Nicole, but this is traffic control for the holiday parade and for the Halloween events that occur uh on Tate and Johnson Avenue. Okay, thank you. And my impression having read the report is that these are for uh rental and um some personnel that are outside of our police department that support these special one-off events. I'll ask Nicole to talk about the vendor that provides that service. Thank you. Hi, good evening. Nicole Burnham, Director of Parks and Public Works. Yes, the town manager is correct. This is a contractor and a vendor that provides both the signage as well as staffing to support um the closures on Johnson, Tate, and also all up in um I'm sorry, Loma Alta and Tate, and then at the holiday parade, the entire route, and it's extensive and requires an extensive amount of staff to support that. And PBW doesn't have that staff. We support the contractor in that effort, and then PD supports all of the public safety related to the event. Great, thank you. I appreciate the clarification for the public. Thank you. Um so, we'll be taking roll call votes this evening because we have a member of the council participating remotely, so I'll turn to the town clerk.

Speaker 2:
Councilmember Rennie?

Speaker 3:
I.

Speaker 4:
Councilmember Hedges?

Speaker 5:
I.

Speaker 6:
Councilmember Badame?

Speaker 1:
I.

Speaker 2:
Vice Mayor Ristow?

Speaker 3:
I.

Speaker 4:
Mayor Moore?

Speaker 5:
I.

Speaker 6:
That passes unanimously. Thank you. Um, so we will now move to verbal communications, which is the time for members of the public to address the council on items that are not on tonight's agenda. Um, and you'll have 3 minutes to address the council. Um, we will start with the speaker cards in the room and then move to Zoom. Um, we will start with James Wetra.

Speaker 1:
Hi, I'm James Wetra. I've lived in Los Gatos for over 20 years. I manage a gift store at the Los Gatos Shopping Center here in Los Gatos. This business has served Los Gatos for over 18 years. The beach traffic issue has been a problem as far back as I can remember. Years ago, the town actually put some time and some effort and financially invested in providing some some relief to this issue. But now, you, Mr. Moore, you, Ms. Ristow, you, Mr. Rennie, are all so entitled with yourselves, so far removed from any business-related issues, it's appalling. You should all be fired for your lack of action. You were all too busy and on vacation while every Saturday for the month of July, we at the Los Gatos Shopping Center had business-crippling gridlocks around every corner of the largest shopping center in Los Gatos. Completely boxing the shopping center in. The few that did make it to our store that gave feedback, the first thing they said was, "What is with all this traffic?" Residents in Los Gatos stuck for 45 minutes just to go a quarter of a mile. God forbid there were had been an emergency at the shopping center. You all have done nothing. Mr. Mayor, you say communication is one of your most important roles as mayor. Instead of focusing on your youth programs, which by the way, why is this such a passion for you? There are no records of you having any prior mentoring or teaching credentials, let alone even a background check. Your newsletter, your Instagram page, your Facebook page, your LinkedIn page, your campaigning against fracking, nobody cares. You say you managed an 80 resident homeless shelter in Santa Clara. Well, you may have to make some more room for all the people who have had to go home because they couldn't work cuz they couldn't even get to Los Gatos. Maria Ristow, you have chaired the Transportation and Parking Commission in the past. What have you done since 2019 to help mitigate the beach traffic? You were busy enlarging bike lanes, taking away city streets, making gridlock even worse with big ugly green cones all the way up and down Winchester Boulevard. You say you're an advocate for inclusion. Well, certainly not for the Mexican-American Marcelina who couldn't work the last 3 weeks because she couldn't even get to the store.

Speaker 2:
[clears throat]

Speaker 3:
Or our African-American worker Katrina who couldn't even work due to the traffic conditions with a zero traffic mitigation. And you, Mr. Rob Rennie, you're too busy giving up our public land to private special interest groups like Tesla charging stations. If you don't think the entire town doesn't know the hidden deals you have with these groups, you're sorely mistaken. Don't look at me. You did this yourselves. You think you're immune? Accountability matters. Voters matter. That's why you have these jobs. Now, do your job. Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Thank you.

Speaker 5:
We will move to Bobcat, who'll be followed by Joe Ends.

Speaker 6:
Okay, Bobcat. This is a little uh intense right there. I I think uh he the public has to know you guys are are not getting paid that much, but you it's like a a thing, but uh um that's not my what what I'm here uh um I I just gave you two. I don't know if you guys got these, but I uh you're supposed to you're supposed to pass them out. I attended a meeting last night um concerning the Creek start Creekside Park soccer and lacrosse field. I believe anyone who spoke up was upset with the 1-minute allotted time to speak. Uh including uh I mean the the and let's see. For the record, I counted 12 people at the start, which grew to about 20 altogether, including Vice Mayor Ristow. Um I asked if they received my email, and that's this one that's in the picture. Uh and I sent you that. I don't know if you got this email the email with this. Did you guys I don't think you guys did it. But, I think the the the anybody that saw that would see uh you know, I've been uh talking about this this problem for a while. And I don't think people know that the soccer field's closed. And uh when it gets out, it's going to get out. There was like I said, there were 20 people there, and they they were you know, you have to listen to the tape. Um and if they would have known that the the the the supplemental material that I tried to put in the couple hours before a 195-page popped in an hour before starting as about uh let's see. One of it says $37,000 for a 91724 report and I hadn't seen this report and I guess it came out in June 1st or of 26. So, 2 years later I'm still trying to gather facts on all this stuff cuz this is more down my aisle. Um I'm uh I have major concerns that require some, you know, some kind of legal stuff that you know they you know, this they fenced off the the their picture. I was out there today. I walked an entire perimeter in mid-June. I also walked out there and looked around and see how things and people are are mad because the all the kids are mad and and the coaches and stuff like that cuz they're all looking for places to go. Let's see uh I don't know what what's what's doing, you know, there has to be some transparency there. This we on 526 we hired a contractor to put the the stuff in there for $27,000 and now it's not usable. You know, what what happened? It was that was supposed to be fixed. That was supposed to continue the life of it. There's a time factor thing the things. I don't have that much time to talk about it, but my sister works in in uh in plastics and we talked about it 45 minutes and she says that it's now it's double or triple the cost of what you know, the $1 million that I was I was saying that it would cost now it's like four.

Speaker 1:
Move to Joe Ends.

Speaker 2:
Thank you very much. Joe Ends, uh Friends of Los Cerritos Creek. I'm kind of liaison for the homeless, but not so much anymore

Speaker 3:
[snorts]

Speaker 4:
because they're too fragmented. And the ones that are two main groups of them are down at Miles and the Miles Avenue. We all know who they are and they're all on that drug that's a scourge with fentanyl and whatever meth and mean. The other [snorts] group and then all four of the people that live down there you know, and the police were just there and there's arguments and fighting and the usual things that go along with that kind of abuse. You know, I would just suggest that the police take uh more action and then maybe, you know, people that are living down there Well, there's nothing you can do about it really and I'm just whatever. And the other group over there, um by the high school next to the high school are doing much better as far as that goes. That's not my concern or for you for you either. Just don't throw your garbage in the Los Gatos Creek. This is where this all started. Um oh, and I we took a month off and I was working with the town manager concerning uh

Speaker 5:
[snorts]

Speaker 6:
getting the tunnel. I'm not sure if it's our jurisdiction or whose it is, but it's it's who and we I was working with property manager for a year if you can get somebody to call you back or team whatever with the uh property manager is right behind St. Luke's. Somebody's responsible for the fence that's hanging on the hinges and the you know, the homeless are going to start going down into the tunnel again, which they do. And then you got a problem down there of uh police don't even want to go down there. It's too scary for them. And there's people down there doing things they shouldn't be doing and [snorts] um I guess I'm just concerned about the liability of that for the town and and what represents for liability for the town. But once again, you can't really control these people's behavior. I'm not all like beyond that in the old days or whatever. I'm just older and just putting it out there that I can't be like that. I'm I work for the city of Santa Cruz. That's where I retired for. I realized I'm not happy unless I'm working for a municipality, which is this one. And I was a SEIU, SEIU union president for 600 and whatever it was, 383 workers. So, that's why I'm doing what I'm doing. Just to be helping in my old age and feeling like I'm making things better. I would hope that some of my friends and cohorts uh do [snorts] the same thing as they get older instead of sitting around doing nothing and drinking and doing drugs all day and just not contributing at all. So, um I'll be talking to you manager personally, I guess. We'll try to get all of us together with you on it uh through emails and whatnot. We'll make this thing work with closing that tunnel down. So, thank you very much.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. All right, we will now move to our Zoom speakers um and we'll start with Nima Rouhi.

Speaker 2:
Good afternoon and uh thanks for your time. Uh so, the matter that I'm bringing today to the um in front of the council is regarding my uh interaction with Parks and Publics Department. So, uh to give you a brief context, back in June 2024, I um sent out a request for some curb issues that I had um around like in front of my house and then after a few follow-ups on April 2027, they um sent some crew to fix that, but uh the problem is that there is a huge um tall tree right next to my driveway that um damaged the curb, but more importantly damaged the driveway and and the crew that came in saw that, tried to fix and patch it, but um looks like because of that tree uh growth and stuff, uh it it doesn't um go away. So, it's in a way that my driveway is now uh whenever it rains, uh it creates a huge puddle and I'm having trouble getting in and out of the house with one of my cars that has a like a low clearance. So, it scratches every time I get it in and out. So, I mean having that tree sort of tilted, I don't know if I can show images here. I already sent out an email to the mayor and the whole council members 4 weeks ago. So, you guys should have that the images, but I if I can share, that would be great.

Speaker 3:
You are not able to share during public comments.

Speaker 4:
All right. I mean again, I refer you guys to email I sent on July 13th, 2026. And again, when it rains, there's a huge puddle even without raining getting in and out of the driveway is not easy for me. So, after a lot of back and forth with the park and publics, they agreed that the tree needs to be removed before any curb or driveway work is being done. And that's after 2 years of like discussions and and back and forth. Now, they were supposed to fix it this July, but then they postpone it to next spring. So, that brings me to 3 years of waiting for for this project. And again, it's hazardous. The tree is tilted and it it damaged the curb, sidewalk, driveway, and It's on Los Carneros Boulevard. I keep hearing from HPC and other town members that this is our gateway to the town. We have to keep it like cool and cute, but when it comes to these projects, I don't see the same treatment for residents. So, yeah. That's I can't.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. Um

Speaker 6:
So, I'd like you guys to just look into that, the images that I emailed you, and uh bring it with the parks and public department, and have the project done as soon as possible.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much for your comment, and we did receive your email. Looks like Councilmember Hedges has a question for you.

Speaker 2:
Uh yeah, thank you. Um and I I did receive the photographs. Um I I don't know if you're uh comfortable, but are you willing to say what the location is? I don't think you said that at at the beginning of your talk.

Speaker 3:
Oh, sure. Yeah. And and uh um Councilmember Hedges, thank you very much for following up on a on a full phone call actually um after my email. Uh the location is 241 Los Gatos Boulevard.

Speaker 4:
Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. Um and we have another speaker uh for public comment, which is Yamamoto.

Speaker 6:
Hi, yeah. Um I had an issue getting downtown in Los Gatos. Traffic is was really backed up on Saturday. Um it seems that even though you hired somebody to mitigate the whole traffic issue, it just it's not working. Um maybe a suggestion of getting a group of public citizens together to come up with a better solution rather than hiring and spending a fortune on people that just don't understand Los Gatos. Um it was really ridiculous. From my house to just the downtown to just go to the Apple Store. Took me 45 minutes. And it normally only takes 10. So, that's a major issue. And like like the other speaker said, um it needs to be better addressed. So, my suggestion is to get a group of citizens to maybe troubleshoot to come up with a way of dealing with our issues. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. All right, that concludes uh verbal communications. Um and I'll just look briefly to the Parks and Public Works um department to see if uh they can provide any background on the issue um that Nima brought up. If there's anything that we need to Yeah.

Speaker 2:
I mean, I think it was accurately described by the resident. Um we have evaluated it, looked at it. We work does need to be done there. The work is at the driveway apron, not the driveway. So, it's right where the um the driveway intersects with Los Gatos Boulevard. The tree is living and healthy. Um and it we didn't get the information. So, what we have is that we received information, you know, in May, June of this year and the paving and concrete projects were already set for the year. So, and we couldn't fit it into the schedule for this year. So, we would roll it into next year. Unfortunately, it's just a little bit of a of it's the kind of work that we really can't do with our in-house staff. Some concrete work we can, but but not this particular location. Um so, that's the response we've been giving to the resident that they're

Speaker 3:
Okay. Um Councilmember Hudas?

Speaker 4:
Uh thank you. Just a brief follow-up. Um the the tree work, is that something that um come before the repair of the apron and is that something that maybe could be accomplished sooner?

Speaker 5:
Um it can come before the apron and it and it will. Um we can look into that. Right now, we are only responding to emergency repair work for sure emergency tree work. We really don't have the funding um and contractor capacity to to be doing work that doesn't isn't vital for safety um and security.

Speaker 6:
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Uh yes, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 2:
Thank you. Um I think there's nobody in this room that doesn't know about the beach traffic issue, the cut-through. And it is interesting to me that sometimes when people talk about it, they do not really understand that everybody up at this dais actually lives in Los Gatos and we live that traffic. Um so yes, I was caught in it as well. I am fortunate that I had an option not to use a car on Saturday, but um I think sometimes there's a thought that nothing's been done and our website hasn't been updated since 2023 on the cut-through traffic, but I know that we have traffic counts. I know that we're doing modeling. I know that the town is working really hard to look at what are mitigation measures that will not create unintended consequences such as we've done in the past where we do one thing and it actually makes things worse somewhere else. So I don't know if our town manager wants to address or Parks and Public Works where we are in the middle of and what we There is work ongoing by experts.

Speaker 3:
There has been work going on for a number of years. Uh the most recent one is we brought on board Dudek that's doing our our town-wide, including Monte Sereno, traffic counts. They conducted their some of their traffic study that included weekend summer beach traffic days. Uh and that work is ongoing. So, we will be looking forward to the report they'll be issuing. We've also had conversations on a longer-term solution. I mean, we have to recognize that this issue isn't an issue that's happened this year, last year, the year before. This is multi-decade issues. This is an issue that has come up in our community survey as a very high priority of something we need to grapple with. Um, and having worked now for in 30 for 30 years for six, seven different organizations, I can tell you this is one of those extremely difficult problems that makes a nice challenge for us to solve. That a longer-term solution that's innovative is something we need to consider. Uh, we're currently in conversations. I'm not ready to talk about in more details about something that has a lot of moving parts that potentially could help. But, you're right. We have not just been starting work. This has been ongoing for a number of years.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Cuz we're all living the pain. Trust me.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. So, that concludes verbal communications. Um, and we will now move to our public hearings. Our first public hearing this evening is to conduct a public hearing to consider objections to the 2026 weed abatement program. Um, and I will turn it over to staff to present the report.

Paul Gonia:
Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members. My name is Paul Gonia, and I'm a project analyst with Parks and Public with the Parks and Public Works Department. Article two of the town municipal code requires that property owners remove hazardous growth such as weed and weeds and other combustible debris from the property in order to help protect the town from fire hazards. This code section is implemented through the weed abatement program, which is administered by the County of Santa Clara and funded through assessments on properties placed in the program. The town started its 2026 weed abatement program on December 2nd, 2025 with the passing of resolution 20 25-60, which declared hazardous growth hazardous growth a nuisance and ordered its abatement. On February 3rd, 2026, a public hearing was held to consider objections to the order of abatement on identified properties. Associated inspections and enforcements were carried out between February and June. The items before you tonight include two recommendations, conduct a public hearing to consider objections to the proposed assessment report charges, and adopt a resolution confirming the report and authorizing collection of assessment charges. A property remains within the weed abatement program until three consecutive compliant years. Each year, county staff visits properties and performs an annual inspection. This inspection cost for 2026 is $296. If required, additional fees are assessed for items such as follow-up inspections, administrative costs associated with enforcement, and actual abatement services to remove hazardous growth. An examination or an explanation including the breakdown of the 2026 fees was included in the county's January 2026 notice, which was sent to all property owners in anticipation of the February public hearing. In regards to this item, the town clerk has received one written protest, which is included in the staff report as attachment five. The county's response is included as attachment six. Here tonight as a representative on behalf of the county is Garrick, the weed abatement manager. Uh this includes my report, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. I will look to uh my fellow council members to see if there are any comments or questions. Yes, Vice Mayor Esto.

Speaker 2:
Thank you. I did read the report, and it looked like we had one objection. Um have any Is anything else come in, or has anybody um change their mind?

Speaker 3:
Uh nothing has come in to my knowledge in terms of what parks and public works. We haven't received anything additional.

Speaker 4:
Okay. And then to clarify, I want to make sure I understand, the protest isn't for the fee for the inspection. The protest is asking to be removed from um the ongoing inspection list.

Speaker 5:
I believe they were asking to be removed, yeah, from it. And as the county identified in its response that that hearing actually occurs at a different period in the time year. I believe it's February. So, that's when that matter should be brought.

Speaker 6:
Okay. So, that objection does not apply to tonight's hearing. That is for a future hearing.

Speaker 1:
Correct.

Speaker 2:
Okay. So, are there any objections to what we have to decide on tonight?

Speaker 3:
No.

Speaker 4:
Okay. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Great. Um seeing no other questions, I will turn to um verbal communications for this item. I have no uh comment cards and no hands raised on Zoom. Um so, seeing none, I will close um comment on that and turn back to the council. Yes, Councilmember Badami.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Uh with no objections, um I have to emphasize that wildfire risk is a real threat to our town. We take this very seriously, and the weed abatement program um is integral to mitigating uh the risk. So, with that, I move to adopt a resolution confirming the 2026 weed abatement abatement program assessment report and authorize the collection of assessment charges.

Speaker 2:
Thank you. Councilmember Huteson.

Speaker 3:
I second.

Speaker 4:
Great. Um yes.

Speaker 5:
I just want to confirm that motion includes adopting the resolution confirming the report.

Speaker 6:
Yes, it it includes adopting the resolution to confirm the report.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. And I did have one other comment. So, I was looking at some of the larger dollar amount you know, costs or the assessments. And it looks like some of them are public property or or semi-public property like the Laura Drive one which is the largest. Is that are we abating Southern Pacific Railroad's property or And so they just aren't Can you give a little bit of detail on on what's going on there cuz that was a little bit surprising that a a railroad wouldn't be taking care of their land.

Speaker 2:
I'll [clears throat] defer to the county representative.

Speaker 3:
Hi, good evening. Garrick Yooselovsky, I'm the weed abatement program manager for the county. Yes, we actually have a large number of railroad properties on our weed abatement program throughout the entire county not just in Los Gatos. And so we do find annually that they are not taking care of the weeds on their property. So, we do end up doing a lot of the work for them.

Speaker 4:
Okay, thank you. And that's disappointing and so is the for instance on this property the $3,800. That's full cost recovery, right? So, that that covers everything but you still have to spend the time having staff go out there and and do the work.

Speaker 5:
Correct. So, that covers the cost of inspections, the cost of the contractor performing the work and also the administrative fees.

Speaker 6:
Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay, seeing no other questions. I will turn to the town clerk for a roll call vote.

Speaker 1:
Councilmember Ernie.

Speaker 2:
I.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Hedges.

Speaker 4:
I.

Speaker 5:
Councilmember Badame.

Speaker 6:
I.

Speaker 1:
Vice Mayor Rista.

Speaker 2:
I.

Speaker 3:
Mayor Moore.

Speaker 4:
I.

Speaker 5:
Um pass is unanimously. We will now move to item 15 which is to consider a recommendation of approval by the planning commission and introduce an ordinance regarding ADUs. Um and I will turn to Sean Mullen, our planning manager, for the staff report.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. I'll give the clerk one moment to pull up the presentation. Perfect. Thank you and good evening, Mayor. Before you tonight is consideration of a draft ADU ordinance responding to changes to state law. Next slide, please. The town previously updated the zoning code regarding ADUs in 2017, 2020, and 2023. New housing legislation continues to be signed into law impacting ADUs on an almost annual basis. The latest bills impacting ADUs shown on the right-hand side of the slide uh made additional changes to ADU ADU law necessitating an update to the town's ADU ordinance once again. Next slide, please. The draft ordinance being considered tonight carries forward much uh from the current ordinance with some revisions and reorganization to align with state laws detailed in your staff report. The most substantive change uh has to do with the maximum number of ADUs the state requires the town to allow on a residential property and the two development options provided in the draft ordinance. Next slide. There are several different types of ADUs as shown here. Detached ADUs are those that are physically separated from the main dwelling. Attached ADUs are those constructed as an addition to an existing residence or as part of a new residence. Conversion ADUs are units created from existing space within a residence or accessory building. And finally, uh junior ADUs or JADUs are smaller units located within the main residence. Next slide, please. One of the most significant changes coming from state law is the creation of two categories of ADUs included in the draft ordinance as town standard ADUs and by right ADUs. A town standard ADU is subject to the town's standard ADU development regulations and continues to benefit from a 10% FAR increase approved by the council some years ago. By right ADUs, which is something new to the town to the draft ordinance, are exempt from FAR and in some cases do not have maximum size limitations. Next slide. The draft ordinance is consistent with state law in allowing for multiple ADUs on a residential property. Uh single-family properties are now allowed one town standard ADU and three by right ADUs. Um existing multi-family properties are allowed at least one town standard ADU, one conversion ADU, and up to eight detached ADUs. And a new multi-family development would be allowed one town standard ADU and two detached by right ADUs. Next slide. The planning commission considered the draft ordinance on on June 10th and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the town council. Um today the down the town did receive a letter from the California Housing Defen- Defense Fund included as a desk item asserting that several provisions of the draft ordinance are inconsistent with state law. If the council would like a response from the town attorney addressing each of those issues raised, staff recommends continuing the item to allow sufficient time to prepare that response. Staff also recommends that the council proceed with a full discussion of the draft ordinance this evening. Doing so would allow the council to identify any additional revisions it would like staff to address and incorporate into the ordinance if the matter is continued. This concludes staff's presentation and we are available to answer any questions.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much. Questions? Yes, Councilman Huitus.

Speaker 2:
Yeah, thank you for the report and and the information. I understand that there's been a great deal of change uh pushed to localities um by the state with regard to ADU. Numerous numerous laws. And um you know, as I read uh as I read this, um I think they think it's one-size-fits-all. And I think that there's some significant challenges um with uh the the laws that have been pushed. Um I wanted to explore the by-right option. Um I think you mentioned that there are uh maximum sizes in some cases. Could you elaborate on that? Are you know, are they 500 square feet or are there cases where the by-right are are larger than that?

Speaker 3:
Thank you for that question. So, in the draft ordinance table 1.3 really provides some of the development standards um for by-right ADUs. Um what you'll notice there uh about halfway down the table is maximum size of interior livable space. Um as you go across the different categories, the only one that has a maximum size is a new construction detached ADU. And that's capped at 800 square feet. Conversion ADUs, whether that's on a single-family property or a multi-family property, um do not include a uh maximum size limitation in state law.

Speaker 4:
Yeah. Yeah, yeah, please go ahead.

Speaker 5:
Um and so with regard to the uh the town standard ADUs, um is there currently and is there any uh any reason that we would have to change the 1,200 square foot maximum size?

Speaker 6:
Um I don't see a reason from the state law perspective why we would need to change that.

Speaker 1:
Okay, so just because this is very important point because we struggled with this several years ago about how ADUs can actually contribute to affordable housing stock. And uh we went through a debate about what's the best way to accomplish that. We talked about putting income restrictions on ADUs or income categories on ADUs. But the town settled on what we called affordable by design. And that design was limiting to 1,200 square feet. Um I understand that ADUs are allowed to be up to 50% of the square footage of the primary residence. But is that capped at 1,200 or if there were a 4,000 square foot residence, would that maximum be 2,000 square feet?

Speaker 2:
So thank you for that question. I think there's a distinction that needs to be made between an attached ADU and a ADU created by converting existing space. So if it were an attached ADU and met that definition under a town standard ADU, you'd be limited to 1,200 square feet. If it were a conversion unit that met that definition, there's no natural cap or nominal cap. It would be limited to the ratio cap of no more than 50% of the remaining portion of the residence.

Speaker 3:
If I could just follow up, is that the case with our existing ADU requirements now? I thought they were all capped at 1,200.

Speaker 4:
The original understanding of state law, and I would actually have to dig in a little bit to research if there was a deviation, but the original understanding was that we could cap all ADUs at 1,200. This is before we had the two different ADU product types. And that's what we have been enforcing for a long time. Recently, it's become clear through HCD that conversion ADUs are not capped by square footage.

Speaker 5:
And so does that is that language reflected in the draft that we have tonight?

Speaker 6:
Yes.

Speaker 1:
Okay. So that may be an area if if this does get continued to follow up on in terms of exactly where because uh we from from what I see, there's a possibility of us having numerous 2,000, 3,000 square foot ADUs plus below grade space, I believe. Um and is that is that correct?

Speaker 2:
Currently, the town code existing and proposed requires the ADUs be located on one single floor. So you couldn't have a basement underneath it and you couldn't have a second story above it. They can't be connected. It doesn't mean you can't have a basement ADU, a ground floor ADU, or a second story ADU. They just can't be multiple stories within this that unit.

Speaker 3:
But could you have three units with uh three dwelling units within a structure?

Speaker 4:
You could. Yes, you could have a conversion unit, an attached unit, and a junior ADU.

Speaker 5:
Okay, I'm going to have questions later when we get around on that.

Speaker 6:
Yeah, Vice Mayor Ariston and Council Member Badami.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Yeah, this gets tricky really quickly. So, um um uh Manager Mullen, when you were talking about you could have the conversion and the junior and, you know, the attached um are any of those town ADUs or are those by right ADUs?

Speaker 2:
Thank you for that question. It's a combination thereof. So, if on um page three of the staff report, there's a table that outlines the maximum number of ADUs uh allowed per property and the state code uh is very clear that you can combine all the different product types. So, for a single-family property, when you read that you can have four total ADUs, um it's not always that easily to actualize that. You would need a to combine a one town standard ADU um and then under the by right category, you would use three, which would be one detached new construction ADU, one conversion ADU, and one junior ADU.

Speaker 3:
Okay. Um and then to follow on to um Councilmember Hudes' comments about the conversion ADU, um a conversion ADU can you explain to me, is that actually literally taken out of the existing footprint? So, if somebody had a 4,000 square foot house and created a 2,000 square foot ADU, would they essentially be cutting their living space in half? Would they be taking their 4,000 square foot house down to 2,000 square feet?

Speaker 4:
Yes.

Speaker 5:
They're essentially creating a duplex.

Speaker 6:
Yes.

Speaker 1:
Okay.

Speaker 2:
In that scenario.

Speaker 3:
Cuz they can't create 2,000 extra square feet out of there, right? Or can they?

Speaker 4:
The conversion is modification of existing space.

Speaker 5:
Okay.

Speaker 6:
So, you couldn't build to convert. That would be considered an interior by some folks' definitions or an attached unit.

Speaker 1:
And is that the only type of ADU that does not have a maximum square footage?

Speaker 2:
Conversion under the town standard ADU it not have a maximum square footage.

Speaker 3:
Okay. And under Okay. But the other ADUs do have maximum square footage?

Speaker 4:
The town standard non-conversion ADU is limited to 1,200 square feet, whether that's an attached unit or detached unit. Um a by-right junior ADU is limited by definition to 500 square feet. And then when you get into the um Make sure I'm on the right table to answer that. Um the conversion ADU uh to answer your question, yes, the conversion ADU by-right it would not have a limit. A new by-right detached new construction is limited to 800 square feet.

Speaker 5:
Okay. So, it does sound like what I'm hearing is conversion ADU is the only one that doesn't have maximum square footage. And at that point, the homeowner I'm hearing is then if as they enlarge that, they're decreasing their space.

Speaker 6:
That's one scenario. There is another scenario where you take a 3,000 square foot barn and convert it into an ADU.

Speaker 1:
Okay.

Speaker 2:
Detached structure, you can convert that. It could be more than 1,200 square feet. That's a by-right um ADU or could be a town standard ADU.

Speaker 3:
So, an existing structure on the property, a garage, a barn.

Speaker 4:
Correct.

Speaker 5:
A pool room or whatever. Okay, got it. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Councilmember Budami.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. I want to make sure I understand this. So, if it were the will of the council and and if we continue the item, we could um discuss or or maybe again, the will of the council move forward with limiting conversion ADUs to 1,200 square feet?

Speaker 2:
Um in my opinion and my read of the state law, no. State law and HCD have opined that there's no floor area maximum applicable to conversion ADUs.

Speaker 3:
Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Um and so just to ask a little bit more on that. So it sounds like we've gotten I read the the letter from um the Housing Defense Fund. The recommendation from staff is that the town attorney reviews that, provides comments in response. Staff brings back a similar recommendation, perhaps with some minor modifications in response to that, to make sure that we comply with state law. But essentially this ordinance is just to get us to comply with state law and our our understanding of state law.

Speaker 5:
Yes, that's correct. So the last two rounds of update I can speak to personally cuz I worked on them.

Speaker 6:
Thank you.

Speaker 1:
We we endeavored only to just get it to the state state level.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Yes, Councilmember Hedges.

Speaker 4:
Um yeah, I was I really shocked by the letter coming from the Housing Defense Fund. Um I believe today. Um and I'm curious whether there's been communications with them previously.

Speaker 5:
Um not with my office.

Speaker 6:
So they just dropped that on us on the eve of our hearing.

Speaker 1:
It was received today.

Speaker 2:
Oh, okay.

Speaker 3:
All right. Um well then I will open up public comment on this item um and then we'll get to a motion and discussion. We have two speaker cards um in the room. We'll start with Kathy uh Weiner Weiner and then followed by uh Linda Swenberg.

Speaker 4:
Um

Speaker 5:
Can you speak into the mic? Sorry.

Speaker 6:
I'm so sorry. I'm new to this part. Okay, I've lived in Los Gatos over 40 years. And I've raised my kids here. I know a lot about the community. I live in the Almond Grove. We have a 300 square foot ADU. It's been a godsend for my husband and I retired fixed income. And I feel like the council, as you said, one size does not fit all. You could add a little something to this ADU idea. I know you have a You can't have a ADU over a detached garage unless the main house is two stories. And I'm guessing that had to do with privacy and so forth. But for instance, a lot of Almond Groves on alleys. So, there is no adjacent property up to the And my situation, many people in Almond Grove, I'm surrounded by two-story houses. Front of me, back of me, side of me. Many, many people. And I just don't think it's fair to think, "Okay, so the people that can afford a two-story house get to have it over their detached garage." And that maybe you could make that a little more flexible and think about how many more ADUs there could be to provide, you know, affordable housing in this community. You know, I young adult children and they can't afford to live here. So, I think being more equitable across the whole community, that as long as you're doing this, I hope you're going to table it till the next meeting, maybe you could add something in there that there are situations where it would be okay to have it over a detached garage. We'd have more green space, which is better for the environment. Some people have really small lots, they can't have an ADU. So, I want you to just sort of think about the message you're giving to the community. On one hand, I get it's privacy. I get you have to be black and white. But you're also sort of saying, "Well, if you're wealthy enough to have a big house, you get to have this, too." And that doesn't seem fair to me. So, I just like like you to consider that as you're looking at this.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Um our next commenter is Linda Swenberg.

Speaker 2:
Good evening, Mayor and Council members. I'm Linda Swenberg. And Manager Mullen, hi. Um I've lived in the town for more than 30 years. And in 2004, we moved to a different house just a couple blocks from our previous home. And at this house, there's a beautiful, brand newly built at that time, accessory structure. And it was fully permitted as a habitable pool house. At that time, and and it even has a spot for for a kitchen. But at that time, the town refused to allow the previous owner to put a kitchen in. That wasn't a thing. ADUs were not a thing at that time, and it wasn't something that Los Gatos was interested in. Well, now we have this state law. And I know we're all a little bit confused about these conversion structures. Um I think that there are probably lots of people like who are in our situation, who have beautiful, completely permitted, habitable structures with a big pool, a big bathroom, a big bedroom. We even have fire sprinklers, which aren't even required today. What we don't have is a kitchen. And I don't think that this current revision um makes a great distinction between different types of conversion units. Like something like I'm dealing with, it seems to be treated exactly the same as somebody converting a barn or a garage or a storage shed into living space. We already have living space. We just need to do an internal renovation, which obviously requires building permits and stuff for safety, but um you know, why not actually put it in your ordinance. Why not consider something um because I think that you could come up with a lot of new housing inventory this way uh and it could be very good for the town without doing a lot of extra building or anything like that. So, I want you to consider that um maybe move away from a from a one-size-fits-all approach on the conversion ADUs. Um I hope that helps. Oh, and I did go speak to the building department about some other things today and they said, "Well, now we're kind of working around that and you can maybe just give a marked-up floor plan, but it's not in the ordinance." So, like I I really think they need some more legislative direction on that. It would be it would be a good idea. I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong.

Speaker 3:
Thank you.

Speaker 4:
I'm confused.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. All right. I have no other speaker cards in the room and I see no hands on Zoom and so I will close public comment on that item um and I'll turn to Vice Mayor Arista.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. I I just want to check with um our planning manager. Is there anything about our rules right now that would preclude I mean, a conversion's a conversion. Would it preclude a pool house or something that's most of the way there?

Speaker 1:
Not at all.

Speaker 2:
Okay. So, I know someone who put a kitchen in their garage with an existing almost

Speaker 3:
Yeah, conversion of existing space. There's no limitation on what that space is used for. The um scenario described by the um speaker sounds like all they would need to do would would be to pull a building permit to put a kitchen in the unit and then it would be classified as an ADU. And I would encourage them to contact me directly. I'd be happy to walk through that with them.

Speaker 4:
Okay. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. Yes, Council Member Hudes.

Speaker 6:
Yeah, I mean in the spirit of uh our new agenda policy in Rosenberg, I'm going to make a motion.

Speaker 1:
Please.

Speaker 2:
Um, to continue this item to a date recommended by staff.

Speaker 3:
Vice Mayor Esto.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. I'll second the motion. I mean, upon seeing that email today, I immediately sent questions to staff, which I realized there was no way they could be answered by tonight, so I appreciate coming up with that option that we start the discussion and then take time to look at this. So, I appreciate that extra work.

Speaker 5:
Mhm. Council member Donny.

Speaker 6:
Uh, with the continuance then, I I would just like confirmation that all would be needed is a building permit to accommodate the last speaker. Um

Speaker 1:
I apologize. Could you repeat the question?

Speaker 2:
Um, I'll be supporting the motion, but I want to make sure that with the continuance that the last speaker could be accommodated by just simply applying for a building permit.

Speaker 3:
Absolutely.

Speaker 4:
Okay.

Speaker 5:
Yeah. There's nothing in the current ordinance or in the the draft ordinance that would hold that scenario back.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. I'll be supporting the motion.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Yeah, to the town attorney.

Speaker 2:
Um, if the council's interested in continuing the item, I think September 16th would allow enough time for staff to look into the questions raised in the letter. And I want to confirm with planning that that day works for planning as well.

Speaker 3:
That would work as long as it's September 15th, which is the Tuesday. It's hard to read from here.

Speaker 4:
Um, that sounds great. And what is the timeline on the necessity for the town to implement these changes?

Speaker 5:
Thank you for that question. So, most of these changes are already in in effect since we are out of compliance with the state law, which is very common because of how quickly they sign bills and how long it takes to get ordinances lined up. Um we are already enforcing what we understand to be compliant state law. Um HCD has reached out to us to check in and we have communicated what our hearing schedule is. Um so if they check in again, we can let them know, but we we're actively working on it.

Speaker 6:
Okay, great. Thank you very much.

Speaker 1:
Actually, can I revise my request to be the first meeting in October? And I I think it says October 6th.

Speaker 2:
Yes.

Speaker 3:
Okay.

Speaker 4:
Yes.

Speaker 5:
Would that work for planning?

Speaker 6:
Yeah.

Speaker 1:
Okay.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thank you. We'll have We'll hear the item by then and if um if it happens to come in sooner, we'll we'll take it. Thank you. Yes, Council member Hudas.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, I did have a number of other um questions that I think maybe could be addressed um at that time, but not necessarily um on the fly, but maybe maybe some of them. Um the first one um relates to uh ADUs in historic districts. And one of the things um that we uh debated and uh included in our ordinance was that um an ADU shall not be built in front of a historic structure. Um does our uh does the revised ordinance continue that policy of not allowing an ADU in front of a uh historic structure, whether it's a by-right or whether it's a a town ADU?

Speaker 4:
Um I can start um with my recollection because that was one of the issues raised in the letter that was received today. Um because the town's proposed ordinance did uh prohibit um ADUs from being built in the front yard if they can be built elsewhere on the property. Um and the letter stated that uh that provision is prohibited. And so, that's one issue I would want to look into. And that applied to both standard ADUs and by-right ADUs.

Speaker 5:
And so, if I could just follow up on that, um I looked at the letter. I didn't see anything about historic. I saw something about setbacks, and I saw something, you know, else. I would just say that I think that needs a great deal of attention because uh if ADUs are allowed in front of historic structures, it would decimate the historic character of our town. And I I think we need to really look very, very closely at that um before we eliminate that that's in our current code. Um so, I I would again appreciate that if we did a little more research into that topic. Um I had another um another question. Um So, coming back to the the size limit, you know, one of the things, and I think ADUs have a lot of potential to add to our housing stock, our affordable housing stock. And despite the fact that we have all of these SB 330 applications, many of them will not get built. Um but ADUs can be an effective way of providing affordable housing in town. And so, um if we're not able to um limit the size of these conversion um ADUs or any other ones, um is there a possibility of doing what other municipalities have done and putting income requirements, particularly on rental ADUs, uh to ensure that these ADUs that are created are actually affordable and not just another way to get around our zoning and create uh you know, large uh large single-family or other homes that we wouldn't otherwise allow. So, could um and I I I think I passed on a report from ABAG that addressed ways that other municipalities have uh tried to get affordable stock out of that. Is that something that we have looked at or could we look at that?

Speaker 6:
So, thank you for that question and and following on a discussion that um Councilmember and I had, um I looked into it a little bit. The kind of initial thought is that what's in front of you tonight is the different product types um could not be deed restricted to lower-income or affordable units. Um the the information that Councilmember Huda has passed on uh to staff from ABAG really is relating to uh an incentive-based program that would be adopted by the council. And in fact, the existing town code explicitly says if the council the council may adopt an incentive program um and if if an ADU is created through said program, it needs to be deed restricted to um a lower-income. So, it's really a carrot-based system. That means um there's there's other municipalities as the councilmember mentioned that do things like you know, additional units above and beyond what the state allows, additional um floor area, uh waving fees, waving uh there's no interest loans. There's all sorts of different uh menu items. Um it really needs to be an incentive-based approach before the town could impose a a deed restriction on affordability.

Speaker 1:
So, is is that something that we'd be prepared to look at in October, or is that something that we might um look at later?

Speaker 2:
Yeah, I realized I didn't answer the second part of that question, so I appreciate you uh repeating it. So, the housing element has programs in it and specifically program Q that speaks to this. Um in exploring incentive programs and exploring other ways to to incentivize and encourage ADUs, um we can start some We've already had some preliminary conversations about program Q in the past. Um we can continue that conversation and come back with some feedback related to program Q um in October uh and see how we can uh move forward with that uh at the council's direction and what kind of incentive programs you may be interested in.

Speaker 3:
Well, I I for one would be very interested in ways of accomplishing affordable uh living spaces as we're revising our ADU policy. Um you know, as compared to uh just allowing development to uh to run over the town.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. So, I'll just add a a few quick things. Um so, one thing that you know, as uh a younger person that lives in an apartment, I was thinking about this as I was thinking about this item. All of my friends under the age of 30 who live in the town of Los Gatos either live in an ADU or in an apartment. That's the only way for someone who, you know, makes less than $150,000 a year to live in the town of Los Gatos. And talking about, you know, our historic districts, and I really appreciated the comment um from our our first speaker on this. The um several of my friends that live in ADUs live in the Almond Grove. There's a lot of ADUs in the Almond Grove. There's lots of smaller housing units, none of which are below market rate. They're not deed restricted affordable, yet, you know, uh not to to out anyone, but these people pay between, you know, a thousand and three thousand dollars a month, which sounds expensive, but is actually quite affordable um for rent in this town. And so, I'm I'm very philosophically supportive of ADUs. I think they're a really, really good way to create more um naturally affordable housing stock. Um and they also, of course, support uh you know, homeowners that are able to build these that then they can create a second income stream or have their family uh live in them. I think ADUs are very, very good, and so I think um I'm always glad when we are creating ways to to make it easier to build ADUs. Um I would be interested in the incentives-based program. I would not be supportive of putting any BMR requirements on, you know, our exi- on what we're talking about here. It sounds like we can't anyway. Um but I think it's it's really important to recognize that well, below market rate units have a huge place in creating affordable housing. Uh most of the affordable housing in Los Gatos is naturally affordable. Um again, the type of housing that I live in um is naturally affordable. If you were to put uh income requirements on my affordable housing, I couldn't live in it, and then it would no longer be affordable to me um because I would not meet the income qualifications um and have to go through that onerous process. Uh anyway, um uh I'm I'm interested in the incentives-based program. I'm also interested in in staff's just perspective on what the first speaker shared about the um sort of issues with second story ADUs in, you know, I what she's was speaking about it, you know, if a home is surrounded on all sides by single or by two-story homes, um, and this second story ADU is not going to be particularly impactful, I would be interested in exploring that. Um, not asking staff to come up with that, but just get some perspective on that when we, um, return in October. I think that's all I've got. Thank you. Not seeing any comments or questions from Councilmember Rennie, so I will call

Speaker 5:
You know, uh, I think for us it would be helpful to have direction on the second story issue because I think planning's hope is to have the ordinance ready for introduction on October 6th.

Speaker 6:
Sorry, so just to be clear on on what I'm asking for. I don't think we're at a place to intro put it into this particular version, but it's not It seems like we do this every year, and so I'd like to get staff's perspective on on how big of an undertaking that would be to create that. Is it a good idea? Is it a bad idea? Um,

Speaker 1:
I mean, I I could respond now. I mean, the the history of that, um, speaking of incentives was all the way back uh, in one of the original iterations, probably around 2018, 2017. Um, as Council was exploring the FAR 10% increase to help allow these, there was a recognition of places like the Almond Grove that have smaller lots cuz they're they're very old and smaller subdivisions that didn't have footprint um, to build these things. And so we're we're back then, we were giving folks a 10% bump, but nowhere to put it. Um, and so it was decided through the Council's decision, um, with the ordinance to allow for second story ADU above a detached structure, so long as the primary house was already two stories. Um, it wasn't about privacy, as I recall. Um, we actually had to address that later from second story ADUs. Um, it was more about making sure that the accessory use the accessory unit was truly um accessory to the primary and it didn't end up dominating a small 900-1200 sq. ft cottage by putting an 800 sq. ft second story on a detached garage. Um so that's been that that's where that that's the origin story. Um to change that would not be a lift. I mean I mean we would look to council's guidance and what you're interested in or is there any limitation or are we just going to allow it? Um and then we could write that um very quickly.

Speaker 2:
Okay. Yeah, I don't personally I don't know that I've given it enough thought or know, you know, well enough what that would uh how big of a change that would be. Um so I guess perhaps my recommendation would be that the next time this goes to planning commission, we hear how they think about that. That would be one way to do this. I'm I'm open to other thoughts from council members. I wasn't around um when that was was first discussed, but um I'll look to Vice Mayor Rice so.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Yeah, I don't think I would be willing to support that in this update right now. I think we've got a lot of other changes and looking at the fact that somebody could potentially add four new four ADUs on an existing structure, I don't want to start adding floors. I also live in a historic district where we don't have an alley and so most of our garages are next to people's homes. And so the idea that suddenly the garage is going to pop up and you're going to have it hanging over your yard or looking into your house, I think it'll create a lot of privacy issues that we can probably avoid. Unless this letter that we've received that says we can't preclude a second story garage comes up, but I think right now good idea to like put that on the back burner and the next time we address a series of laws and who knows maybe the next series of laws will make this conversation irrelevant. Um but I would prefer that it not be brought back to us in October.

Speaker 4:
Yeah, I I'm not Yeah, asking for that.

Speaker 5:
Okay.

Speaker 6:
Councilmember Renny.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, I I thought that we were already out of compliance with state law, that state law um said that you could have an ADU on a second story, um and we what what we currently have is not in compliance. Is there Is there some subtlety here?

Speaker 2:
I don't recall offhand, um the letter from today brings up a different issue that may if what there's if what the H uh HDF is saying is correct for the 66 Sorry, the by-right units, um it's possible that they would be allowed now, but we don't have clarification on that. So, we need to we need to explore that.

Speaker 3:
Okay. So, it sounds like we'll get a more thorough update in October on on all these things.

Speaker 4:
Yeah, cuz I I spent some time exploring the idea of um adding a second story ADU on my house, and I had communication with Director Paulson and with HCD on it, and basically I my understanding through HCD is we the town cannot prevent me from putting a second story ADU on my one-story house.

Speaker 5:
Looks like Director Paulson has some input.

Speaker 6:
Thank you, through the mayor. Um Joel Paulson, Community Development Director. So, I think the the issue Councilmember Renny is raising um is very site-specific. So, there are parameters where in his case, that would be the only place he may be able to put one, so we would have to allow it. Um but there's a lot of other nuances depending on the site-specific conditions.

Speaker 1:
Okay, so at a high level, it sounds like there's maybe a little bit of misunderstanding or or or lack of understanding, at least for me, among, you know, where can where is the second story ADU allowable? So, maybe if staff just comes back to the council in October with that information, I think that'd be informative for how we think about this moving forward. Thank you. Okay, does staff have all the direction they need on this? Thank you. Um will the town clerk please do a roll call vote?

Speaker 2:
Council member Annie?

Speaker 3:
I.

Speaker 4:
Council member Hutto?

Speaker 5:
I.

Speaker 6:
Council member Badami?

Speaker 1:
I.

Speaker 2:
Vice Mayor Arista?

Speaker 3:
I.

Speaker 4:
Mayor Moore?

Speaker 5:
I.

Speaker 6:
Passes unanimously. Thank you all. Um we will now move on to other business. Um and we have the introduction of an omnibus ordinance amending the town code to make minor updates and clarifications. Um and I will look to the town attorney for this item.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Uh Gabrielle Weland, town attorney, and I have a uh PowerPoint presentation that will accompany my talk. Um so, this proposed ordinance is the result of a annual review of the town code to see if there are any cleanups that are needed. Next slide, please. Um and so, the purpose of it is to really fix non-substantive uh simple things that are errors or things that don't match um current town procedures or current town titles, etc. Next slide, please. Um and then and other element of this is we're updating cross-references to make sure that references to other sections of the code are still accurate. Next slide, please. Um and also to make sure that we're in alignment with current state and federal law. Um Next slide, please. And so, I have the ordinance changes the proposed ordinance changes listed in numerical order, um but I won't describe each and every change. I'll talk about them in terms of categories. Um and so one category of proposed changes is updating position titles. And so the town's finance director position has been replaced with an administrative services director position. And so those references are proposed to be updated in the code. Next slide, please. Um another category of changes has to do with what the town manager's supervisor supervisorial responsibilities are. Um and the code needs to be corrected because the code used to say that uh the town manager did not have supervisory responsibility over the town clerk or town treasurer. Um and that's incorrect. And so we're proposing to update that language. Next slide, please. Um and then with regards to the powers and duties of the town manager, uh the proposed change would state that the town manager can designate another employee to attend town council meetings in his or her stead in the event that he or she is unable to attend. Next slide, please. Um and then another position title update is currently the code references a town administrator, which is a position that no longer exists. And so those references have been replaced with references to the town clerk. And then there is a change a proposed change to personnel board meeting requirements. The code currently states that the personnel board meets annually. Um however, in Stop's experience, there's not a need to meet annually because there's no guarantee that there will be business to conduct each year. And so the proposal is to change the requirement so that the meetings occur as needed. And the meetings will still occur at the date and time that's specified for personnel board meetings, but they would only be held if there was business to conduct. Next slide, please. Um the next two changes have to do with referring to the administrative services director. Next slide, please. Um in the town's sidewalk vending ordinance, there is a holdover reference to pushcarts, which is the term that we used before the state law came into effect. And so, for consistency with state law, we're recommending that that term be replaced with the state term, which is vending device. And the next one has to do with the town's special events ordinance. Um the ordinance talks about penalties for um having a special event without a permit. And uh there's just a typo in the cross-reference, and so the proposal is to change the cross-reference to the correct section. Next slide, please. Um with regard to the second change that's noted on the slide, um that codified an urgency ordinance, um and the urgency ordinance has expired. And so, we're proposing to remove that code section since the ordinance that authorized it is no longer in effect. Next slide, please. Um with regard to animals in parks, um it's come to our attention that our code um prohibits animals off-leash under all circumstances. And pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, there will be some instances in which service animals can be off-leash, and so we're proposing an amendment to the code to reflect that. Next slide, please. Um these two sections have to do with the bonds and insurance that the town requires for its contracts. Um the code had specific um insurance and bond amount requirements in the code, but those requirements really should be tied to the risk associated with a specific contract. And so we're proposing an amendment to the code to give the town manager or designee the authority to determine what the appropriate amount of insurance or bond is to require. Next slide, please. Um those have to do with changes to titles. Next slide, please. Same. Next slide, please. And so those That's um a list of the changes that are proposed to the town code. Um tonight, staff is recommending introduction of the ordinance. Um and if it is introduced tonight, it would return for adoption on August 18th. And if it's adopted by the council on August 18th, it the changes would take effect 30 days after that. And that concludes my presentation.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thank you very much. Are there questions for the town attorney? Seeing none, I will open up public comment on this item. I have no hand uh no cards in the room and no hands raised on Zoom. So I will close public comment and I'll look to Councilmember Badame.

Vice Mayor Ristow:
Thank you. Um this item is essentially general housekeeping um in regard to legalities. So I move to introduce an ordinance amending various sections of the Town of Los Gatos Municipal Code to correct grammatical errors, clarify existing provisions, ensure consistency with current state and federal law, and make administrative, technical, and non-substantive changes.

Speaker 4:
Thank you, Vice Mayor Ristow.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. I'll second it. I also want to extend thanks to um it looks like our administrative technician Bridget Falcone did this work and you know I know every time I find a typo or an inconsistency I'm sure coming through this was very tedious but hopefully somewhat satisfying to clean it up and I really appreciate probably the hours that she put into this.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. I will just echo those sentiments appreciate our town attorney and town clerk for making sure everything all of our T's are crossed and I's are dotted seeing no other comments I will turn to the town clerk for a roll call vote.

Speaker 1:
Councilmember Ernie.

Speaker 2:
I.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Hooters.

Speaker 4:
I.

Speaker 5:
Councilmember Badami.

Speaker 6:
I.

Speaker 1:
Vice Mayor Arista.

Speaker 2:
I.

Speaker 3:
Mayor Moore.

Speaker 4:
I.

Speaker 5:
Passes unanimously. Thank you all. Okay, so we will now move to item 17 which is regarding electronic pet containment in the town's fence regulations and I'll be turning to the town attorney to hear about that item.

Speaker 6:
Thank you mayor. So this item relates to a request that was made by a resident at a meeting about 6 months ago. The resident had asked whether the town council would consider changing the town code to specifically allow for the use of electronic pet containment systems in the hillside areas. Next slide please. An electronic pet containment systems use a buried wire around the property that establishes a boundary for pets and the pets wear a collar and when they cross the boundary they receive an electric shock. Next slide please. State law does allow for the use of electronic pet containment systems for ordinary pets but it does require an actual physical enclosure for potentially dangerous or vicious dogs. Next slide, please. The town code currently requires that dogs either be on a leash or confined behind a 6-ft fence. Um and that's contained in section 4.40.005. Next slide, please. Um however, there is also a town code section in the zoning chapter um applies to properties in the hillside areas and it provides that uh fences in the hillside areas cannot exceed 6 ft. And then further, on properties that are 1 acre or more, the perimeter fencing must be wildlife-friendly. And wildlife-friendly is defined in the code as a fence that wildlife can pass through and it requires um an 18-in difference between the base of the fence and the ground level. Um so, wildlife-friendly friendly fencing would not be effective in containing a pet. Next slide, please. Um and so, there is a conflict within the code because in one place there's a requirement for 6-ft fence and then in another place in the hillside areas there's a cap at 42 in uh s plus it needs to be wildlife-friendly. Next slide, please. Um the resident who made the request also referenced the Room the Room to Roam Act, which is a state law um and he mentioned that he believed an ordinance change would bring the town closer in alignment to that state requirement. Um the Room to Roam Act is a state law that requires uh cities and towns to consider wildlife movement when they're planning new development. So, it's not directly related to the issue of the town code, um but it is related to the issue of wildlife movement um to the extent that an electronic pet containment system would allow for wildlife movement. Next slide, please. Um so, I've composed a list of pros and cons of amending the town code to allow for electronic pet containment. Um there may be others, um but this is a starting place. Um so, the first pro would be that it would resolve a conflict within the town code. Um it would support wildlife movement. It is a more cost-effective option than building physical fences. Um and electronic pet containment systems do work well on uneven terrain where it's difficult to build a physical fence. Next slide, please. Um the cons are that electric correction can cause discomfort to pets. Um and then it's important to note that an electronic pet containment system would not keep wildlife off the property. Um it only works for the pet that's wearing the collar. Um pets have been known to escape if the system fails. Um and it will be more difficult for town staff to verify whether or not property owners are in compliance. Next slide, please. Um so, we did research on which other jurisdictions currently allow specifically allow electronic pet containment. Um and we located a number of jurisdictions in Southern California. Um the first is the County of San Diego. The next is the City of Del Mar. Next slide, please. Um and then in Northern the city of Salinas, um, does allow it, and so does the county of Monterey. Next slide, please. Um, City of Rolling Hills allows it as well. Um, and then with regard to jurisdictions that are closer to us, Santa Clara County and Los Altos Hills are working on wildlife-friendly fencing regulations, but I did not locate, um, any information that they were considering allowing electronic pet containment specifically. Next slide, please. Um, and so the purpose of this presentation was to provide the council with information regarding electronic pet containment and the town code. And, um, I'm here to answer questions, and if the town council is interested in pursuing amendments to the town code, um, that's something that I can work on.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much. Uh, questions for the town attorney. Uh, my question is, uh, if this is something we were to provide direction for you to pursue, what would be the approximate ballpark timeline on preparing an ordinance?

Speaker 2:
Um, there's a number of, uh, very important public hearings that the town council will be hearing regarding, um, SB 330 applications and other applications. So, my thought would be that, uh, the town council could direct that this work be undertaken after those hearings are complete. Um, and so I would anticipate that this amendment could be undertaken, um, in November.

Speaker 3:
Great. Thank you. All right, seeing, uh, no other questions or comments, I will turn to the public. Um, we have one speaker card from Keith Blaine.

Keith Bohannon:
Good evening, Mayor Moore, members of the council. Um as you know, my name is Keith Bohannon, and I was the my family and my pet were the ones that brought this to your attention. Um so, thank you for all your attention so far. I really wanted to sincerely thank our town attorney for going through this and putting together um a fair, well-researched report. Um and pointing and confirming that there is this conflict with between our two code sections. Um and that it didn't appear to be uh intentional. It was it wasn't uh wasn't something that the town was trying to do. I think it's great that we found four more jurisdictions than I did. I think we have total of 11 between our two reports. Um I wanted to just speak to the the cons if I could. And so, the one on the the pain uh that uh an animal, a pet, or dog might uh experience. With all the major systems, I'd say there's Dog Watch, Pet Safe, and SportDog. Um they start with an audible noise within about 10 ft. They vary between device. Um and then not Dog Watch, but the other two have coincide with the vibration also in the collar. So, there is this uh a non-painful warning system before you get within the actual fence itself. Um and so, then that that shock or that what we Dog Watch refers to is kind of it's more like a static or uh like when you touch a doorknob, it's kind of like a static shock. It's not like a punishment pain intended type thing. Um in my personal experience with our dog, um I'd say like with most training aids for dogs, once they've been trained on it, uh the collar can be taken off and they don't really they've learned that this is where I don't go. Um, so on the second con was related to power failure. And uh, in my proposed uh, addendum language, uh, thinking about this and thinking about it from the public and my neighbor's standpoint, I would recommend uh, 24-hour battery backup, which is very similar to motorcycle battery that you see in this building's fire alarm sprinkler system. Um, and then you're kind of like your your your home uh, alarm system. Um, and then on the escape, again, once the dog has been properly trained on the system, um, it's common for them to no longer need the collar. Um, and then the fourth item uh, on compliance, um, like all fences within our town, uh, inspections and owner maintenance is required. And the proposed uh, permitting process is included in uh, in my kind of five-step suggestion for the the amendment. Um, and then I think I just wanted to clarify that the room to room to roam act is going into effect in 2028, not in the not in 2025. So, anyways, I kindly ask that we direct staff to draft a an amendment. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Thank you very much. Looks like we have a question for you from Councilmember Hudes.

Speaker 6:
Yeah, thank you. Um, thank you for all the work on this. Um, the in in your understanding, does town current town code prohibit you from implementing uh, this type of a system?

Speaker 1:
I have personally been cited for having this type of a system and not having a 6-ft fence on my hillside property.

Speaker 2:
So, the issue is not having the required fence.

Speaker 3:
Um,

Speaker 4:
or is the issue that this type of a system is not allowed?

Speaker 5:
If I were to put up a property line 6-ft fence on my property, it would prevent it'd be in conflict with the uh hillside resident fence uh wildlife movement code.

Speaker 6:
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Um, any other questions for the speaker?

Speaker 2:
I did I did a little the 1-acre versus hillside resident. I find that pretty gray, and I would I personally want to read more about how to find it cuz I always refer to it as hillside residents, and there is the 1-acre version, but I think it would be I would include both because hillside residents I I just don't I don't know if the 1-acre minimum requirement is [snorts] encapsulating everything.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Oh, yep, now we have another question.

Speaker 4:
So, um, your citation, just digging a little deeper, was that an administrative warning or did it um involve a fee that you would have to pay to the town?

Speaker 5:
Um, it it's a $100 fee for each citation.

Speaker 6:
Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much for your comments.

Speaker 2:
Thank you, guys. Appreciate it.

Speaker 3:
Okay, seeing no other comments, um, I will turn back to the council. Yes, Vice Mayor Resto.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. First of all, I appreciate um the dilemma this resident has, and it sounds like most of our hillside residents would have because it's impossible to comply with both of our regulations. And over the years, I've attended ad hoc meetings about the fence ordinance and updates, and And it is really important, and state laws going to codify that that our wildlife have the right to roam. Um the con about the electronic fence is that it won't keep wildlife out. Well, that is a property owner's issue, not our issue. And I would imagine that there can be a smaller enclosure on the property where the dog could be out unsupervised, but you know, speaking as a downtown resident, we've had a mountain lion run through our backyards. They can jump over a 6-ft fence. So, if you're worried about your dog's safety, you don't leave them out alone at night anyway. Um I also have personal experience with using what would be called um correction or a shock collar. Um I had a Vizsla, which is a dog that likes to exercise a lot, and we do we use if when I had him, we did a lot of um off-leash hiking in the East Bay hills where it's legal, and there are a lot of rattlesnakes there. And so, those of us who had sporting breed dogs got together, and we brought in an agency that did um rattlesnake aversion training. And you really can't do that without inflicting a little bit of discomfort on the dog when it smells the skin, when it hears the rattle, and when it sees an actual rattlesnake. And I can speak from experience, my dog, who had very short fur, was on the lowest setting of the shock. I touched it, I barely felt anything, but he elevated. Um and he only needed one. And he was solid. We did we renewed the training period maybe like 5 years later, but I will tell you he was the best he kept me from getting bitten by rattlesnakes because he would give the warning as soon as he thought he came anywhere near it. Now, generalized to other snakes, too, but I was okay with that. So, I think the argument that this could be cruel to an animal, I also think it's cruel if they can't go outside, if they can't go outside of a 5-ft enclosure, if they can't run and be free, and I know that compassionate pet owners will choose systems that will train the dog well and with the audible and with the vibration. Dogs are smart. They'll they'll figure it out. So, I think this is a really important thing for us to do. It also looks like we have about 400 properties that are already using this type of system. And so, I really would love to I'll I'll make a motion that staff come back to us in November with an ordinance change for us to consider allowing electronic fences in the Hillside, but also perhaps for properties that may not be in the Hillside that are over an acre.

Speaker 5:
Councilmember Braden, I mean

Speaker 6:
For the multiple reasons cited by the vice mayor, I'll be supporting the motion.

Speaker 1:
Great. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
Councilmember Braden, I mean

Speaker 3:
Yeah, it was at a second.

Speaker 4:
Yeah, I took that.

Speaker 5:
Yes.

Speaker 6:
I I wanted to understand from town staff perspective two things. Uh One is the level of effort to create this system. And then the second or this ordinance, and then the second is what level of effort or cost would be incurred to ensure compliance as compared to the current code requirements. Um and related to that, who on town staff would be tasked with this? Is this currently budgeted? Um and if it does incur additional costs would these be permitted in a way that we could recover fees for this for the work.

Speaker 1:
So with regard to the first question, I mean I know it's a simple fix, but whenever you change the ordinance, you have to make sure it's internally consistent. So it's you know, it's not as much effort as the ADU ordinance for for say, but you know, there's still a level of effort. And it would for the council would require first reading, a second reading. And then with regard to enforcement, the town currently does complaint-based code enforcement and there's one code enforcement officer. I think the second code enforcement officer is out of funding. And so the officer responds whenever there's a complaint. And to my recollection, the complaints that the officer has received pertain to dogs being off property. And so the citations that I'm familiar with have been issued for dogs being off property. And then with regard to permitting, I imagine that it would be the same process that the town requires for fence permits, but I would have to defer to the community development department and I can work with them on this later.

Speaker 2:
If I may add to that, the cost will be associated with the regulatory structure we want to put into place, what type of inspection occurs up front, what kind of periodic review, if there is a complaint, to what extent are we going out there. We'd also have to look at to what extent animal services would be responding to dog-related incidents that are occurring because we typically call them. Lastly, I do want to highlight that I don't believe this fits any of your strategic priorities. So I know that the town attorney mentioned we can get it done by November, but I would raise caution that if there are other priorities that get bumped, that this is not currently a strategic priority. So, if it is an item you would like us to consider, uh it may be a little looser timeline. Um might be beneficial to make sure that other strategic priorities are not impacted.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, so I could just follow up on that. Um I know I know I don't believe it is a strategic priority. Is this an issue that we're hearing about from a lot of residents? Um or is, you know, are there other ways that this might be perceived as a priority? Are there um a lot of residents who are complaining about the existing uh fence ordinance or are um feel that they're being prohibited from implementing this type of a system?

Speaker 4:
My understanding is that a lot of property owners have already implemented electronic fence systems. Um they just haven't been cited because their dogs haven't been found off the property. And so, the request that I'm familiar with is coming from the the single resident. Um but I I do think there are other properties that are using the electronic fence system that the town's not aware of.

Speaker 5:
Vice Mayor Ristow.

Speaker 6:
Um I have two thoughts. One is um we've just found an internal inconsistency. We're telling people that live in Hillside that they cannot have a solid 6-ft fence because it has to be wildlife permeable. And we're also telling them if they have a dog, they have to have a solid 6-ft fence. So, I think right there, that's an issue. Um I can be, I would say, um as soon as November in my motion, understanding that other things might cause it to push back. So, this isn't a mandate that it come to us. The other thought The other comment is people who do have fences have gates, and those gates open sometimes. I personally, probably in the last 6 years, have come across easily 20 dogs where I'm walking along and there's just a loose dog, and I most of the time can get them to come to me, look at the collar, call the phone number, and sometimes the owner is like, "Ah, the gardeners must have let him out." I one time had to bring the dog back to that house because no one was there. And, you know, if you don't have a leash with you, it's not very fun to walk a mile and a half holding onto a collar. So, um dogs get out with any system, or they can, and we don't go around and inspect that every gate is closed when a dog is in there. We're not going to go around, I imagine, and inspect to make sure every day that electronic fences are working. Our all of our things are big gas blower issue, everything is on a complaint basis. And, um we if we already have 400 properties with electronic fences, I have not seen 400 dogs running through town, so they must be working.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, and just a question for the town attorney. We don't prohibit electronic fencing, correct? It's the requirement for the fencing that's the trigger.

Speaker 2:
Um so, we have a section in the animal chapter of our code that says the owners need to control their dog by either a leash or a fence not less than 6 ft high. Um and so, that's a minimum height for the fences, and so that that would preclude the electronic fence system.

Speaker 3:
Two thoughts. So, an electronic fence that the sensor activates within 6 ft, both in height and distance, wouldn't that qualify as a in the a fence that's of 6 ft of height.

Speaker 4:
Um it says keep such dog confined behind a fence not less than 6 ft high.

Speaker 5:
So, the internal consistency in my mind I don't I don't know the exact nature of the citation, but if there was an internal inconsistency in hillside properties and we review that case, I would have a problem enforcing a citation against somebody when there's two different codes. When the bottom line intent is that you must take measures to protect that dog from being outside of your property. And so, I don't have a problem with the ordinance. I just want to make sure we're not accelerating its implementation to the detriment of something else. And so, if if you can get to it by November, great. If there's no other priorities that are impacted, but if it takes a little bit longer, I think that latitude be beneficial.

Speaker 6:
Okay, great. I I have no issues with that. Um and and I'll just uh add my thoughts that um the vice mayor articulately said everything that I feel about this. I think this is a very common sense uh way to approach this issue. I think it's clearly um clearly is an issue, and I do um as a big animal lover, I think this is actually much much uh you know, more kind to the animals um than it is uh cruel. And so, I would be very supportive of this. Yeah, Councilmember Hutas.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, I have trouble getting my head around the um priority of this relative to the other things that are in front of the town. Um I think it's a good idea. Um but uh I you know, if this uh motion passes, um I would only be supportive of implementing this if I really knew what the cost would be to ensure compliance um and whether those costs could be covered by uh, permits. Um, I'm not so much worried about the cost of developing the ordinance. I'm more concerned about the ongoing burden of uh, uh, this and and while it may make common sense to do it, um, we are in a very constrained budget environment and uh, I I'm not sure that I've heard evidence that this rises to the level of some of the other things that we're we're dealing with. So, um, you know, for that for that reason I won't be supporting this motion, but I'll be looking for information about what the cost of compliance would be when this comes forward.

Speaker 2:
If I may, I know a while ago we were talking about the cost of fees when we were looking at the fee study. The structure of the regulations and requirements we put into place are a direct correlation to the cost. And so, without looking at this a little more with the town attorney, if the fix could be as simple as adding another provision that says an electronic fence shall for the purposes of the section the 6-ft fence constitute a 6-ft fence. And that the regulatory structure is just if your dog isn't contained by that electronic fence, there really is nothing else for us to inspect. It's you're in violation and then you're fined. And so, if you streamline it and make it very simple and easy, there should not be a huge cost for somebody to say I'm putting it in and there shouldn't be a huge cost to enforce it. We're re- we're reactive code enforcement. So, if there's a complaint of a dog that gets out, then we enforce with the presumption that if there's not a 6-ft fence, which is there's inter- there's some inconsistency in the hillsides, that your electronic fence may be your only option, then the presumption is your electronic fence failed and therefore you're in violation. So, I think we can design it if you'd like very simplistically to reduce the cost on us and the cost on the individual who's putting it in.

Speaker 3:
Um yeah, I I mean that makes uh sense to me, but I'm looking at something with a proposed ordinance that is quite complex and cause and calls for a compliance efforts, you know, modeled on uh some other municipalities that are much larger than us and may have um you know, more resources available than we than we do.

Speaker 4:
If If you If the council allows some latitude to staff, we could look at a simplistic solution that fits us from a implementation and cost perspective on both the applicant and us. Unless you have some specific requirements that you absolutely want to see in an ordinance that would then increase the compliance costs, the cost to the applicant. If it's as simple as allowing this as an option, we can make this very simplistic.

Speaker 5:
Yeah.

Speaker 6:
I'm in favor of pure simplicity. Essentially, if a dog gets out, whether there's a 6-ft fence or an electronic fence, it's a violation and that's a code compliance issue. So, I don't really want to get into the details of how the electronic fence has to be installed or um what the current is or anything else. Um I don't know if we want to add an electronic fence with battery backup is, you know, you can think about that when it comes back to us, but I think just I I'm fine with simple and it's already in effect. It's just not compliant or consistent with our present code.

Speaker 1:
Yeah. So, question for the town attorney. It Are these comments helpful in terms of the work that's in front of you because, you know, I'm looking at a model ordinance and some very complex things and um it it sounds like there may be at least a majority of the council that would like to see a much simpler solution. Are you uh

Speaker 2:
Yeah, I'm I hear direction that the solution should be as simple as possible and I think it will be as simple as amending a couple of code sections and then adding some definitions.

Speaker 3:
That makes me more comfortable.

Speaker 4:
Yes, Councilmember Badami.

Speaker 5:
I'm all in for simplistic solution and a loose timeline.

Speaker 6:
Great. Um with that I will turn to the town clerk for a roll call vote.

Speaker 1:
And just for clarification, the motion specifically stated November. Is that still

Speaker 2:
As early as November, but that's not a requirement.

Speaker 3:
So, maybe maybe we just take

Speaker 4:
The motion was that staff come back in November with an ordinance to change um for changes to consider allowing electronic fences in the hillside and also properties that may be in the hillsides that are over an acre.

Speaker 5:
Okay, then I will adjust my motion to strike the timeline and just say that staff come back to us and remove the by November. If that's okay with the seconder.

Speaker 6:
Uh so approved as a seconder.

Speaker 1:
Okay. Okay, great.

Speaker 2:
Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Renny.

Speaker 4:
I

Speaker 5:
Councilmember Hudas.

Speaker 6:
I

Speaker 1:
Councilmember Badami.

Speaker 2:
I

Speaker 3:
Vice Mayor Aristo.

Speaker 4:
I

Speaker 5:
Mayor Moore.

Speaker 6:
I passes unanimously. Okay, we are just 1 minute shy of 9:00 p.m. So, we'll take a very quick 10-minute break. We will come back at 9:10 and hear our last item. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Mhm.

Speaker 2:
All right, good evening. I'm going to reconvene this meeting of the Los Gatos Town Council for our last item tonight, which is item 18, which is to review the request for supplemental sustaining grant funding, um allocate the available supplemental funding, and determine whether Cassie should remain a sustaining grant recipient. I'll turn it over to the library director, Ryan Baker.

Speaker 3:
Good evening, Council. I'm excited because it's the first time I've started my presentation before 11:00. So, this [laughter] is great. Uh I've got two things for you tonight as it pertains to the sustaining grants. The first is that back in June, in the budget, you put an additional 20,000 in supplemental sustaining grants, and you said, "Hey, Ryan, could you talk with go out to the uh sustaining grant recipients and ask them what they would do if they had some additional funds?" And what they came back with, I had uh three organizations uh came put four little proposals in, and those are all attached for you. The total dollar amount of those comes to 19,200, which falls under your 20,000 that you allocated for uh for that amount. Um so, uh so the first part is just to determine if you want to allocate those as such, or if you want to move in a different direction. And then the second part of that is that uh we have one of our our long-time sustaining grant recipients, which is uh Cassie Counseling Support Services for Youth, who's been doing amazing work at Los Gatos High School for years and years and years and years and years. Starting next year, um the high school is going to be taking those services internal. So, they're they're having their um they'll they're they're they're restructuring. And so, starting in fall, um there will not be a a contract with with Cassie any longer at the high school. We would give them uh 10,000 a year. And so, the question that I didn't know cuz this isn't hasn't something like this hasn't really popped up before is uh since that was kind of the the main reason we were giving this sustaining grant, uh should they continue to uh be sustaining grant recipients? Um and uh they they do still operate in town at St. Mary's, um and uh also in in uh, Lee High School, Lee High School. Um, uh, so those so they do still have a presence in town, uh, just not at the high school where they were where you used to having their main presence. So, you just have to make a little determination there if um, if they uh, they still qualify for as a St. Anne Grant recipient. Um, in which case I would just process the the $10,000 that's already earmarked there. If you decide that that uh, they no longer qualify there, then that $10,000 would just go back to general fund. Those are the two things I've got and um, I have a feeling that you've got a lot of questions for me. I saw some questions uh, in in an addendum there and so um, I'm I'm available to answer anything you've got.

Speaker 4:
Great. Questions of Director Baker. Council member Yudis.

Speaker 5:
Um, yeah, with regard to the Cassie situation, um, you know, one of the things that I know that you look at is the organization sustainable. Have Do you have any sense about with the scale back, um, whether Cassie as an entity will be sustainable in in um, you know, existing as a 501c3 and in providing services to St. Mary's and Lee High School and it is is that was it like 1/3 1/3 1/3 or was it a a smaller um, effort for them to serve those In other words, with discontinuing the high school, are is the is the organization really getting very much smaller?

Speaker 6:
Got it. So, it's a great question. I don't know the answer to that one. Um, I do believe that there are some Cassie um, uh, board board members or employees here in the audience and they may mentally take a note of that um, when for public comment, but I I do not know the answer to that one myself. Uh, I haven't looked um, more into that. Uh I I didn't actually know that everything was in transition until uh fairly recently. So.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Vice Mayor Resto.

Speaker 2:
Um and I just want to highlight a question I asked that I got an answer to, but to make sure everyone knows it. Um I know Cassie in the past has provided counseling services to Fisher Middle School. Um but it sounds like or maybe that'll be for staff. Are they They did not include that as a school that they cover right now, is it?

Speaker 3:
Uh so in uh in the communication that I had with them, uh Fisher Middle School didn't get listed. Um and so I I can't verify if they're they are at Fisher at the moment. Um that may be another one what during public comment that they

Speaker 4:
That'd be a pretty big omission on their part, but

Speaker 5:
Okay. All right. Yeah, so my apologies there. I I uh that did that one didn't uh come to light for me.

Speaker 6:
Yeah. No, I understand. Thank you. Yep. One more question. Did they request uh when they sent the letter, did they still want the $10,000, but they're letting us know that they're not doing the high school anymore?

Speaker 1:
Oh, no, the the way it worked out was that when I was starting to do all of the stuff for the sustaining grantees um for all the the back end administration, uh was when I learned that they would no longer be at the high school. And at that point, I was confused because we've never really been in a situation where one of our sustaining grantees um has has fallen off. The The only other um time something sort of similar has happened was when Live Oak Adult Day Services uh shuttered their doors completely, and that was during the uh during the pandemic. Um and so obviously there was no grant in that situation. Um this one's a little different. I just didn't know how to proceed. Um so I thought it best to take it before council. Um the money is earmarked in the budget. You've already approved that budget. Um I just didn't know how we determined if they had still qualified under sustaining grants for for that. So

Speaker 2:
that a lot. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Great. So I know we have at least one speaker um from Cassie, so I'll open up public comment and look to Amy Gibson um who we have in the room and then I will look to Zoom.

Amy Gibson:
Good evening, Mayor Moore and Vice Mayor Ristow and members of the council. Thank you. Oh um my name is Amy Gibson. I'm here as a Los Gatos resident as as well as as the development manager for Cassie. Our um interim executive director is participating via Zoom online. And together we hope we can answer your questions. Yeah. Um would you like me to first start with those or to address the things that I came to say?

Speaker 5:
Um so you'll have 3 minutes to speak um and then uh so please proceed and then we will ask any questions we have.

Speaker 6:
Beautiful. Beautiful. I um we've lived in Los Gatos for about 20 years. My kids attended Los Gatos schools and we were very very happy to have Cassie services at Los Gatos High School when my kids were there. Um as a former educator, I'm also um development manager because I believe in what Cassie does. I believe in what we're doing. I believe that all kids deserve access to mental health support right in their schools without barriers and without delays. And so I'm here to respectfully request that you continue to support Cassie services for all Los Gatos students, not just those at Los Gatos High School. Yeah. Why? The need is really great. It is great. For about the past decade, depression and particularly anxiety have just shot up among young people. Um mental health concerns are now the number one reason that young people, children, in addition to adolescents, end up in the in the ER. Um it's just catastrophic. Um in high-capacity communities like this one, we are seeing tons of anxiety, we're seeing depression, we're seeing academic stress, and all kinds of kids, those that are on the margins, and then those who look like they have it all together. We see a lot of kids who are struggling in silence. And being right on campus is really key. So, in one of our local schools, one of the schools we serve, right nearby, um there was a very quiet student who was just flying under everyone's radar. And a teacher just thought something seems off, asked our therapist to check in on them. And when they did, um thank goodness, it was um not just a quiet kid, not just a struggling kid. This kid was in active suicidal crisis, ready to take their life. And so, our therapist was there with them for 5 hours um during the crisis process, just providing that safe, comforting presence. And when mom got down to school, she just hugged our therapist. She had no idea. Um young people sometimes want to hide. So, this is why we're on campus. Not very long ago, one of our kids in this community was in a dark, dark place looking for a way out, and now they've been surrounded by a circle of support with ongoing, you know, help to find a way through. That is what CASY does. That is what we bring to each school community that we serve. Los Gatos, Leigh, few Los Gatos kids at Westmont, and now at Saint Mary. And I'm just grateful for the town's support to help keep kids alive.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Um questions? Yes, Vice Mayor Stone, and then Councilmember Yutis.

Speaker 2:
Thank you. I have some questions that you might not be able to answer. I'll do my best. But, what I think about is, for example, when um when CASY was at Los Gatos High School, first of all, our grants are meant to cover activities typically that impact Los Gatos. I mean, it's Los Gatos money for Los Gatos students. And I understand, I know that there are a lot of students that go to Westmont, Leigh, and Saint Mary's that live in Los Gatos. I also think about the high school where a significant portion of the students that attended Los Gatos High School are not in um the borders of the town. They're in unincorporated Santa Cruz Mountains. They're in county pockets. So, I'm I'm trying to understand like this $10,000 is that in line, or can you even give me an idea if that's in line with a what the costs are at these other schools and how that relates to the percentage of students that are Los Gatos High School students?

Speaker 3:
I will do my best.

Speaker 4:
Crazy math, but

Speaker 5:
Yeah, I will do my best. So, um the way CASY works is we partner with schools. We have a contract with those schools. And those school contracts never cover the full cost of providing services. Even at our most well-resourced districts and schools like Los Gatos Saratoga, um MVLA, the peninsula, even those, there's always a funding gap, always. So, CASY as a community-based organization has always fundraised from a variety of sources, municipal, big community partners, individuals, corporations, and um who am I missing? Foundations. We we go everywhere asking because the Surgeon General said, "We need all of us to address the youth mental health crisis." So, the question is we are on campus, and then we serve any kid that comes to us, regardless of where we live, where they live. We don't ask them. Um there aren't precise percentages out there telling you exactly what percentage of students are residents in each town. That's not publicly available information, so you have to kind of extrapolate. You have to look at about 80 to 90% of Los Gatos kids go to Los Gatos High School, and the other Los Gatos High School students go to Leigh, most of them feel at Westmont. Am I I can't speak to the mountain.

Speaker 6:
Um could you also let me know um like this $10,000, how much of a gap does that cover? Like how big is the gap typically, and with the other fundraising you do, what does $10,000 mean for that gap?

Speaker 1:
Yeah, it provides a little bit of salary support for each of our therapists. Um to give you a feel for in the past year, we know we had an overall fundraising gap of about $400,000, but we received in in multiple ways. We do have to answer your question, we do have strong reserves. Um most all of our funding goes to fund people and programs, about 90 91% somewhere in there. Um so we run very lean, there's not a lot of overhead. So it sounds like what could $10,000 do? It helps. It adds up. It's my job to go out there and ask and ask and ask, and those 10,000 10,000 10,000s add up to our funding gap this year. Last year through these kinds of grants that you all have generously provided, we raised 99% of our fundraising budget. So it does actively make a difference. Thank you.

Speaker 2:
Councilmember Ritus. You know, I I mean I think Cassie is a tremendous resource um for for our community, and um I want to thank you and the organization for persisting. I know there's been some challenges. There were some huge challenges certainly during COVID and different different types now. I was just and the questions I had earlier were really trying to understand what does the transition look like for CASY? Um are there uh therapists have there been therapists on site at Fisher, Saint Mary's, Leigh? And how do those numbers compare to what was at LGHS?

Speaker 3:
Sure. Sure. Fisher predates my time at CASY. That was some time ago. Um what we find often when we work with school districts is that they love what we do. We partner so well and so closely with them that those that have resources sometimes want to take it in house. And that's what happened at LGHS. Very collegial relationship. Very wonderful transition. Zero animosity. Um So Fisher predates us. To give you an idea for numbers, there's been a transition that's been a few years in the making. Since 2023 we've been writing about it in our you know grant reports and the various things we're trying to let you know this is coming down the pipe. Um I believe 2 years ago that we served 85 Los Gatos residents. Um the last year that we were at Los Gatos High School we served 61 Los Gatos residents. And this past year, where I mentioned to Ryan, um we were not at Los Gatos High School for the first time ever and we still served 27 residents. That is only with the addition of Saint Mary at the very last at the very tail end of the school year. So, we expect that to rise. So, there's almost half as many kids that are being served at these other schools. Does that give you some

Speaker 4:
Yeah, that's terrific. That's That's very helpful. No other questions from me, so we'll turn to Executive Director Amy Gloner and any other questions and we can ask her. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Thank you for your time. Thank you for listening.

Speaker 6:
Uh good evening, Mayor Moore, Vice Mayor Rislow, and council members. I'm Mary Gloner and speaking on behalf of CASY, Counseling Support Services for Youth, as its interim executive director. Many of the things that I'm going to be sharing with you my talking points, Amy has done fabulously well and will be sharing that lived experience. But, I just want to freshen a little bit on history, um where CASY is now, and hopefully our uh future together. CASY was founded over 16 years ago to partner with local schools to ensure the mental health of its students. When founded, Los Gatos High School was reeling from three student deaths in 4 months, including a young person who lost her life to suicide. CASY was selected to partner with Los Gatos High School to create an embedded mental health program on campus. Um as Amy um referred, after an over decade and half of an award uh a half of an award-winning partnership, Los Gatos High School gained the capacity, the leadership, resources, and wisdom to institutionalize CASY's school-based model by providing therapists in-house this past year, not next year as Director Baker reported. This included hiring CASY's therapist as a district staff. Superintendent Rocha shared and expressed with me uh valuing a continued relationship with CASY for possible future collaboration. While CASY's no longer at the town's Anchor High School, CASASC remains committed to serving its Los Gatos residents by continuing its over decade partnership at Leigh and Westmont High Schools where the need is great and the budgets are limited. And last March, CASASC began a partnership with Saint Mary School in downtown serving TK through eighth graders. CASASC can proudly say that it has presence across the town of Los Gatos addressing the mental health priorities of its diverse children from TK through high school. For each child and family CASASC serves including a brief check-in, a training or specially tailored counseling plan, it can lead to a life-saving intervention. Even one young life lost to suicide is too many. We thank the town of Los Gatos for your long-standing commitment to youth mental health. We are hopeful to continue our valued legacy partnership.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. You're welcome. Questions for Mary? Okay. Seeing none, I will close public comment and and turn back to the council. Councilmember Mehuitas.

Speaker 2:
Um yeah, I I wanted to ask about the uh the grant for uh rental housing assistance. And um I think I I sent an email in earlier, but my you know, really my question is um aren't there really three organizations that are providing rental housing assistance in Los Gatos? And if that's the case, what maybe not all through the grant program, but through another means?

Speaker 3:
That is uh that that is correct. So we've got uh two organizations that are through the community grant program. Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition and St. Vincent de Paul. The Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition is the the lead agency for that. So we went we had a a period where we had I was doing contracts and agreements with both of them and they were working very collaboratively. And sometimes they were even working with the same client. And so I suggested that maybe we could just I could I could do half the work. I could just you know work with one of them and then behind the scenes they could figure out how it is that they wanted to work together and how it is that they wanted to to to do all that. But I would only have to do work through the the financial piece with this one organization and the reporting with one organization. The way that we came to that was after I I pitched that to you back in Oh gosh. It was August of 20 2025 about 12 months ago. The direction was for me to go ahead and just talk with those two organizations and and then see what see what we could come up with. And so I did. I talked to both organizations and what they came up with is they said well let's have Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition be the lead agency for this one. St. Vincent de Paul has has a different grant as well. So they have the laundry grant. So they they just held on to that as the laundry grant. They had Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition be the sort of the fiscal lead. And then they decided that what they would do is that I do all the contracts agreements and reports and everything through Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition and then they collectively work at a level down where they they they split the money and they do that. But then all the reporting goes back through Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition. So that's where we got there. So that was a that was a collaborative agreement that we that we came up with that. The other organization is West Valley Community Services. Now, they do get there's two different kind of grants as it were that goes to them. One comes through the sustaining grant and that is for the CARES program. The CARES program is the Oh, it's the Community Assistance Resources and Education Program. And our particular contribution through the sustaining grant for that one goes to one of their service goes to their operations, one of their service workers. And they do food distribution, case management, referrals and also emergency rental and utility assistance. But that portion that comes through the community grant program is through the CARES for the CARES program for a staff member. The other portion that they get does not go through the community grant growth program. It goes through an agreement that they have with with CDD. That was an agreement that was originally entered into in 2011 and it expires in 2030. And that is the called the Comprehensive Emergency Assistance Program. And under that one, there there is there there may be as an option rent direct rental assistance in the same way that Most Scott's Anti-Racism Coalition and St. Vincent de Paul are providing. But not necessarily. They also do a whole swath of other things regarding rental rental things as I understand it. So, utility help, other help with re-housing, other kind of problems that maybe intervention in preventing eviction and whatnot. I don't know the full scope of what they do there because that doesn't run through my it doesn't run through me at all. It's that's an agreement. It's a completely separate thing. Their reporting um uh it's something that's completely different also. Uh so, what their requirements are under that program in terms of reporting is is n- could be very different than what they uh report uh in terms of their cares grant. So, yes, there's so there's three. I tried to make it one. That's but that's what we have.

Speaker 4:
I if I could just follow up um you I believe your original recommendation was to have one agency provide rental assistance. Having observed this uh situation that we're in now, would it be more efficient just to have one agency provide rental assistance?

Speaker 5:
Um so, I I kind of So, on my end, speaking selfishly, it's less work for me to just produce and process one set of agreements. In terms of the way that uh these organizations work together very collaboratively, it seems like they figured out a good process to work on their own at a secondary level and get it figured out. So, um so, they've they've shown that they're able to work together very very well under this process where essentially I'm at this point through the community grant program, I'm just giving one check to uh to one organization and two organizations are figuring it out uh at the next level down. Um I will say that when we did have that initial time where we uh where we invited on a competitive basis organizations to apply for that rental assistance bucket of money, that West Valley Community Services did not apply at that time. So, they didn't they didn't put their name in the hat uh for that, which is uh I I can't speak to why, uh but they just they they didn't get in line on on that particular one. So.

Speaker 6:
I but they are already getting money to provide that kind of service under a contract rather than under a grant.

Speaker 1:
Right. Yeah, it's just through a different program through through different monies. So, it just doesn't it doesn't follow the same agreement. It doesn't follow the same process. It doesn't follow the same reporting that comes through my office.

Speaker 2:
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Bedani?

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Um when we had this conversation before where we didn't obviously take the recommendation just to have the one organization and we went to three um I may be quoting Councilmember Rennie, but it seems like we're spreading the peanut butter across all these different other organizations. And then you mentioned this second level of agreements where parties might split the money a certain way and I I'm just I mean, I'm looking back to a a council motion that was made back in 2024 where we specifically said an equal split of 12,500 of 25,000 in between Saint Vincent de Paul and Los Gatos Anti-Racist Coalition. So, did both organizations receive the exact split amount or did they take it amongst themselves to maybe not do exactly what council made in their motion as being binding?

Speaker 5:
Uh so, in the year that you're referring to, that's exactly what happened. We took that the 25,000 and we split it uh 2 12 12,500 12,500. Each of them got the the exact same amount. I had two sets of contracts, two sets of agreements. Two sets of reporting, all of this. The following year is uh in 2025 is when I uh it would drop from 25,000 down to 20,000. And that was the year uh where I said, "You know what? Really, I don't like having two organizations. Can you pick one?" And and and so it was at that point um so so so yes, it did get split uh per council's direction in 2024. And then in 2025 per Council's new direction um I I I I per per direction of Council I talked to both of the organizations and then they figured out the allocation. And the allocation they figured out was that they're just going to have one as LGS uh uh Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition being the sort of the fiduciary of it and then they would they would work together. Um but I wouldn't have to do two sets of reporting.

Speaker 6:
Okay. Um with that, I just need clarification on the definition of rental assistance. Um does it include storage unit rent, security deposits, and hotel stays?

Speaker 1:
So what is you currently have does not include that. Um what's uh what is being proposed in the supplemental one um would be in addition to uh or rather an expansion of what uh you know what I don't need to look it up. Uh would be an expansion of what they're already doing. Um at the current moment uh they everything that they put into their uh their their applications and all the paperwork is is just direct rental assistance. It doesn't have these other parts. So this would be an expansion.

Speaker 2:
Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Herdis?

Speaker 4:
Um yeah, with regard to the grants um that have been awarded, have all the funds been expended?

Speaker 5:
Uh so in the first year in which um the Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition received a grant and that was a when it at that point it was a competitive grant, just a flat-out competitive grant, uh they did not expend the entire amount and they did return the unused funds to the penny. Uh so they accounted for everything that they spent and they accounted for everything they didn't spend and they they they they refunded it to us. Um that's probably one of the only only times I've actually had any organization tell me what they did and spent and give it back. So, um uh in the following years, uh which would be the last 2 years, they've uh they've accounted for all of their spending and those grants have been spent out. So.

Speaker 6:
Okay. Um just a I'll just add a little bit of of flavor here, which is just that for my understanding of of these two organizations, Anti-Racism Coalition and St. Vincent de Paul Society, an important aspect of why both of them exist to give out funding is that they are 100% volunteer run and so there's a massive capacity issue um when it comes to actually expending the the funding. Um and so I think that's why the two or from my understanding, that's why the two organizations like both being there. So, if someone is not available on a Sunday at 10:00 p.m. um in one organization and they are at another, then they can work together to allocate funding in a in a quick manner. Yes, Councilmember Bodami and then Vice Mayor Ristow.

Speaker 1:
I want to understand the accounting that you were referring to. Um you said both organizations provide accounting for the money that was spent. Um are there records as to who received the funds um and how much they got and is it going towards Los Gatos residents?

Speaker 2:
Uh yes. So, um uh so, for all of the community grants, every recipient, we have not in the past asked for them to We we had part of the contract was we want you to save all your invoices, save all your receipts, save all your transactions, but we'll call on you if we we want to get them. Uh about I don't know, a couple months ago, uh we called on them and we said, "Everybody, we want all your receipts right now." So, now I'm getting or 99 grants worth of organizations giving me all kinds of receipts and invoices. Uh the Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition's uh reporting is is a is a good example of reporting. It's it's probably what I'm going to use as a template for the other organizations of what we would like to see. Um I can kind of tell you uh it's they They have Um they've given me line by line expenditures um with all the grant funds used. They've the disclosures. They've given me copies of canceled checks. They've given me um the approximate locations in order to protect the actual identity of the the the person involved. So they didn't give an actual street address. Um if we would like to look at that on the back end, they said they would provide that to us on the back end, but as part of terms of public record um of for what they reported here, they just put the approximate. Everything is in Los Gatos for the money that uh we have given them. Um they gave the circumstances um and then they gave an indication of whether it was paid directly to the applicant or if it was to paid to the landlord or to the property management. So um I've got canceled checks. I've got payment sent. I Yeah, their their accounting is is pretty good.

Speaker 3:
Okay, thank you. I just, you know, gathering this information cuz I understand that West Valley Community Services already executes a rental assistant program and that for fiscal year 2026 totals 35,000. So again, um my number's correct. You're looking at me funny.

Speaker 4:
Um I'm not sure we give them 15,000 uh per year.

Speaker 5:
Okay.

Speaker 6:
Um and uh and again, I don't I don't I I know that it may include this direct rental assistance, but their their program in general has it is would be more of an expanded version, I guess. So they do like helping with um utility shutoff. Um other sort of um maybe helping to to negotiate or or mediate with um you know, possible eviction, those types of things. So, um so whereas these uh Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition working with St. Vincent de Paul is is just the direct um the the direct rental assistance, which is um lost my job, I'm a single mom, I'm you know, I've I've gotten a a notice of eviction. I just need like while I'm looking for another job, I need to cover the rent. Um whereas West Valley Community Services um is is more of an expanded thing. Part of that money, a 15,000, maybe that direct rental assistance, but not necessarily all of it. And again, I don't see their reporting or paperwork because for that particular program, because it doesn't pass it's not part of the community grant program. So, so I I don't know the what those those reports look like.

Speaker 1:
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 2:
Yeah.

Speaker 3:
Vice Mayor Ristow. Whoo, I think I forgot what I was going to say. I've gotten so wrapped up in this. Um you know, there there were there was a letter submitted where there was some concern, and you know, I remember when there was the discussion of granting the money to Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition, and they would divide it with St. Vincent de Paul. So, that's not a concern for me, because I think when I was part of that voting for that, that fulfilled what I intended anyway. In terms of the conditions that we set with the dispersion of the dollar amount, do you believe that was fulfilled by those organizations?

Speaker 4:
Uh everything that's been reported to me is looks like it's fulfilled those obligations, yes.

Speaker 5:
Okay. And then um there was another comment about how they approached rental assistance, and I was going to ask and I emailed you this, did all groups comply with the requirements of the grant conditions? And it sounds like um Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition was exemplary in terms of

Speaker 6:
Uh yes, uh so everybody is is is complied but uh again I for West Valley Community Services I can't

Speaker 1:
It's a separate

Speaker 2:
speak to it because it goes through a separate process so I can't actually verify what theirs looks like, right? So.

Speaker 3:
Okay.

Speaker 4:
I mean it would be nice if it was all one process. I'm just saying, but

Speaker 5:
I know cuz it's hard to compare but they're different services. Um I don't have any other questions right now.

Speaker 6:
Great, thank you. Um so just some some feedback I'll provide um and try and get us back to the we have a few questions we need to answer this evening. Um so but just at a high level one thing I'll say is that one thing that I really like about the community grant program is that these are sort of block grant style grants that are minimally onerous because they're really, really small dollar amounts. Um I know lots I you know, having um worked in the non-profit sector for a long time there are lots of grants that my organization when I was working in a non-profit would not apply for because the reporting requirements were so intense that they would not be worth it to apply. The the staff time would take just as much work as you're getting out of the grant. And so especially when we're talking about, you know, um less than $10,000 which we do, you know, a variety of grants in that size, I think it's really important that we are not overly uh onerous. I think, you know, receipts and and, you know, standard accounting is totally reasonable but I am I'm not interested at all in going through an auditing a bunch of small non-profits that serve the Los Gatos community. I think that is totally antithetical to the purpose of of this and so um yeah, I I have no interest in that. Um and so getting to the questions in front of us about uh the sustaining grants. Um so I I I think it's excellent that we um came in just under the $20,000 we allocated to go to um our you know the the standing grants that they requested. So, I think we should definitely proceed with allocating the $19,200. Regarding Cassie, I think that's you know it's it's not easy because I think you know the intention of this grant was for these services at Los Gatos High School. However, being a a proud Lee High School alumni go Longhorns. Um Uh I grew up in Los Gatos, lived in Los Gatos. About a third of people that I went to school with at Lee High School lived in Los Gatos. Um and so I think it's perfectly reasonable to think that money going to Cassie to serve Lee High School students as well as St. Mary's and Westmont students is is a reasonable use of this money. And so those are my thoughts. But again, I don't I do not have any interest in going back and auditing or changing anything else that the council has has done with other grant recipients. That's my wrist out.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Going back to the question of Cassie, you know, I had a few thoughts and you know, as I explained before, just because the money was going to Los Gatos High School didn't mean it was exclusively going to town residents. It was super helpful to get the numbers from Amy where she talked about how many Los Gatos residents were served. So, I have kind of split thought. I mean, my first thought is I don't want to cut this off because there are Los Gatos residents you know, I don't want to cancel this. There are Los Gatos residents being served. It's approximately 50% and so I would love to hear from fellow council members whether we continue at 10,000 or we move it to 5,000 based on that approximation and then maybe next year when we hear if it's gone up or what the service level is. But if we're serving half as many residents, maybe the grant should be half as much. Maybe it's really barely covering it, and it's important to keep the grant at the same level. But, that's where I'm kind of going, that yes, but full or half, I don't know.

Speaker 2:
Yeah, sure. I'll just chime in and say that I I'd be open to either. And And I think if we didn't end up giving all of the money to Cassie in the sustaining grants program, I I would be interested in in allocating whatever is left over back to the community grants program because we have a lot of, you know, I think there's a lot of deserving folks in the community. And that program is There's always more people I don't know I could Are there more folks applying to the community grant program this year than we can allocate funding to?

Speaker 3:
Uh for the competitive grants, uh yes, there were uh 22 applications. Uh seven Seven will receive full grant, and one will receive a partial grant because that's where the money ran out. Got it. So, yeah. So, there So, So, yes, there there was always always more applications than there are um our funds. But, that's what makes it competitive. So, there we go. Um if I just wanted to super chime in there I Do you did say something about maybe uh uh looking putting in a number in now in terms of Cassie, and then maybe looking at it again next year. And by all means, you can do that. Selfishly, I kind of like it when you just set a number, and I can just put it in the budget every single year without having to do reanalysis. And I I mean, I don't currently do reanalysis of all the other sustaining grants at the moment. And again, I could, um but I kind of like it when you just put a number in, and we just go we just ride with it.

Speaker 4:
Okay, that makes sense. I do have um It's not even late, and I'm forgetting what I wanted to say. Um, you what were you talking about before the cast Oh, the um, sustaining grants. Um, you said seven were fully funded and one was partially funded.

Speaker 5:
Oh, that's for Sorry, for the competitive grants?

Speaker 6:
For competitive, I'm sorry. Competitive, seven will be uh, fully funded, one will be partially funded, and the announcement of who those will be will go out tomorrow. So, I'm going to refrain from a spoiler.

Speaker 1:
What's the delta on the partial funding? What would it take to bring that to full funding?

Speaker 2:
Um, it's it's um, it's 7/8 of the way fully funded.

Speaker 3:
Oh, okay. So, I mean, um, just to

Speaker 4:
3/4, 7/7/8, somewhere in there.

Speaker 5:
follow on the mayor's comments, I'm not necessarily ready to just take all of whatever money we're not going to expend in the um, sustaining grants and send them over to competitive. I would be more of a mind to fully fund that seventh grant that apparently was quite worthy, but not fully funded, and move the rest of the money to the general fund. So, different thought.

Speaker 6:
Or just keep the 10,000 in Cassie, right? That'd be the other option.

Speaker 1:
Right, but we still have extra money, right? Because we came out to 19,200. We put 20,000.

Speaker 2:
800.

Speaker 3:
Oh, yeah. Yeah, what does that do to the

Speaker 4:
an extra you allocated 20,000 in supplemental sustaining grants. There's 800 that is unclaimed. So, yeah.

Speaker 5:
If that 800 or if I can continue, if that 800 got moved to the competitive, would that allow that seventh grant to be fully funded?

Speaker 6:
Um, uh,

Speaker 1:
Or would it allow it to be more fully

Speaker 2:
It would be It would be really close. I think they'd be happy.

Speaker 3:
Okay. I mean, that might be an answer, too.

Speaker 4:
Councilmember Hutas.

Speaker 5:
Yeah, a little a bit along a different line. So, we have um, we have a letter of from a member of the Finance Commission and it states that the Finance Commission is going to discuss this at their August 10th meeting. Is that um has that been agendized and is that along the lines of what's in this letter?

Speaker 6:
It will be agendized. The agenda has not been issued for that meeting. Uh and it will be um as the ordinance allows the chair to set the agenda for the meeting, will be along the lines of allowing that conversation. We are still awaiting for um a complete set of documents that would be made as attachments that are coming from a member of the commission.

Speaker 1:
So, I guess what um you know, I'm thinking about is that we have a Finance Commission that's raised some questions and is going to be addressing them um at their at their next meeting um in a few days. And I uh think it might make sense to uh allow that to happen and then have the benefit of that advice from the Finance Commission um when we look at this package. So, it you know, is there a requirement that we vote on this uh tonight or will something fall apart with the grants or with services if we were to change the sequence and allow the Finance Commission um to uh take a look at the uh the financial controls and other things that are that are serious questions that have been raised?

Speaker 2:
Uh yes, so in terms of the sustaining grants, so this is is just a supplemental portion. So, if you didn't vote on the supplemental portion, it wouldn't hold up the other sustaining grants. It wouldn't hold up the competitive grants. Those are are are in the queue. We've already approved those. Those are those are those are processing. You rather you've approved the budget amounts. And so, those will be processed either way. So, the only thing that would hold back here would just be that supplemental uh 20,000 that you put aside. Um I could also give a different suggestion that with with what was proposed here, it doesn't have to be one package. Um you if if you were concerned uh about the rental assistance portion, there are two asks that are non-rental assistance. And so, you could split this up and uh make a decision on those two and then just put the rental assistance ones aside. Uh the advantage with that would be is that I'm like currently processing agreements and I could just add the extra amounts into those agreements now rather than having to go back and do an amendment to the agreements later. So, it would it would selfishly, it's a little bit more less paperwork if you made a little bit of a decision now, even if it's not the full decision. So, that could be another different way you could do things, too.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, and look, um I'm a big fan of the community grant program. I think that Los Gatos is a leader in implementing this. I think it allows uh really direct connection with the needs of our town and it uh prevents the one-off requests coming to the council. Um so, it's I think it's a really good program. Um I have had reservations about some elements of the grants where essentially, where money would be going to individuals um pretty directly. And one of those was the hotel uh program, which is not part of the community grants, but again, a similar nature and I didn't I was very uncomfortable with cash or vouchers directly going to individuals and we've avoided that situation by having um the police department, as as I understand, make the payments to the hotels. Um so that's an entity of the town that's actually involved in that. The The other one is rental assistance. And so rental assistance um invo- involves individuals uh not receiving counseling, but receiving a cash equivalent in someone paying their rent. And so I think that we need to uh be uh oh careful and make sure um that money isn't going to people's friends or family or things like that. And so I do think it's worth the Finance Commission having a look at the controls here um and uh I'm I'm not in favor of eliminating these grants, but I do think that it would make sense to have the Finance Commission take a look at the process and the controls that are in place um uh regarding the the the way uh these grants are being um uh awarded to individuals.

Speaker 4:
Councilmember Rennie.

Speaker 5:
Thank you, Mayor. Um so listening to all the discussion, um I I'll put it There's no motion on the table, correct?

Speaker 6:
None.

Speaker 1:
So I'll I'll put a proposed motion on the table um just to see where it goes. Um So So before saying that, I would I'm not sure I'm very supportive of the expansion uh that the Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition is um suggesting um two other items other than rental assistance. Um and it sounds like Cassie's still doing work in Los Gatos, but maybe less. So, with those, I would make a motion that we go ahead with what's suggested in here for um the towel and laundry vouchers, St. Vincent de Paul, um rental assistance, and the Live Oak Nutrition Center. And that we cut Cassie's funding to 5,000 from 10,000. And since the competitive grants have already been done, rather than mess up the work with 5,000, just send that back to our general fund. That would be my motion.

Speaker 2:
Councilmember Restel.

Speaker 3:
Um I probably will second this. I have a question for Councilmember Rennie. When you were talking about the expansion of Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition, are you then saying that in that chart, where they're asking for an additional $3,000 to take that out?

Speaker 4:
That's correct. I

Speaker 5:
So, keep it at 20.

Speaker 6:
for their 3,000, they've now added additional, uh you know, it sort of almost seems like scope creep. I mean, we we wanted something very simple, which was rental assistance, and now it's become, you know, storage unit rental, security deposits, on and on and on. And if there's any question at all about controls, this I think we're getting into too many things that will make control even harder. So, for that reason, I would not grant the 3,000 to them based on this scope creep.

Speaker 1:
Okay, I can support that. I have another question. When you say that it should all go back to the general fund, did you want to flip any to competitive to make that seventh grant full or not?

Speaker 2:
I I I can go either way on that. I I just thought, you know, that the I'm I'm flexible. If you wish me to change the motion to send the the extra 5,000 back to competitive, that's fine.

Speaker 3:
Well, it doesn't even have to be 5,000. I think it's hundreds. I'm not sure.

Speaker 4:
I think it's 1,000. Yeah.

Speaker 5:
1,000.

Speaker 6:
I don't think we even need to decide. You can just whatever.

Speaker 1:
So, then that would sort of be a motion where um Los Gatos Anti-Racism gets $20,000 to divide and that all of the extra money goes back to the general fund except for what it would take to make the seventh competitive grant whole is what I'm think I'm seconding.

Speaker 2:
So, the first column I I assume was already um a done decision and then it was about additional money and in in this in that one case additional scope. Um so, you mentioned that the 20,000 on to anti-racism coalition, it's going to be what they already were approved for, all three of them, and then the new approval, as I mentioned, the four line items of the talent laundry vouchers, Saint Vincent's de Paul, or I guess it's three line items, and Live Oak Nutrition, and then change Cassie to 5,000, and send all the extra back to uh uh to competitive grants. That would be the motion.

Speaker 3:
competitive grants

Speaker 4:
Okay, I'll second that.

Speaker 5:
Okay, did staff looks like they have some some

Speaker 6:
Sorry, I got lost.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, I think

Speaker 2:
so I think the motion, as I understand it, or maybe clerk wants to drive, but it's approve everything except those got to approve everything in sustaining except anti-racism collection extra 3,000 and have Cassie's money to 5,000, send all of that back to the general fund except whatever portion is required to fulfill the partial remaining last competitive grant. Does that make sense?

Speaker 3:
Um that's that's not exactly what I said, but I'm if that's a request for amendment, I'm willing to do that.

Speaker 4:
Sure, sure, I'm requesting an amendment. Is the second or okay with that?

Speaker 5:
Second or is okay with that.

Speaker 6:
Okay. To the town manager.

Speaker 1:
Again, it is the council's call how you want to divvy up the money, but I just want to remind us during the budget discussion, the council increased the sustaining grants by 20,000 for us to come I'm sorry, for us to come back which is what we did today. You also increased the competitive grants by 30,000 dollars under the premise that we were increasing the total dollar values to be more meaningful and to make it easier to administer with fewer grants. And so, you in essence increased by almost 50% the competitive grants. And so, I understand that you try to you're trying to make whole a grantee where you normally stayed out of the discussions of the competitive grant programs and allowed the commissioners that were in the selection process to make that decision. And so I just want to remind you of that. So if you do make take a course of action that says take an action to do something with a specific competitive grantee, it is different than what you've done in the past. Yep, Vice Mayor Russell.

Speaker 2:
Based on the fact that we have this grant system that we have handed over that's not supposed to be happening at the dais and now I've gone and inserted myself into it. I will actually not accept the amendment. I think the extra money just goes back to the general fund. Thank you for the reminder that the competitive grants were increased quite a bit.

Speaker 3:
So to reiterate then what it and to Rob Renny and the seconder the motion was to accept the recommendations of staff with regards to the 19,000 200 minus the $3,000 for the Anti-Racism Coalition to reduce the allocation for Cassie from 10,000 to 5,000 and for any remaining unallocated funding from both sustaining and competitive, that money is to be returned to the general fund.

Speaker 4:
That That was my original motion.

Speaker 5:
Okay, then I'll go back to my original second.

Speaker 6:
Okay. Council Member Hudas.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, just a question. Um when the council took action uh to increase the sustaining grants, um did the the council did not specify the split for rental assistance between the two organizations. Is that correct?

Speaker 2:
It did not.

Speaker 3:
When the council and and when the council approved the budget with the original sustaining grant amounts, Um did it consider the split between the two organizations?

Speaker 4:
The discretion was left to staff.

Speaker 5:
And so, is it staff's recommendation uh that uh St. Vincent de Paul receive 2,500 and Racism Coalition receive 20,000?

Speaker 6:
So, do you have the uh So, you've already slated the 20,000. 20,000 is just part of the regular process. It's not part of these uh supplemental funds. We've already got it figured out and it's in process for how that's going to be how those two organizations are working together. So, Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition will be getting the one check. One organization, one one one thing. With this supplemental piece, that means that there will be a a second set of contracts and a second set of agreements uh going to St. Vincent de Paul, which in a way kind of defeats what I was going for, but that's okay. It's it's the way it played out in the way that uh things were set up. So, we'll we'll just roll with that. So, so so yes, that uh that 20,000 is already in process um as it were. So, I I can't really change what's that that ball that's rolling. Um this is uh additional too, so this will be a separate contract with St. Vincent de Paul for that supplemental amount, which will be rental assistance. So,

Speaker 1:
So, if I could just ask my question again.

Speaker 2:
Yeah.

Speaker 3:
Was it a council action to make that split of 2,500 and 20,000 for rental assistance?

Speaker 4:
2,500's for towel and other laundry vouchers.

Speaker 5:
I I see. I'm sorry. So, there is no money for rental assistance going to St. Vincent de Paul. Is that correct?

Speaker 6:
Now, there will be 5,000.

Speaker 1:
No, I'm talking about the original

Speaker 2:
Oh, of course. Sorry. Of the original 20,000 St. Vincent de Paul was not getting a check that had their name on it. So, this will be a check that will now be the supplemental fund will now be a check with St. Vincent de Paul's name on it coming from us for a rental assistance. Um making the the officially making another organization that gets a check for us they

Speaker 3:
let me rephrase what you're asking cuz I think it's not being understood. You're asking what was the direction of council for how the $20,000 was to be allocated for rental assistance. So, director, what is the contractual relationship we're entering for 20,000? Your answer is we're entering into one contract for 20,000 with the Anti-Racism Coalition.

Speaker 4:
That is correct. Thanks for the clarification.

Speaker 5:
And that there and then the supplemental question to that would be was there direction from council this year to split that 20,000 amongst those two groups?

Speaker 6:
Uh there was not a direct the council did not direct a dollar amount. The direction in August of 2025 was that I talked to those organizations and they figure out how best to move forward with that. As partners.

Speaker 1:
So, as a follow-up to that, does the sustaining grant program allow for subcontracting um of monies received? May one organization pass those monies on to another?

Speaker 2:
So, the way that I interpreted everything with with council before is that these organizations were going to in August of 2025 is that these organizations were going to work together and we wanted to get to a point where we were working with just one I was just doing contracts with one. Um so, I feel that we are with within the context of what I thought we were I thought it was okay. I'm perfectly happy to have finance commission take a look at that and decide if that's what they want to do. I also have no other way of

Speaker 3:
At at the moment, there's no other

Speaker 4:
There's nothing really in place uh for other organizations, any any grantee to say that well, part of our grants is going to require the services of uh different organization, part of our grants is going to be uh hiring somebody else to do something, hire part of our grants is going to be um uh getting additional help or uh or whatnot. And so, I think we have I think I've got some good examples of other organizations that pay out money to other organizations. As long as all the paperwork comes back and I can account for the money at the end of the day, uh which Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition has been doing, that's where I'm at. But, I'm I'm perfectly happy to have finance commission come up with a different set of uh criteria for looking at that, and I would be happy moving into the future. But, the the train's kind of train's kind of moving on this year's one.

Speaker 5:
Let me let me intervene here. Um on August 19th of 2025, a motion was made by Vice Mayor Moore to set our sustaining grants. I'm just reading this from the minutes. For 23,000 for Live Oak Nutrition, 2,500 to St. Vincent de Paul for laundry program, $20,000 to West Valley Community Services for human services support, $20,000 for rental assistance for staff to work with St. Vincent de Paul and the Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition to fairly and then the rest. There was no direction to say to for council to direct what that split is. And so, when what it sounds like the conversations between the library uh director and the two organizations led to having one organization to administer that grant, which was the Anti-Racism Coalition, and for them to work with St. Vincent de Paul.

Speaker 6:
Okay. So, question I have is does the agreement uh allow an entity to delegate part of the project to another organization?

Speaker 1:
So, I can speak to that um cuz I did review the public comment and review the contract and the contract says that the grantee agrees to perform the scope of services that are described in the proposal. And the proposal is attached as an exhibit to the agreement. And the proposal said upon receiving 20,000 in grant funds the Anti-Racism Coalition plans to allocate 10,000 to St. Vincent de Paul as soon as possible to run its own independent rental assistance program. And so, because the proposal's attached as a scope of services to the agreement um the arrangement does comport with the grant agreement.

Speaker 2:
Okay, I think I'm in the weeds on this. I'm I'm going to offer um a substitute motion um and that is uh to take the existing motion under advisement and to continue this item uh to the next uh council meeting uh following the Finance Commission's uh review uh of the community grant program.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Bedolla-Ahmadi?

Speaker 4:
I'm not comfortable wheeling and dealing on the dais at 10:00 p.m. So, I'm going to second that motion. I think this needs to be reviewed by our Finance Commission. That's why we have a Finance Commission. And I think this is just getting out of hand. And I actually quite frankly just prefer that one organization takes care of our rental assistance just to streamline the operation. and that was staff's original recommendation to begin with.

Speaker 5:
Town manager.

Speaker 6:
I know there's a substitute motion. The one ask I would ask for the substitute motion part of the reason this item is incoming at the second meeting in August, which would have then come after the finance commission is the significant number of agenda items that will take us late into the evening. So, if we add that to that meeting that we it'd be really challenging to get all of them. So, if you are amenable to amending it to the first meeting in September that would work, too.

Speaker 1:
I would enthusiastically adopt that suggestion.

Speaker 2:
I do want to say that just in terms of processing tabling the entire item there's still the Cassie which I feel could be divided from your current discussion and hopefully you could make a decision on it that at least so I could process or not as according. And as and then once again you would do have some other ask that have nothing to do with rental assistance. So, just for consideration. So.

Speaker 3:
I'll just chime in that I am not comfortable with the substitute motion and I would support the original motion. I while I appreciate the interest of the finance commission in developing greater controls on our non the money we provide to community-based nonprofits. I am much more interested in ensuring this money gets out to these nonprofits to do important work in the community in a timely fashion. And so I I would not support the the substitute motion. Yep. Vice Mayor Stone.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. For similar reasons I won't be supporting it. It feels like this is delving more into policy actually than finance and um the other thing is to address the question of you know, two organizations versus one. I am familiar with the work both organizations do and they have different reaches within our community. And so people that are in need of rental assistance may show up at St. Mary's Church asking for it and they get referred to St. Vincent de Paul. The Anti-Racism Coalition has other touch places in the community and so I feel like these two organizations that are 100% volunteer are the most effective use of our money and have the broadest reach. Um they do know that the stipulation is that it only goes to residents that live in the town. The fact that um Director Baker you brought up the very careful accounting with photocopies of canceled checks and how the money is going makes me feel like for this amount of money that is the right amount of levers. I do not want to impose a lot of other onerous overhead on a process where it feels like we can trace the money. So for that reason I will not be supporting that motion.

Speaker 5:
Councilmember Beddawi?

Speaker 6:
Yeah, I just want to make a comment that um the purview of the Finance Commission is certainly within their charter. Um it makes sense to me. I mean we are stewards of the town's money, our residents' money and there's hundreds of thousands of dollars that we have spent on on grants um and we've got budget issues. We have budget issues going forward and I think that the Finance Commission should review this. Um I don't necessarily see this as policy over finance. I see it as politics as to uh personal preference as to where a councilmember might might want the money to go. And I would rather take that off our plate and take politics out of it.

Speaker 1:
Councilmember Huitus?

Speaker 2:
Yeah, just another comment and again I'm very supportive of the grant program, uh the sustaining grants and the competitive grants, and I think it serves our community well. Um we have a finance commission. Finance commission has never looked at this. And I think that they're scheduled to take a look at it shortly. Uh for me, it's just prudent to allow them uh to take a look at this. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily going to suggest onerous uh controls. In fact, two of us will be at that meeting, and uh are able to make comments at that meeting as well. Um but, you know, we created a finance commission um to look at our financial processes and and uh they've asked to do that, and they've been scheduled to do that. And, you know, I I frankly don't see why we're in a, you know, ready, fire, aim mode on this. It would be, I think, much much better to uh to have the benefit of the uh the review and the deliberation of the finance commission, even if it takes us another 3 weeks uh to get there. We've already allocated uh money, so I don't think what what we're really talking about is this action relates to the supplemental money, so we're not going to be drying up any organization at this point in our budget year, I don't think. So, I um I I I I just think it's important for us to uh uh be good stewards of the the um the town's uh residents' money.

Speaker 3:
Uh i- if I may if Just and you don't have to go in this direction, but if you could split off the Cassie piece from the supplemental funds piece, um I would at least know if I'm processing for Cassie and they're kind of waiting over there and I'm sure they'd love to get an answer on that one. So, I know that your current motion kind of combines everything together, but there's no reason why you couldn't have a motion that just addresses one and takes one thing off of the plate at the moment and then looks at this as the supplemental sustaining uh as a separate thing at a time to be come back to you after Finance Commission has had ample time to look at it and come up with a new plan. Just a suggestion.

Speaker 4:
I appreciate the suggestion. I think the the there's a motion on the table. I think we can take a vote on that motion and then if that motion does not pass, right, there's an original motion that does that does address the Cassie piece. Um so, can we take a roll call vote on the substitute motion, which is to table this or or to continue it until September?

Speaker 5:
Councilmember Rennie?

Speaker 6:
No.

Speaker 1:
Councilmember Hedden?

Speaker 2:
I.

Speaker 3:
Councilmember Badame?

Speaker 4:
I.

Speaker 5:
Vice Mayor Ristow?

Speaker 6:
No.

Speaker 1:
Mayor Moore?

Speaker 2:
No. Um Rennie's got cut off just a little bit. Just to be clear, that was a no. Councilmember Rennie?

Speaker 3:
Correct. No.

Speaker 4:
Okay. So, we now have uh the original motion on the table. Um do folks have questions or comments on that motion before we vote?

Speaker 5:
Can you remind me what that motion was?

Speaker 6:
Yes, it was the very original one. It's I I think we

Speaker 1:
Yeah, I can uh summarize.

Speaker 2:
you. Thank you, Councilmember

Speaker 3:
Um so, it was uh it was to adopt the supplemental requests for everybody except for the Los Gatos Anti-Racism Coalition.

Speaker 4:
I I repeat it. So, it's to as you said, it's for all the items on the supplemental except anti-racism coalition to cut Cassie to 5,000 and return all the money to the general fund.

Speaker 5:
Seeing is that clear to staff? Great. Councilmember Hudes.

Speaker 6:
Yeah, I I won't be supporting the motion um because I think we would be in better position to evaluate that. I have concerns. Two two areas of concern. One is the fact that we actually have three organizations providing rental assistance. Two through the grant program and one through contract. And I'm not sure that that is wise use of our resources and funds. And the second reason is that I think there have been um substantial issues raised in the letter about uh the the way that community grant program has been raised that issues have been raised about that and I think it would make more sense to consider that afterwards. So, I I am not able to support this motion now.

Speaker 1:
Councilmember Bedolla.

Speaker 2:
I won't be supporting the motion either. And I would just like to state that each of us council members appoint our own individual finance commissioner. We choose them, we evaluate them, and we select one to service individually. It just behooves us as council members to evaluate their input from their own individual appointed commissioners. It it it it's it makes me sad, actually.

Speaker 3:
Um and I would just chime in that the crux of the letter is that too many This is the second sentence. Too many questions about the rental assistance program remain unanswered. Um I disagree with that and this is coming from one finance commissioner and so I'm perfectly comfortable to have the council as the decision-making body for the town of Los Gatos allocate money within our purview. With no other comments, um can we have a roll call vote, please?

Speaker 4:
Council member Rennie?

Speaker 5:
I.

Speaker 6:
Council member Hedden?

Speaker 1:
No.

Speaker 2:
Council member Badame?

Speaker 3:
No.

Speaker 4:
Vice Mayor Ristor?

Speaker 5:
I.

Speaker 6:
Mayor Moore?

Speaker 1:
I. Motion passes three to two. Um and I'll turn it to the town manager.

Speaker 2:
No, thank you cuz I know we're talking about the finance commission which provides an extremely valuable role to the town. Um I just want to highlight since we're discussing the finance commission's review and what what they're going to be doing at August 10th. The um chair of the commission and staff received a request from one commissioner to agendize a discussion of the community grant program on a variety of different factors and it was accepted by the commission chair under the authority vested in the ordinance that the chair sets the agenda for the meeting. While the chair sets the agenda for the meeting, they cannot unilaterally take an action that directs the work of staff substantially. You know, we'll provide reasonable assistance, so we'll agendize the documents they're asking for, we'll agendize the item, but they will still have to act act to make a recommendation to the council to amend their work plan to add or review the community grant program and you would still need to act to approve that as part of their work plan to allow staff to expend the time on that project. And so, the commission can have very robust conversations, but when they turn, and I believe they will, for additional assistance from staff, legal interpretations, that may necessitate you to act to add that to the work plan.

Speaker 3:
Thank you for that clarification. Okay, um that brings us to the end of our agenda items. Thank you very much, Director Baker, for um all of the input. And we will now go to council matters, and I'll start with Councilmember Lenny, as he is the biggest.

Speaker 4:
Uh thank you, Mayor. Since our last council meeting, um the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Risk Oversight Committee met twice on June 24th and July 22nd. Um that's confidential meeting, nothing to report from it. Um I also got, uh I guess on July 8th, an update um on the El Camino Hospital um redevelopment that's going on. I think the other council members have been getting those, so uh I won't add anything there. I also met with um uh a person who has applied in the past for finance commission My finance commissioner is moving out of town, and um I believe next council meeting I will be appointing a council member or a finance commission member. That's it for me.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. I'll look to Councilmember Bednarski.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. Um I enjoyed time off during the summer, so I don't have a whole lot to report. Um On July 1st, I participated in the 75th anniversary of Savoca with the unveiling of a special plaque. Um I've also met with residents uh concerning pending development in town.

Speaker 1:
Vice Mayor Ristow.

Speaker 2:
Thank you. Since our last meeting on the 18th of June, I actually attended the ABAG General Assembly meeting up in San Francisco and um a lot of discussion was about what was difficult about cycle six, which we are now heading toward the end of the third year of the eight-year arena cycle, where our allocation was 1,993 housing units. We are more than a third of the way through. We've approved fewer than a third the number of homes. And only two of them have broken ground. So, I don't think we're going to reach our number by 2031. Um but hold on to your hats because the cycle seven numbers are likely to be even higher for everybody. Um so, we'll have our work cut out for us. Um we should have more time to submit early. We're supposed to get our numbers, I think, three years before or general idea of three years before the next housing element is due, which will be January 31st, 2031. And so, I think we're going to start thinking about and maybe working on the housing element next year or the year after. Um and let's see. Hopefully, oh, and there will be additions. It'll include lower levels of affordability than what we've got right now. And um take rent burden and homelessness into account, which is probably why the numbers will go up. On the 24th, I, along with um Councilmember Beddawi, got a tour of West Valley College, which um with one of the trustees and the chancellor, and it is really impressive the work that's going on at West Valley College. They're um offering classes to all ages. They have free lunches for the free food for their students, and um the building buildings are just stunning. I mean, it was really impressive to see. And um anyway, I encourage people to head over there. Um we are lucky to have this college. On the 25th, I attended the El Camino Hospital rebuild community open house. So, people have probably heard, you know, all of our hospitals have to come up to seismic standards, and that is going to require a complete and total rebuild of um El Camino Hospital in Los Gatos, and that will be coming before the council, so I'm not going to make any comments about it, but they've started doing community outreach meetings where people can come and see what the plans look like, what the layout will be, and what the phasing will be. Um on the January or January Well, this J months. July 1st, um the vice mayor and I, along with um Oh, we had uh Midpen Director Craig Gleason, we had staffers from um Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga's office, got a a tour actually of um the Highway 17 wildlife overcrossing. So, this is a project I've been following since maybe 2014, and so on the Los Gatos side of Highway 17, there's going to be a wildlife undercrossing, and as well as an overcrossing for pedestrians, equestrians, and cyclists. It'll connect, I think, five open spaces, but more importantly, it will connect critical wildlife corridors. And on our side of Highway 17, right now, annually, one to two mountain lions are killed being hit by cars. Um and if that doesn't strike you as tragic, just think about if you're the driver and what happens to you if you hit an animal like that, but deer and other creatures. So, that is coming along. I think um Midpen has acquired land for that. We got to look at the sites where the bridge will connect, and it was really um very informative, and it's a really important project for a lot of reasons. On the 4th of July, I was at the Symphony in the Park. I'm sure the mayor will have more to say about that, but he gave a great speech and um the Billy Jones Railroad found the town bell that had not been rung I think in like three decades. Are you going to talk about this, Rob?

Speaker 3:
Please go ahead.

Speaker 4:
Yeah. Anyway, it was it was very exciting to have this bell rung and I think annually now on July 4th we'll be ringing the bell for the Declaration of Independence. On the 20th of um that is July, yes. I attended my first meeting. I'm um I've been invited to join the Good Samaritan Community Advisory Committee, so we'll be meeting periodically and so if anybody has input for what Good Sam Hospital can be doing better or concerns you've got, I am a conduit to the community and helping to improve the hospital for us. We're really fortunate to have two great hospitals very nearby. Um and then I I was gone for about a week and a half, but in between I've met with community members on cut-through traffic before this weekend and after, e-bike issues, active transportation, proposed developments, North 40 incoming restaurants and phase one development. And I've met with a number of candidates who are running for Los Gatos Town Council and other city councils. I've also attended Music in the Park, Gold Thursdays downtown, Jazz on the Plazz and a number of World Cup watch parties um and then had 10 days in Truckee hiking and just enjoying the mountains. But I have to say no matter how much I love where I'm vacationing and I'm kind of sad that I have to leave, as soon as I enter Los Gatos I think I live in a perfect destination. So, nothing like leaving to remember there's no place like home.

Speaker 5:
[snorts]

Speaker 6:
Councilmember Hedges.

Speaker 1:
Uh I've been traveling a lot, so I have just a couple of meetings to report. Um First of all, uh I participated in a wildfire advisory um meeting uh in uh June. And then um I attended the El Camino uh open house uh that uh the vice mayor um mentioned and really I would encourage residents to uh attend any of their community outreach meetings because um I believe that they they really do want to engage with this community and continue to be a community hospital and they're designing a uh really a world-class facility to replace uh an aging facility, but taking into account what the needs are of of our community. And so um I have uh spent even more time there and I think it's really valuable. I would encourage people to do that. Um I met with um a developer uh who has proposal on the uh Mirasu school site and uh and I've had discussions with uh several residents and developers about um other SB 330 sites that are in process. Uh and I've had some conversations um which I will disclose in more detail with uh the uh West Valley Muslim Association and their upcoming uh a conditional use permit application uh as well as some residents who uh live nearby to that. Um so those are the main things that I've been involved in.

Speaker 2:
Great, thank you. Um So, as Vice Mayor Ristow alluded to, I had a lovely July 4th Symphony in the Park celebrating the 250th anniversary of the United States and 175th anniversary of the state of California. I'll just say that Town of Los Gatos staff did a phenomenal event with that job. I think every single year we elevate that event. It gets better and better. Turnout was massive. I think, you know, we were fortunate that the the day was a little bit less brutally hot than in past years. So, we'll all talk to our contacts upstairs to make sure that that happens next year, but it was a really really lovely event and a great community celebration. Huge kudos to to town staff for making that event possible. Um just I think two weeks ago now, I'll just briefly touch on a ride along I went on with the Los Gatos Monte Sereno Police Department. Real briefly, I had been wanting to go on an evening ride along and so one of our officers was kind enough to take me out. We were planning on doing some traffic control and and maybe going by dispatch to give thanks to our hard working dispatchers at the town. When we got a, you know, 10 minutes in, got a priority three call and so responded to a home fire where I saw firsthand two of our Los Gatos Monte Sereno police officers arrive in just a couple of minutes, immediately park and run into the burning building to get out the homeowner who was still trying to put out the fire and safely get out everyone who was in the house, everyone who was nearby the house, all of the pets, very quickly and efficiently control the situation in a way that I think made everyone feel safe and free of danger. Within a couple of minutes of PD arriving, County Fire arrived and immediately got to work hooking up two large 5-in hoses, and doused the fire, they ended up arriving with more than 10 engines, and the firefighters, you know, within minutes climbed onto the roof of the house to cut holes in the garage where the fire was burning where, you know, to to let out the heat which meant that they were letting the heat out into their faces and so it was it was just truly a heroic sight to see and so whenever you have the opportunity give thanks to our both our Los Gatos Monte Sereno Police Department and our Santa Clara County Fire Department true local heroes. I also related to fire got a tour of our Cal Fire Alma Helitack base which is nearby just outside of the border of the town of Los Gatos but got to see the work that they do and have seen that helicopter flying all around Santa Clara County supporting fires around the area so that's a really fantastic capability that that we have right in our backyard. There's only 11 Helitack bases in the state of California and so we're very fortunate to have one just minutes away. A little bit less serious I have been loving attending Music in the Park and Jazz on the Plazz was honored to provide the opening remarks at both of those the first evenings of both of those events and they've just been lovely and there've been so many people attending them. The weather's been great there such wonderful community events. We have about three of each of them left so if you haven't been to a Music in the Park or a Jazz on the Plazz make sure you get out and enjoy them. Myself and some members of town staff met with the president of PG&E and I'm optimistic it was a very productive conversation. She she sat down with us for about an hour and 15 minutes to talk specifically about issues going on in the town of Los Gatos and I'm very optimistic that we'll have some wins from that conversation. Had a similar conversation with the president of San Jose Water. I then later in the month flew down to Orange County to attend the annual meeting of Los Gatos' new insurance joint powers authority, the California JPA, which is an insurance pool of more than 125 public agencies. Sounds really boring, but it's really important. And I think our insurance coverage has gotten significantly We've discussed this at the DAS, but going down there and sort of seeing it firsthand, it was evident that these are real professionals. I think it's it's a really good organization for us to be a part of, and we have the big benefit of a representative from the town sitting on their board and and having a lot of access to to the resources they provide. Finally, I attended this year's Los Gatos Saratoga Rec Summer Senior Picnic, which was in Saratoga, unfortunately. But it was a great event, mostly Los Gatos folks there. And so all the more reason to continue trying to create spaces for people of all ages to thrive in this town, and really enjoyed that. And then I will be tabling at the farmers market this weekend. And that's all I've got. Thank you. Turn it over to the town manager and then town attorney.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. In relation to the high school district, they put out a press release that they're opening use for their track and field to the community when it's not currently in use by students or reserved by a permittee. I think this is an extremely positive opportunity for our community. You see this in other communities, but for us, we have a world-class facility in the high school district, and it's nice to see that you will be able to use it as a resident. Along those lines, the mayor and I, as well as the command staff of the police department, as well as uh higher-ranking individuals from the CHP met with the high school district to go over some of the results of their surveys regarding binge drinking. Um astounding to see how significant the issue is in our high school of binge drinking. Um where more than 22% of students in the last month have in been engaged in binge drinking. And we have seen a dramatic increase in alcohol-related crashes in our community involving juveniles, as well as adults. And the district is seeing a significant increase of alcohol um issues at their games by not students, but adults. And so, we are looking to work with the district on, you know, they're working towards a public information campaign, and our police department is going to be working with the district on finding opportunities to help educate and encourage folks to moderate and to not engage in this type of behavior that could lead to unfortunate injuries, and God helping us not deaths. Um we've been fortunate in our community, but the extent that it's occurring exposes our community at large, and that's just not Los Gatos, so we need to work to combat that. Lastly, I know one of the council members talked about wildfire. It's our top community priority in the strategic priorities, and I will say I have firsthand had the experience of seeing what's currently happening in the world from Spokane, Washington and other places in this country to the massive fires on the west side of Madrid, and the massive fires that occurred in Greece where my family was impacted while they were traveling there. Um it's something that we cannot leave our eyes off the ball as our community here in Los Gatos, and we need to continue the the tremendous effort that we're doing to enhance the safety and reduce the risk exposure to our community by focusing on the wildfire risk in our community. With that, I'll turn it back to you, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. I'll look to the town attorney for any updates.

Speaker 5:
Nothing to report. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you very much. Um then at 10:43 without anything else, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you all.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Town Council Meeting / June 16, 2026 / 7:00 PM</title>
      <link>https://transparentcities.org/los-gatos/transcripts/msmrvj7Dmn8</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://transparentcities.org/los-gatos/transcripts/msmrvj7Dmn8</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>The Los Gatos Town Council opened with a child-led pledge and three recognitions: Coupet Thai as small business of the month, retiring school superintendent Paul Johnson, and the Daughters of the American Revolution (proclaiming July 2026 as DAR Month). During public comment, residents raised concerns about surveillance/Flock cameras, police misconduct, immigration rapid-response funding, appeal transparency, and a Highway 17 pedestrian/bike bridge. The council unanimously approved the consent calendar, continued a West Valley Muslim Association CUP appeal to August 18, confirmed 100% brush abatement compliance, adopted landscape/lighting assessment resolutions (with concern raised about toxic herbicide use near a trail), and discussed the adopt-a-bench fee schedule (deferred for edits) and the Chamber of Commerce annual services agreement.</description>
      <category>Pledge of allegiance</category>
      <category>Small business of the month recognition</category>
      <category>Superintendent Paul Johnson commendation</category>
      <category>Daughters of the American Revolution proclamation</category>
      <category>Consent calendar and spending concerns</category>
      <category>Flock surveillance cameras</category>
      <category>Police misconduct complaint</category>
      <category>Immigration rapid response funding</category>
      <category>Highway 17 pedestrian bridge</category>
      <category>Historic preservation noticing</category>
      <category>West Valley Muslim Association CUP appeal</category>
      <category>Brush abatement program</category>
      <category>Landscape and lighting assessment districts</category>
      <category>Herbicide use on trails</category>
      <category>Adopt-a-bench program fees</category>
      <category>Chamber of Commerce services agreement</category>
      <category>Destination marketing and TOT tax</category>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Speaker 1:
All right. Good evening everyone. I'm going to call this meeting of the Loscatoos Town Council to order and we will begin with a roll call.

Speaker 2:
Council member here.

Council member Hudis:
Council member Hudis here.

Council member Badami:
Council member Badami here. Vice Mayor Risto here. Mayor Moore here. Thank you. Um, okay. So, as we begin all of our meetings, we'll begin with the pledge of allegiance. And today we have Nora Lee who's going to lead us in the pledge. Nora, you can come on up.

Speaker 5:
Um, and as Nora makes her way up, I'll tell you a little bit about Nora. So, Nora is a fourth grader um or is a rising fourth grader at Van Meter Elementary School. Um, she is very involved in our community. Perfect. Um she is uh involved in gymnastics, golf, um she loves reading and drawing. She's involved in the K kids club which is amazing. Our our Kowanas club for students. Is that right? Um and the refuge. What is the refuge?

Speaker 6:
That's okay. Um [laughter] and and when asked what her favorite thing about Los Scatos is or what she wanted to share with the community, um she said she likes how neat and clean Loscatos is, the stores, the parking lots, and the building. Um which is a big part uh thanks to our town staff.

Speaker 1:
So, thank you to our town staff for keeping our community clean. Are you ready to lead us in the pledge, Nora?

Speaker 2:
All right, I'm going to give you the microphone to please rise. Please rise.

Speaker 3:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, for liberty and justice for all.

Speaker 4:
Great job, Nora. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Okay, perfect. And so now you can um start with council member Dami um and shake each of the council members hands.

Speaker 6:
So um walk over to council member Dami, make your way back to council member Risto behind you. Vice Mayor Risto right behind you and at the end of our handshake train um you get a a little prize. So, thank you very much, Nora.

Speaker 1:
All right. Thanks again, Nora. You rock.

Speaker 2:
Um, and as a reminder for everyone in town, um, if you have a little one that wants to, uh, lead the town council in the pledge of allegiance, you can just reach out to the town clerk's office and we can get that scheduled. So, um, thanks again, Nora. Um, okay. So, we have three uh, presentations and recognitions this evening. Um, and the first is our small business of the month, which is Coupet Thai. Um, so please come on down.

Speaker 3:
So, for those of you that don't know, coup d'et Thai is a wonderful local business in in our town, um, located in the downtown. Uh, coup d'et Thai is a authentic, amazing, uh, Thai restaurant.

Speaker 4:
Um, one of my absolute favorites. And so, I'll read a little bit about um, coupet Thai. So, congratulations to the entire coup d'et Thai team on being named Loscatos's business of the month.

Speaker 5:
For over a decade, you have brought authentic, exceptional Thai cuisine to the heart of downtown Loscatoos and become one of the most beloved dining destinations in our town. Um, more than just a restaurant, you show up for our community, opening your doors for gatherings that bring locatos together.

Speaker 6:
coup detai regularly hosts um gatherings whether it's the chamber of commerce or private events and inviting people into your space and um more recently if you all haven't seen coup detai did a major remodel um which also was a major investment in our downtown community I think doubling or more than doubling your space um they now have a business of the month picture [applause] Thank you. Thank you very much. Really appreciate you being here. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
If you have not checked out coup d'etai, I couldn't recommend it more. Okay. Um our next recognition is a commendation for Superintendent Paul Johnson. Um please come on up.

Speaker 2:
So, for those that aren't aware, um I have some some very uh bad news for you tonight. Paul Johnson is retiring um from the Loscatoos uh Union School District after 35 years in public education.

Speaker 3:
39 years. [laughter] Um Paul has a true passion for students.

Speaker 4:
It's very evident in everything that that you do for our our students and our community. And uh I I think one thing that's particularly uh commendable about you is um some folks might not know that Paul Johnson is not only the superintendent of a significant high performing school district, but he is also the president of the Loscatoos Rotary Club. Um which is uh uh truly amazing. Uh as if you didn't have enough on your plate. And so, um, the the town council has put together a commendation for you, um, uh, honoring your I have more than three decades, that's still correct, more than three decades in in public service. Um, began his career in 1987 as a teacher in Riverside County.

Speaker 5:
Um, and and one of the some of the things that I'll highlight about Paul's service to our community, he advanced project-based learning um, at our uh, elementary and middle school. um has uh really pushed steam, has prioritized elementary Spanish, which is something that is so cool. I think that's that's such an amazing skill and something that I wish I had learned um when I was going through our school district. Um and and one of the other things I'll I'll just say about Paul is that Paul really embodies service above self. Um which I know is is very important for you. It's not only the motto of the school district, but also the motto of Rotary.

Speaker 6:
And um you know when I was looking things up, preparing this commendation, you cannot look up Paul Johnson on the internet without um seeing him by service above self. And I think that's very much indicative of the school district that you've run in our community for the past decade. Um we're I I can't think of a more servant leader and someone that that is uh has done more for our community. So I just want to express my most sincere gratitude. Um and I'll turn it over to you if you want to say a few words.

Speaker 1:
Sure. Um, well, thank you for that, uh, Mayor Moore. Um, you know, I frequently tell the school board, the current school board of Loscatos Union School District, they're the that they're the allstar, rockstar school board, understand governance, um, so forth. But I would say the town council is also like uh, second to none.

Speaker 2:
And I think about Mary, you serving lunch to the kids there at the school and talking to them and Maria, one of the founding forces behind Safe Routes to School, all was there for the schools. Uh my Rotary buddy, uh Matthew uh Hudas and being involved with the community center committee and project, Rob making, um multiple appearances, sitting in front of uh school children answering their questions. um Chris and all of your work as town manager. Um I just consider it such an honor and privilege to be here in Los Gatos and to work with all of you. Keep up the good work and appreciate the recognition.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Thank you very much. Um I'll give this to you. Um you want to take a quick picture?

Speaker 4:
Yes. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 5:
[laughter] [clears throat] Takes a good partner to be a good superintendent.

Speaker 6:
[laughter] All right, here we go.

Speaker 1:
Thank you for your leadership and unwavering commitment to our students. Thank you.

Speaker 2:
Okay. Um, and we have one more presentation recognition this evening for the Daughters of the American Revolution, Los Gatos Chapter, um, who are here this evening of of all evenings to help recognize uh, the United States's 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Um, and for those that don't know, the Daughters of the American Revolution is comprised of members who directly descended from a patriot of the American Revolution. Um, they focus on patriotism, service, historic preservation, educating our next generation. Um, and so I'll welcome up uh the Daughters of the American Revolution to uh help celebrate and recognize um this important occasion.

Speaker 3:
[laughter] Oh, thank you. Okay.

Janet McAlpine:
My name is Janet McAlpine and I'm the chairperson of the America 2 250 Las chapter Daughters of the American Revolution. [snorts] Um I'm going to give a brief very brief summary of DAR. Uh National Society of Daughters of the American Revolution or D which is is how it's commonly called was founded in 1890. The organization's home occupies a full city block in Washington DC. The buildings include Constitution Hall, Memorial Continental Hall, a big library, and several other buildings. They can be rented out. In fact, the the US government rents them out. rents them for gallas, military events, uh anybody can rent it. For a wedding, it can be anybody can rent it. It's the largest building of its kind uh owned and maintained exclusively by women.

Speaker 5:
D has achieved a membership of over 1 million women worldwide.

Speaker 6:
Our chapter started in 1929 and we're almost 100red years old. We have 145 members in our chapter and we're a service organization.

Speaker 1:
Some of our activities include the San Jose Veterans Parade, the Lasatus Children's Parade, Fourth of July Symphony in the Park. If you haven't been to that, that's a lot of fun.

Speaker 2:
Constitution Week with schools and library displays Memorial Day observance downtown Saratoga Reacross America which I'm sure most everybody's heard of and we do ours for Madronia Cemetery. Uh with JOTC and ROTC awards, Dood Contest award, D American History essay and video contest and the Fisher Middle School Veterans Day appreciation which is so wonderful and so touching. If you haven't been, it's a treat. Um, in our chapter, our chapter alone, in 2025, we recorded over 10,000 service hours. The women in D are generally are women who enjoy history and of course genealogy. And as Mayor Moore told you, we're all related to somebody from the directly related to somebody from the Revolutionary War.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. And I brought treats. So, if you um if you uh want to know more about D, I have pens, writing pens, and our website is on it. Um I'll leave it over here or by the door so you can grab one or if you just need a pen, take one. And the other thing is uh for the for the city council, I have D America 250 buttons. Thank you very much.

Speaker 4:
Um thank you. So, um uh this is it's a little funny because we don't meet in July. Um, so we're here this evening in June, but um, we're here to proclaim July 2026 as Daughters of the American Revolution Month. Um, and encourage all people in our community to reach out and support your mission. So, um, thank you very much and thank you very much for the You want to come up to take a photo?

Speaker 5:
one first.

Speaker 6:
One more. very much. Thank you all for being here.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Thank you so much. Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Speaker 2:
All right. Um so we will now move on to the public portion of our meeting um which is uh the time for people to comment um first on items that are on consent and then on items that are not on the agenda. And so um if anyone is here to um comment on any of the items on the consent calendar which are considered routine town business um please fill out a speaker card um and I will call you up.

Speaker 3:
Um all right, we have um one speaker for consent um which is Gus who okay I uh sent in a supplemental material and I just uh there's a bunch of stuff that 10 10 items that I want to speak on. One is the one is you know I think we should have you know 10day 10day kind of thing but the minutes aren't put down and people talked you know number of people talked last week and it's it's easier to trace and and look back at you know I talked on the World Cup and it's here and uh you know some of the stuff this on the paper here. Um the number three uh is the terabyte is, you know, they're charging $5,000 for a ter one terabyte and it's like 50 if you looked it up, it's like 50 to $250 the max to store terabytes. And so if you wanted more terabytes, you know, uh number four, cloud storage cost, uh $10 per month, you know, data and stuff like that. These are very expensive uh things. I think we need to overhaul the the system anyways because it wasn't working last last week. The the Zoom wasn't working. And I you know there should be number five um law firms on on call two five and six are law firms on call 40,000 for the cup. You know I I'm going to be talking a little bit more about that number 19 the cup modification and stuff like that. This is they should get paid by the hour not you know straight up 40,000 in legal costs. I mean we save a lot of money that way. the town would uh seven for what this is the study for a fiveyear I'm not sure exactly what that is a lot of this stuff we should there should be a study sessions on some of this and the financial commission should do have have more say on the on on uh instead of doing the consulting stuff there's way too many consultants as it is the 10 and 11 are drainage system surveys no bids on call I've talked about Loma Street and and that's that's you know I think that's fraud people if you start looking at it number 12 consultant legal uh legal department again uh it's LA based you know they're not local how you you have to do this over thing 13's overpriced $5,000 for lighting for the library um for I guess emergency lighting or for the battery stuff and you know so I think that if you pull pulled it and talked about it, we'd save a lot of money. Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Um, are there any hands raised on Zoom?

Speaker 5:
There are no hands raised on Zoom.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. Um, so then I will turn to the town council to see if there are is anyone looking to pull an item from consent or a motion.

Speaker 1:
Council member Hudis. Uh, I move to approve um the consent calendar items 1 through 18.

Speaker 2:
Great. Council member Badami. I'll second.

Speaker 3:
Perfect. Um, and we will be taking roll call votes tonight because we have one member of the council who is remote. So, I'll turn to the clerk.

Speaker 4:
Council member I.

Speaker 5:
Council member Hudis I.

Speaker 6:
Council member Vadami I.

Speaker 1:
Vice Mayor Risto I.

Speaker 2:
Mayor Moore I. Um, that passes unanimously.

Speaker 3:
So, we will now move on to verbal communications. Um, which is for items that are not on the agenda. Um, and I have a few speaker cards here, but if there are any other uh speakers who want to speak on any non-aggendaized items, um, please uh bring your card forward or raise your hand on Zoom. Um, our first speaker for um, verbal communications is Ian Baronowski.

Speaker 4:
Um, and Ian will be followed by Joe Ends.

Speaker 5:
You can approach the podium. Yep. You'll have three minutes.

Ian Baronowski:
All right. Thank you. My name is Ian Baronowski and I've lived in Los Gatos for 4 years. Um, I've had my first child here and I dream of settling down here.

Speaker 1:
I believe this is one of the safest towns in the Bay Area, which is what brought me here. Uh, in fact, from the Los Gatos's own website, it says, "Feeling secure is a major part of any community's quality of life. The town of Losatoos has one of the lowest crime rates in the Bay Area." I am here to tell you that despite the low crime rates, I am feeling less secure since the rise of camera usage in Loscatoos.

Speaker 2:
Every day I drive home off Highway 85 at Winchester and on my short 1.4 4 mile drive.

Speaker 3:
I pass seven flock cameras and 31 cameras that I can't identify.

Speaker 4:
I can't escape the feeling of being watched until I'm inside my own home.

Speaker 5:
We all hear the message about how secure our data is with these cameras. And we have heard it all before. In 2023, customers were assured that 23 and me securely handled our most sensitive data, our DNA and our ancestry.

Speaker 6:
Then a black hat crime group hacked the data of 6.9 million customers.

Speaker 1:
In December of 2025, a YouTuber named Ben Jordan used simple internet searches to gain access to Flock's Condor camera system and look at footage from cameras in real time and tracked himself moving around his home city. Clearly, they were unaccounted for weaknesses. They described that as Netflix for stalkers.

Speaker 2:
I am requesting that you do not renew or if possible cancel any flock cameras that Los Gatos has in place.

Speaker 3:
I also ask that you provide clarity to citizens on how many cameras are installed in Los Gatos, what are their purpose, how our data is being handled.

Speaker 4:
I'd like to end by saying I believe in our police force and I know that they are here to protect us. But with all the events going on around us, I know this is not the right way forward.

Speaker 5:
Thank you.

Speaker 6:
We'll go to Joe Ends. Um, and Joe will be followed by Jeff Suzuki.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much. Um, I guess I want to be a little more serious than I've usually been about this crime and I don't like naming names. Uh, but I got three of them. And there's town manager over there which I said I was going to meet with and we thought should talk. I don't know if you want to air it out here. I'll give you three names though. And there are confidential informants.

Speaker 2:
The police department. Yeah. There. And then we got to talk about a police officer that listens to these people and I get hit. I get battered. There's nothing done. Nothing. Gone. Because officer Juan Banese guy, I think that's his name. He comes and does every time I get hit or a broken rib. This is serious stuff. And one comes and takes it. Oh, the D never picks up on the case. It's kind of funny in a way that No, it's not. I had a cranial bleed with a head, a broken rib.

Speaker 3:
I can give you those names. I probably should. and and responsible supposedly responsible police officer that we got a great police department now saying this this can't exist and I'm not they're calling me a snitch and they're like so I'm choked up for words I'm real happy with my life but I got to get real serious and keep the integrity of our police force can't have bad cops can't have them we had them I got rid of the last police chief bas on that with a grand jury civil complaint sent to our wonderful Laurel Pvetti. Remember hello great because um so he got his disciplinary hearing in L of termination he was gone a couple days and that's how we picked up beautiful sheep that we have. Okay, thanks a lot everybody. Bye.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Um we'll go to Jeff Suzuki who will be followed by Lee Quintana.

Speaker 5:
Good evening, council members. I will disclose that I am not speaking as a complete streets and transportation commissioner but as a private citizen and the president of the logatus anti-racism coalition.

Speaker 6:
I would like to spend a short amount of time to express my gratitude for uh taking action upon our request during the last council meeting to increase funding uh through the community grant program in light of our request for uh resources specifically for the rapid response network. We had come to these council meetings for I mean since March basically every council meeting uh we had started our vigils in February. There were hundreds of distinct visitors over the course of those months. Um, and it really does uh mean a lot to me and to the organization and to many of our community members that that I've spoken to uh that that this council uh acknowledged the concerns of our community and acted upon them in a m in a material way. It really does represent the ideals of local government. So, thank you. I I very much appreciate it.

Speaker 1:
I I understand that the this money has not yet been allocated to the rapid response network. Uh but I understand that this council uh was working within the constraints of uh the existing system. It can't accommodate every individual request. Uh but I do appreciate that this council did what it could uh on that particular night. Uh this this money would be very useful for supporting the over 100 uh volunteer rapid responders who serve within Loscatoos, providing material uh support for those who are victimized by federal immigration enforcement, and also providing legal support uh and material support to those whose family members have have been deported across the county and potentially in our own town.

Speaker 2:
Um so thank you. I I very much appreciate it. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
We'll go to Lee Quintana. Um, and Lee will be followed by Gus who?

Speaker 4:
Good evening. I just have one comment and that's regarding the uh item that was on the June 10th um planning commission meeting regarding um it was on uh excuse me it was on other matters and it would to be discussion of the work plan that was submitted to the council by the historic preservation committee. And by the way, I have to say I am on the historic preservation committee, but I'm not speaking for them. I'm speaking as an individual. Uh what I want to say is that even though the area architects were informed about this meeting and staff reached out to them to get their input, the members of the historic preservation committee were not aware of that meeting. Uh, and I think that is something that they should have been made aware of since it was their word program that was submitted and that was going to be discussed.

Speaker 5:
Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. And our last card in the room on verbal is Gus who?

Speaker 1:
Hello again. Uh so I think uh got mutated the world cup the good old color. So we I think we might have to quarantine the sound or something. Um I'd rather actually be watching the two A teams Algeria and Argentina putting playing right now and standing up here and and uh you know bringing up some concerns. Um, same thing. Uh, uh, ice though I don't agree with Jeff on the the last that was out of agenda. That wasn't even on the agenda. And you guys seem to want to, you know, dish out $20,000 to basically lawyers. And uh um I I think there if you went the legal route, it would be better. On on March 18th, 20125, council orders staff to follow federal funding and report back every two months. That hasn't happened. Um let's see. Six days ago, um, another concern is six days ago, um, there was a preliminary review of construction on North Santa Cruz Avenue that had six parking spaces for a three-story maximum, two retail store, two retail stores on the first floor, one office building on the second floor, and four rental units on the third floor. Six in six things. It's perfectly legal that you know because the staff said it but everybody nobody heard about it. You know I'm saying again 10 day you got to give people 10 days to to if you're putting things out. I know this is that was something that's not really on the um um it's just it was out there.

Speaker 2:
I gave you two uh pictures of uh the the the you know article on 92024 that shows that you guys you know we with the the bathroom we don't have we have one party down things and it was activated you guys have talked about it there's a lot more money put into it than $18,000 and and it's just it's a h 100,000 and the second pictures of you know we pick one up for $38,000 and it, you know, it's on a trailer and we can put it in and I've done enough research on it that uh you know there's there's sewer in the park and the it was an on call architect for got 23,000. I don't know if he got 23, but it's just that's you know there there's a lot of waste there. And last was the front page news on the uh uh the two things I'm probably against that because uh there's I can see problems coming with with you know working with different agencies. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Um, and it looks like we have uh one hand raised on Zoom for verbal communications. Um, we'll go to Arnov.

Speaker 4:
Hi, I'm a recent Fisher graduate. I've always ridden my bike to school and I am here to ask the council to prioritize finding funding for the Blossom Hill Highway 17 pedestrian cycling bridge. It is very stressful to bike next to cars on the current bridge because it is so narrow. Some cars don't even slow down.

Speaker 5:
So that's why we need to we need the separated bridge.

Speaker 6:
It may not be it may not benefit me anymore, but it will help Fisher students in the future and encourage more people to bike and walk. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much for your comment.

Speaker 2:
Um okay. Uh that concludes verbal communications. Um and we will move to our public hearings for this evening.

Speaker 3:
Um, our first public hearing is item 19, which is to continue um is to consider continuation of an appeal of the planning commission decision to approve a request for modification to an existing conditional use permits um for the West Valley Muslim Association. Um, and I will turn to Gabrielle, our town attorney, who will explain the continuence recommendation.

Speaker 4:
Good evening. Um, so this relates to a planning commission decision that was made on May 21st. The town code provides that interested parties can appeal the decision and they have 10 days to do so.

Speaker 5:
The deadline to do so was 400 p.m. on Monday, June 1st. And in order to submit an appeal, an appellant needs to submit a form that explains how their property will be injured by the decision and pay the appeal fee. Um the town received two appeals. Um the town code provides that the appeals are to be heard within fix 56 days of the decision that's being appealed. However, the town council does not have July meetings scheduled. Um, so staff reached out to the two appellants to ask if they would wave the 56-day deadline. And both appellants have waved the 56-day deadline. And as a result, um, staff anticipates scheduling the appeal hearing for August 18th. And so tonight's election [clears throat] is for the council to continue the hearing to August 18th [clears throat] and accept any public comment on the continuence. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Um yes, uh Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, thank you um for making clear what we're considering tonight. So we're not considering the application. We're just considering a continuence to August 18th. Um I wanted to just ask with the process of an appeal. Um when does the public um when is the public informed of the contents of that appeal? Um is that something that uh is made public um or can be made public? Is that something that's available?

Speaker 2:
Um, it typically would be made public in the hearing packet, but um, a council member did ask for a copy of it and so copies have been provided to the council as and also posted on the town's website um, under the project. So, if residents go to or anybody goes to the town website and looks under pending planning projects and looks up uh modification to conditional use permit on Farley Road, um both appeals are posted there.

Speaker 3:
Okay. Thank you very much for clearing that up. Yes, Council Member Dami.

Speaker 4:
I just want to clarify. So, because a council member asked for it, um, typically we would not have posted it until maybe closer to the appeal or because That's correct. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Great. Are there any other questions?

Speaker 5:
Okay, seeing none, then I'll open up public comment on this item. Um, I just have one speaker card um from Gus who Okay. You have just been handed uh my I appealed it on the the day after. Um I do have the [snorts] I have a right to appeal. You know, it's a constitutional right. First amendment.

Speaker 6:
If I have a grievance, I have, you know, it's it's uh one of those things that um and I I do have documentation for that the town doesn't give back doesn't get back to me for a week later after I appeal. I handed it to the town attorney and stuff like that. I don't want to get an argument, but uh you know, this is a religious you know, I I'm I'm Christian.

Speaker 1:
And I and I um uh say that this is a religious argument. You're going to lose if you do this cup thing because it's under the first amendment. Uh any religion has a right to to uh their it would be, you know, it's guaranteed.

Speaker 2:
It's I'm just to say the first amendment, the religious right, you can't interfere with that. And that's what the town is doing. It's it's not a traffic issue. that there's an article that I I provided here on the second picture and and and printed out and it's basically a biased it's it's it was in the paper that's part of the record. Um you you're punish you're you're opening up you're to litigation major litigation if this goes you know u out you know because this this is supposed to be a public hearing nobody hears about it you have three days you're supposed to give 10 days and stuff like that you know I'm I was the first to file I don't know and I couldn't afford to pay but I don't know both the other two paid for legal uh uh for all these planning fees and stuff like that. It's it's it's one of those things that you're the town's going to lose out. you you're this is another hearing on it and I'm you know I should have that right to you know say get together with people that are just non you know that represent religion and say hey you're wrong you know the town's wrong trying to uh put uh uh you know if it was Christmas and it Christmas Eve I went and and uh and they were packed the the parking lots were were packed and stuff like that and it it's it's later than 10 o'clock or 10:30 at night. So, I mean, those would be some arguments that'll be made, but you're to continue it when this is the first one is wrong. It's not it's not really agendaized. It's it's this the first sentence is it's a continued on this. So, it's it's just written wrong. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Um we will now move on to Lee Quintana.

Speaker 4:
Lee Kintana. Good evening. Um, this is going to sound like a continuation of my other comments earlier. I too looked at the pending projects uh filed several times before today expecting to see the uh appeals that were submitted.

Speaker 5:
It's my understanding that once something is submitted to the town, it becomes public and uh to the public should not have to ask for something to be placed on the pending projects.

Speaker 6:
uh page, the project is the appeal and the appeal should appear on that page.

Speaker 1:
And this is just another instance where some of the noticing practices that we now do uh in a sense is um keeping the public from knowing what is going on.

Speaker 2:
There's a it it presents as a transparency problem. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Um I see no hands raised on Zoom for this item, so I will look to the town council for comments or emotion. Yes, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Um first of all, I appreciate that both of the appellants waved the 56 day deadline because given that we don't meet in July, it would have been pretty impossible to get all the material together for tonight's meeting. So that worked out well. Um, I do have a question. I mean, typically in advance of almost any issue, the town council receives a ton of letters from people or there's other records that come in and folks are told it'll be in the packet because sometimes we're hearing about a project long before it ever comes to the council or as a council member, I was getting letters about um West Valley Muslim Association CUP before we even thought it would ever come to the town council. if it had ended the planning commission, it wouldn't be in a council packet. And so my assumption is that like every other issue that comes before the council that all of the information that relates then to how everything came to the how how the hearing came to the planning commission is part of our packet, but also subsequent material from the date of that hearing. So that would be the appeal, that would be any letters that continue to come in. Is that correct?

Speaker 5:
All the documents are provided to the council and I know that the speaker indicated that the appeals are not posted online. They are the second and third links on the pending projects page for the Farley Road project. So both appeals that were filed correctly in accordance with our rules are posted there. So when the meeting does occur, all those documents will be provided for the council's consideration.

Speaker 6:
Okay. Um a follow-up question. In the past, when there's been an appeal to the town council, has the appeal been posted ahead of the package for that meeting?

Speaker 1:
I don't believe so.

Speaker 2:
Okay. Is that part of our um procedures or is that a policy?

Sean Mullen:
I I will turn it over. I think Sean Mullen's here that can speak to that.

Speaker 4:
Thank you, Sean Mullen, planning manager. That's not our typical procedure to post the um appeals on the pending planning projects. Um I think when we look at this particular appeal, there's a significant amount of information that's going to that has come in thus far and probably will continue to come in. So posting it made a little bit more sense in this case. Okay. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Yes, Council Member Bami.

Speaker 6:
for the reasons provided by our town attorney that council has a recess during July and that both appellants wave the 56-day period. Um I move uh that we continue this appeal hearing to a date certain of August 18th, 2026. Great. Vice Mayor Risto second.

Speaker 1:
Okay. Yes. Council member Hudis, a question for the town attorney. Um, are there two appeals or is there a third appeal that is uh lawful?

Speaker 2:
There are just two appeals that submitted the appeal form with the required information and paid the fees.

Speaker 3:
And that said, when this does come for public hearing, any member of the public can address the council.

Speaker 4:
Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Great. Um, seeing no other questions, I will turn to the town clerk for a roll call vote.

Speaker 6:
Council member Annie I.

Speaker 1:
Council member Hudis I.

Speaker 2:
Council member Vadami I. Vice Mayor Risto I.

Speaker 3:
Mayor Moore I. That passes unanimously and we will hear that item again um in August. Thank you all very much.

Speaker 4:
We will now move to item 20 which is to conduct a brush abatement program public hearing to consider objections to the proposed removal of uh brush on parcel listed on the 2026 wildland urban interface WOOI area non-compliant parcel list. Um Paul Gonia um public works project analyst will present the staff report and I apologize if I said your last name wrong.

Paul Gonia:
You actually got it correct so thank you. Uh good evening, mayor, vice mayor, and council members. My name is Paul Gonia, and I'm a project analyst with the parks and public works department.

Speaker 6:
Each year, the town adopts a hazardous vegetation abatement program, also known as the brush abatement program for part parcels located within the wild land urban interface area, also known as the WOOI. Santa Clara County Fire uh administers this program on behalf of the town. Jeremy Davis, a representative uh from County Fire, is here with us tonight in support of this item. Town Code section 92025 requires that properties within the WOOI maintain defensible space near homes. Each year, property owners are reminded that they must remove flammable vegetation around their homes and other structures on their property to create a defensible space. Throughout the spring, county fire staff performed inspections and provided education to property owners in the WOOI to encourage compliance with vegetation removal requirements. On May 5th of this year, the town council adopted a resolution declaring unmanaged vegetation a nuisance, ordered owners to perform abatement, and set tonight's hearing date to consider objections from any property owners who have not yet completed the necessary abatement.

Speaker 1:
Attachment one of the staff report identified properties that still need inspection. As of May 29th, the date of the hearing had to be posted. As of June 3rd, 2026, County Fire completed all of its inspections and notified the town that all inspected Loscatoos properties are in compliance. Parks and Publics Works would like to thank County Fire for all their hard work and support in administering the county brush program.

Speaker 2:
PPW would also like to thank the Loscatoos community and the various property owners for all their efforts and support. Uh, no protests or other written communications have been received on this on this item. Uh, that concludes my report and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Speaker 3:
Thank you very much. Thank you to County Fire Parks and Public Works and our town residents for making our jobs a little bit easier this evening. Um, are there questions for staff or county fire?

Speaker 4:
Okay, seeing none, I will open up uh public comment on this item. I have no speaker cards and I do not see any hands raised on Zoom.

Speaker 5:
So, we'll close public comment on that item and turn back to the council. Yes, Vice Mayor Stow.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. Well, this is easy. I mean, everybody came into compliance. I feel like the messaging about hazardous brush and fire readiness is being taken seriously all across our community, and I think this is one outward sign of that. Um I looking it just says we have the hearing. So it doesn't sound like we need to vote on anything or make a decision. We're just hearing this.

Speaker 1:
I'll look to the town attorney, the town clerk, or public works staff.

Speaker 2:
Do you want us to make a motion to be safe? It it it sounds like we're in such a unique situation that everybody's in compliance that we're stunned to think that there's no action that needs to be taken. I do not believe any action is necessary as we're not going to proceed with sanctioning any property owners. Okay.

Speaker 3:
Um can I can I make a motion?

Speaker 4:
Sure. I move to uh thank County Fire and the residents of Loscatoos and parks and public works and everybody who has put out the messaging about this preparation um and the fact that our residents had 100% compliance this time. So if that can be a motion that relates to this council member if it's a motion I will gladly second it. I cannot underscore the importance of wildfire prevention and vegetation management and the work uh that you've done. So, thank you to all.

Speaker 5:
Great. Um, do do you want to vote on that? [laughter] Um, okay. We have a motion on the table.

Speaker 6:
We'll take a a roll call vote.

Speaker 1:
Council member Renie, I.

Speaker 2:
Council member Hudis, I.

Speaker 3:
Council member Vodami, I.

Speaker 4:
Vice Mayor Risto, I.

Speaker 5:
Mayor Moore, I. Passes unanimously. And thanks again.

Speaker 6:
Um, okay. We will now turn to item 21, which is to conduct a public hearing to hear protests and adopt resolutions confirming the diagrams and assessments um uh regarding the landscape and lighting assessment districts one and two. And I will turn back to Paul for the staff report.

Speaker 1:
Thank you again. Uh [clears throat] the California Landscaping and Lightning Act or Lighting Act of 1972 allows local agencies to form assessment districts for the purpose of financing the cost and expenses for landscaping and lighting public areas. In 1990, the town established two landscape and lighting districts consisting of six benefit zones. Each year, the town levies assessments and reauthorizes the districts through the adoption of resolutions following a public hearing.

Speaker 2:
The annual process is required by the landscape and lighting act. On May 5th, 2026, the town council approved the town's engineering report, adopted resolutions confirming the diagrams and assessment, and set tonight's hearing on the proposed assessments.

Speaker 3:
Tonight's public hearing was scheduled pursuant to the California Landscape and Lighting Act. Before you final report, it is recommended that the six resolutions be adopted. No protests or other written uh communications have been received on the proposed assessments. And that concludes my report, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Speaker 4:
Thank you very much. Are there any questions from the council?

Speaker 5:
Okay, seeing none, um I do have one speaker card on this item. Um so we will turn to Stephanie Rickard Hacker.

Speaker 6:
Afternoon or evening. I'm mindful of my three minutes, so I'm going to talk fast. So I have been Do you mind pulling the mic to your Oh, sure. Thank you very much.

Speaker 1:
Take that off my minutes. Okay. So I have moved to Loscatoos in 1985. Um, we moved to Kennedy Meadows in 1996. That's when it was bare dirt. We were the first house that was there. Kennedy Meadows benefit zone is one of the areas you're considering for the budget of what's going on. For those not familiar, it's a development with 10 homes. Surrounding the 10 homes is an open area where people walk their dogs. There's wildlife. There is a creek that is there. It is a former wetland. It is a beautiful area. To develop it, the Army Corps of Engineers had to give approval because it's a protected area. Things of that nature. It's gone wonderfully. It's a great resource for the community, everyone else, which leads to the problem and why I'm here. So, I have a dog. I may or may not love my dog more than my husband. That's up to vote.

Speaker 2:
Anyway, my dog was having issues for about a year. She's a mut. Um, we walk her three times a day on the trail. She was having issues with her paws. She was licking her paws. She was having distress in her intestines. We took her to the vet. She was exposed to something. We couldn't figure it out.

Speaker 3:
Long story short, at some point my husband decides that he may talk to the landscapers that are out treating the area just outside the paved area around the trail there. He finds out they are spraying something called tribune, which is something that's called dequat dromide. Dequat dromide is sort of like a junior version of Agent Orange that is legal in California. However, it is not legal in the UK. It is not legal in the European Union, nor is it legal in the state of New York. The reason for that is it's poisonous. It's toxic. There are many guidelines as to how and when you can use it. One of those is you've got to give written notice. Two is you're supposed to leave the area for 24 hours without anyone else being exposed to it.

Speaker 4:
And three is you have to get permits to even use the the substance. The reason I'm here is because I want you to ask that we do not use that substance at all. I can represent to you having lived in the neighborhood for 30 years. We didn't use the substance for many, many years. No giant weeds grow up on the trail in between times. And the danger with the poison is extreme. In my court alone, we have two dogs that died before they were four years old that were walked on the trail daily. One of the neighbors in my book club said that she knows of five other dogs that have died.

Speaker 5:
We have children that walk on this trail. We don't have any preventative measures in place to say that no one can walk on this after the people that provide the poison have to wear masks, hoods, and other things. So, I'm just asking that we don't allow this poison to be used on the trail. I don't think it's necessary. I think it's toxic, and I don't come here often. The last time I came here, my husband was trying to get elevated bar stools for a restaurant that's long been sold and gone. So, I come to you because I think it's very serious, and I hope you can address that one issue. I'm in favor of the budget. I think it's great. Maybe add in a little bit more for poop patrol because we've also become sort of a local uh pooping zone. My time is up. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you very much.

Speaker 1:
Great. I will turn back to the town council.

Speaker 2:
Yes, Council Member Bonami. Uh, if we're looking for a motion, um, I would say I move to adopt the six resolutions in attachment 1 through six to continue the annual process of renewing landscape and lighting assessment districts number one and number two for fiscal year 2026 through 2027.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Is there a second? Council member Hudis, I'll second. Um question for staff about uh whether the issue that the resident raised has been something that the uh staff um has been aware of or um has uh interacted with the residents on it.

I'm Nicole Burnham:
Yeah, thank you so much for asking that question. I'm Nicole Burnham, director of parks and public works. Not sure why there's so much feedback on this mic tonight. Um uh yes, we have been in contact. Um the resident did contact us, reach out to us as soon as she found out this information. We've investigated. So our our landscape contractor does the treatment work in this area. So we've addressed the issue with them. Um and and the noticing requirements. Um and they do have qualified applicators that are licensed to to work with this material. Um it is legal as was noted. I think we need we're going to think about that a little bit more with them about whether there are other alternatives that could be as effective. Um, one of the things we've discussed is whether we should just change our treatment protocol entirely and go to mowing which would be more more expensive. So, we we are working um on this issue and we will continue to work through it. Um, but any change we make in the treatment protocol is going to change the price point. So, we're going to need to work through that and come back with different pricing. So, we're asking tonight for you to, you know, if you to adopt um the fees as they're proposed and the and the um and then we'll continue to work through the issue.

Speaker 5:
So, if I could just follow up, I I appreciate getting the information. Um, is there a time frame that you plan to come back to the council on this or um is is it something that you plan to resolve without coming back to the council? I'd like to think we can resolve it without coming back to council and then ne and because I think we can resolve the use of chemical issue or the type of chemical that's being used and then over the next year we want to look more closely at all of these um LLD areas and the way they're being maintained and see if we do need to make changes holistically in all of them which would change the pricing which would bring us back next year with maybe a different a different price point for some of these areas.

Director Bernham:
Yes, Vice Mayor Stowe.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Uh, thank you, Director Bernham. I appreciate that, you know, follow up with the resident and the thoughtfulness of what our other options. Um, does that mean that there would not be any changes executed this year or that if there were changes considered, we wouldn't do a price adjustment until next year?

Speaker 2:
Um, we would not.

Speaker 3:
The changes we would look at this year are using different chemicals, not an entirely different way of maintaining the area.

Speaker 4:
Okay, got it. So changing chemical wouldn't have a big impact on the price.

Speaker 5:
The price swing would be if we went to mowing or some other maintenance approach versus, you know, hand pulling, whatever.

Speaker 6:
That is versus chemicals. Okay, got it. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Great. And it sounds like um uh staff is thoughtfully looking into this. I'll just share I'm I'm very sympathetic to what the resident shared. I've actually I've had a resident from the um Santa Rosa Heights Lighting and Landscape District reach out to me about this maybe six months ago and then also I've had a few residents whenever this whenever the spring happens in Belgato and the Heights open space. I get a couple emails um and so I do think it's something worth looking into. It sounds like um you all are going to do just that. So, thank you.

Speaker 2:
Um Council Member Renie has a question.

Speaker 3:
I'll comment. I I would just say that um you know I'm sympathetic to trying to use the least chemicals possible or at least the least toxic chemicals um possible if we decide that we're going to a more expensive um method to reduce our effect on the environment and the and the people basically. Um I I would say we would want to notice our you know the people of these districts to say you know we're increasing because we think this is going to be a less toxic less bad for the environment and the people um solution but let you know basically let them know that is why we're increasing it and then see what the feedback is. Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Look to the town manager.

Speaker 5:
No, we'll take a look at see if there's a more sustainable way to approach this.

Speaker 6:
However, with a landscape and lighting district, if there's any changes that impact the cost and there's needs to be a cost increase or decrease, we would need to go back through the process that involves a vote of those who are impacted by that assessment. In which case, yes, we would have to engage them.

Speaker 1:
So I think if we're looking at a different protocol that may have a material impact on the dollars and cents of the approach, yes, we will be engaging with the residents to determine is there an appetite to do so and if so proceed through the process for the next year to change the assessment.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thanks for that context. Okay.

Speaker 3:
No, I'm sorry. Thanks for asking. Um uh we will now uh call a vote of the council. I'll turn to the town clerk.

Speaker 4:
Council member Annie I.

Speaker 5:
Council member Hudis I.

Speaker 6:
Council member Badami I.

Speaker 1:
Vice Mayor Risto I.

Speaker 2:
Mayor Moore I. That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Um okay. We will now move on to item 22, which is to adopt a resolution approving the proposed fee schedule for the adopt a bench program um for this next fiscal year. And I will turn to Nicole Bham, our parks and public works director.

Speaker 3:
Ah, good evening, Mayor and Council.

Speaker 4:
Super happy to be here talking about adopted bench. hoping we're going to get this over the goal line, but we'll see how tonight goes with you. Um, so just as a refresher, so I did this um this presentation, thank you so much, Cara, came out today very late in the day as a as a desk item. Um, just to kind of frame the conversation we're about to have. So, if we could go to the first slide, just as by way of background, um, and friendly reminder, we've been working on the adopt a bench program for quite some time. Um there's been in historically no framework, no policy, no guidance on how the program works or how people pay for what they're getting out of the program. Um so back in February, we came forward to council with a new policy that covers um the bench adoption and thank you for that was adopted and is now effective. Um on April 7th, uh the bench fees for the associated program were part heard as part of the public hearing on the fees and and charges schedule. Um and council at that time asked some questions about how the fees were established and why they were what they were. Um and so we're back tonight to try to um work through some of that.

Speaker 5:
your staff report that accompanied the the council agenda talked about the history of the fees that are charged. Um provided you with some backup calculations of how the fees were charged uh the fees were developed. Um explain the cost and provided some backup on the costs of the town standard benches that we currently use. Um discussed some potential lower cost alternatives um and the ben type bench types that are used in other jurisdictions.

Speaker 6:
um and included a comparison of cost to other jurisdictions just to provide some context and understanding for council.

Speaker 1:
So for the next slide, um so these are the bench styles we're talking about. The one on the left is uh typical of downtown. This is actually so this brand is called Duour. That's the ba brand that most of the jurisdictions around us are using. Doour makes a number of different styles and colors, but generally speaking, people use most in a lot of public spaces, people use do more benches because they have an incredible warranty that comes with them and they're incredibly durable. Um, Saratoga is using one of their benches.

Speaker 2:
Campbell uses their benches. Dublin, Pleasanton, we Tyler did a number of research. So, there's it's a pretty common bench um bench style. The one on the right is what we use in other areas outside of downtown. It's a recycled plastic bench um that has proven to be quite durable early on in the advent of [clears throat] bench and street furniture when recycled plastic was first in coming into its its own. Um recycled plastic benches were very unreliable. They baked in the heat, they melted, they warped, they were awful for maintenance. They've come a long way and we've had really good luck with these these benches and using them in public spaces in the parks. Um, as we noted in the memo, in the staff report, there are cheaper benches that exist for the options that are here. Um, San Jose standard is a concrete bench. Um, but we, um, staff, not to be obstinate, um, continues to recommend that we retain the existing standard that we have. I think if council wants to evaluate changing them, it that's a topic that really should use some have have some community engagement behind it. And I think we should have more conversation about what we pick rather than sort of trying to pick on the fly to manage a cost. So we continue to recommend that we we retain these two benches. And so that's what the cost information that you're going to see on the next slide supports.

Speaker 3:
The next slide um shows a cost comparison of the various options and alternatives that um that are that were presented in the report plus one bonus option. um on the left. So there's four five columns. One is the bench information and then four item four columns that show you the charges. So the first one is the historic charges um which are quite low. We don't have any backup information about how those charges were defined or established. They are not cost recovery.

Speaker 4:
when we brought forward um the item um for inclusion in the fees and charges um document that the the council um adopts each spring. Um we had done a calculation. It was included as attachment two in the staff report. It was quite detailed based on the cost of the benches, the cost of the plaques, the time it takes us to coordinate um with prospective adopters, um the time and materials it takes to install the various benches um and um also a 10-year maintenance cycle. So, the idea is residents are adopting or whoever is adopting a bench, they get a bench installed or they're adopting an existing one and they they adopt it for a 10-year period. And so, over that 10-year period, they're also paying the maintenance cost. Um, we did calculate two different price points because the ben the steel bench that do more bench is more expensive than recycled plastic.

Speaker 5:
We took those two separate costs, steel versus plastic, and then averaged them to get the $9,865 price point. And then we did with this new um with the new policy, we did open the opportunity for adopters to continue their adoption. But right now in the current program, if you've adopted a bench, there's no mechanism for us to sunset that adoption or um or understand if you even want to continue to have the bench adopted. So um so one of the things that we also recommended including was subsequent cycles of adoption and you then wouldn't need to buy the bench. You're only paying for the maintenance. So that's what the proposed charges from 2026 were. In the staff report, we presented an alternative recognizing that council really can set the fee at whatever they would like. Um we could um we had suggested we could do the benches at cost and if we can find lower cost vendors then people would we would charge we're only going to charge them what we pay for the bench um which we can document through our procurement procedures. um and then determine, you know, council certainly has the right and the opportunity to determine what they would like to charge for for staff time.

Speaker 6:
Um today in preparing for the for this item as we were talking about it more at staff we at a staff level we recognized that when we calculated the 10-year maintenance cost we included time for both a lead maintenance worker and a a field worker to do the maintenance. And as we thought more about that, um, we recognized that the lead worker, while they would be there in the park, they probably aren't dedicating all of their time to, um, maintaining the bench. So, the alternative to that's on the slide in front of you recognizes a pot a cost savings from not including or or reducing the amount of time a lead worker could um would spend on bench maintenance. So, that drops the perspective fee down as low as $6,912 for a new bench. Um, and drops the 10-year renewal down to the 2500 $2,958 value. Um, which so those are options for for council to consider and think about. Um, if we go to the next slide.

Speaker 1:
So, just as you're considering this, um, a couple of things to think about too.

Speaker 2:
So in the past with bench adoption, people would come to us and say, "We want a bench and we want it here." And so almost every time someone adopted a bench, they were paying for a new bench because they were adding a bench to the system. With the way we recalibrated the program, we are strongly encouraging people to use existing benches, existing bench locations. So they can pick a location and if they want a new bench, they can pay for it. But if they don't want a new bench, they we can put a plaque on the existing bench that's there. So if the bench is in good condition, they don't need to pay for the new the new bench. And I I think that's a really important distinction um and understanding because it gives people some flexibility over the cost um that they end up paying. Um, so under all the scenarios that we're presenting, we're suggesting the bench cost is only charged if they're not using an existing bench or if they decide they want a new one for some reason. Um, and the bench costs that we're presenting to you are based on re recent purchases. We will continue to look for lowerc cost vendors for these same style of benches. Um, and obviously pass that cost on to adopters whenever we can. So, just to wrap up for the last um for the last slide, um just the recommendation. So, we're asking tonight that council give consideration to adopting the fee um as presented or provide us direction for an alternative fee. Great.

Speaker 3:
Uh sure. Should I? We'd like to recommend alternative too. So in in discussing the maintenance protocol and understanding the the staff that are involved, I think that alternative two that's presented that drops that price below Saratoga and is in a more reasonable range, I think is more appropriate. Um, I'm also cognizant that while we're very supportive for folks that want to commemorate a new bench and put benches in different locations, we also have to recognize that unless there's a guaranteed funding source, every new bench in a location that the town wasn't originally planning to place a bench is potentially a long-term cost that the town would incur. And so I thank the director for helping folks navigate towards existing benches and either upgrading them from the wood the recycled plastic to the more durable what was the name of that bench again?

Speaker 4:
Do more since the bench does do more in terms of last longer.

Speaker 5:
Um and and I think that's the good direction.

Speaker 6:
Great. Thank you very much. I really appreciate uh parks and public works looking into this and and really taking some time to be responsive to the the feedback um from council and and providing some good options in front of us this evening. Vice Mayor Risesto, thank you. Um I agree. I appreciate the deep dive into here and also giving us an option that heads more toward what we were asking for before. Um I do have a question because it looks like if I look at your chart um the bench and plaque fabrication alternative two basically is the same as the proposed um you said we if someone selects an existing bench then they would basically pay the 10-year maintenance cost only but and the application charge. I mean I'm not seeing a number there. And when you said they don't have to pay for the bench, well, the plaque fabrication is included in the cost of the bench in the top line. So, the plaque fabrication cost presumably would need to be pulled out if if I'm adopting an existing bench. Is that correct?

Speaker 1:
Yes. Thank you for catching that. Um, well, yes. Yes. Thank you for catching that. Attachment two gives us the cost of the plaque fabrication. So, we can probably do some math here and uh Okay, good. and know what cost to to how to set things. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
Okay. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
If you do decide to go that direction, I'd recommend you approve the alternative two with the addition of the plaque fee for any bench that is doesn't require a new bench.

Speaker 4:
And um it sounds like you can do the math on that, but do you have a a ballpark of um what that cost would be?

Speaker 5:
Yeah. In attachment two, it's presented.

Speaker 6:
Um the plaque on the the steel benches is $450 and on the wood benches, the plastic bench, it's 402. So, so to be clear, someone would adopt the bench, an existing bench at that cost and then agree to the renewal cost moving forward or the maintenance costs moving forward.

Speaker 1:
Yeah, I think what they would do is is agree to the adoption at the with the fee paid that's in the on the on the um the second row of costs, application, processing, bench procurement, and installation.

Speaker 2:
Uh and plus the $400.

Speaker 3:
So, which would be $586 for the steel bench or 1360. It's a lot cheaper to install the steel benches plus the 2458 for the 10-year maintenance.

Speaker 4:
Okay. Thank you very much. Uh, Vice Misto.

Speaker 5:
Yeah. Not to beat this too hard, but if you're adopting an existing bench, there's no installation charge. Correct.

Speaker 6:
So, I realize I'm guessing we can probably adopt something without knowing the exact numbers and if we get there.

Speaker 1:
Um, so would we be able to since we're asking questions, would we be able to um make a recommendation or or adopt something saying that for the existing benches, the cost of the installation would be pulled out of line two and the plaque fabrication would be substituted in line one and that would be the cost of an existing bench. I I would recommend we take a break so we can frame that portion of the resolution because you are approving a resolution with a specified dollar amount.

Speaker 2:
Okay, that's fine. I think we had a couple other questions from council. So, let's get through questions. Yes, but I council member Hudis.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, my question is just where where is um this being documented? Is there is there a document? And so will it be just the resolution or the presentation?

Speaker 4:
Um, I was looking for that. I didn't see it. So, so the final the final fee that gets adopted will end up in the um in the fees schedule with the fees and charges that gets published July 1st. But are I are I think you're asking so all of the line items that we're going to talk about are in attachment two of this staff report. I think what I'm going to do at the break is just juggle them a little around a little bit to give you a clearer picture of what Okay, that's um very helpful and um I'm not going to comment yet, but we haven't taken public comment. So um but thank you for doing that, Council Member Renie.

Speaker 5:
Uh thank you, Mayor. So I also am a little confused. I I I think part of what's confusing me is is you have a a recommendation to uh approve a a resolution which only talks about the cost of the a new bench. But you've also said that if you want to use an existing bench with a new plaque, it does that need to be part of the resolution or is it part of the resolution or is it already something that's included? That's so that's what's confusing me a little bit and I I know we're going to take a break and make it a little clearer. So I'm just telling you what's confusing me. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 1:
Um, just another question. Has have we had any information coming um from the uh uh parks and sustainability committee about other places where benches are needed?

Speaker 2:
Um has there has there been any uh either through that means or through the public any idea about whether people think new benches are needed somewhere?

Speaker 3:
We had taken the policy to parks and sustainability commission twice during its development. Um the comments we received from them were more focused on the plaque and and plaque language. Um I think they were grateful for the mapping of benches. No one no one brought up the idea that we need new benches and more locations. Okay, thank you.

Speaker 4:
Great. Um, we we do have one public comment on this item. Um, I think I'll take the public comment now um in case it is uh relevant for staff's consideration. So, um, we'll go to Sharon Childs.

Speaker 5:
Thank you, Mayor and Council. Actually, what I am here to say doesn't really have to do with the with the fees, but because although because I was the executive director of the Lascatoss Community Foundation at the time, we were very involved in doing and uh the adoptive bench, I have some information.

Speaker 6:
I actually had a lot of information, but since I've been listening, I've changed everything. Hopefully, I can get my points across. First of all, um, Mayor, uh, Council Huers, you were, one of the things I heard you say was the location and adding benches. When I was involved in doing this, we were told that there were only a certain number of benches that could be placed in certain areas, and we were not going to be placing them any uh, any place else. I had one uh person in particular who was uh family of uh longtime resident of the the whole family wanted her bench to be put in a certain location and we were adamantly told we could not put it in that location and years later and I can't say exactly how many years now there's not only one bench at that location she wanted there's two and there have been other situations where I've been involved in wanting to place benches and we can't do it, but then later we can.

Speaker 1:
So, one of the things that I would like to have done if it hasn't already been done is to have a map of where all the benches can be placed and not change it.

Speaker 2:
um have it so that we know exactly where downtown and where the parks where they're where where we can have them and uh like I said not change them because I personally have watched this happen and watched people be turn turned away. We have benches in the downtown area. There was you were you mentioned um the cost of maintenance with the parks but you didn't say anything I didn't hear you say anything about downtown. I just want everyone to to know that there when I was involved, the benches downtown were the plastic ones and if we were putting them in the parks, they were going to be the metal ones and we couldn't change that. So, I don't know what's going on with that. Now, one thing I did want to say want to say is I know that you've been uh looking up for the people who are currently adopted bench people. I don't know if you found everyone or not.

Speaker 3:
I would be willing to uh help out because I realize if I look at the names or the information that's on the bench, my brain will eventually remember who bought that bench. And I do know there are some people who have not been contacted about their their current benches because I talked to my friend today. So, I'm really here to offer assistance and just give you history information. And do I get to have my hand get to shake my hand with every that's all. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Um, looks like there might be a question for you, Miss Childs.

Speaker 5:
[laughter] Um, Council Member Renie, I was Yeah, I do have Thanks a lot.

Speaker 6:
Hello. [laughter] Hi. Maybe you, you know, your comments made me think about this, you know, this problem of where we allow benches and then later we allow them somewhere else.

Speaker 1:
And you mentioned two locations, parks and downtown.

Speaker 2:
And the first thing that comes to mind, are those the only places we want to consider allowing benches? Do you do you have any perspective on where where should we be where should we be considering allowing benches? I I know there's parks and public works has criteria in their mind of where we shouldn't and shouldn't allow benches, but I I you know, and that's probably a long discussion, but I I guess I wanted to get your thoughts. Is parks and downtown good enough or there other places in town where we might want to allow benches?

Speaker 3:
Good question. For myself, my opinion would be I think the way that we have it now where some are downtown and some are the in the parks and not just the big park. We also have them uh at Bachmann and the park that's um by Harwood Avenue. Can't remember. Oh, Belgato Park. Um and I like that they're different depending on where they are.

Speaker 4:
Personally, I don't think we need them any place else other than where we have them now, but it might be something to look at.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. Thank you. You know, I'm I'm kind of thinking it'd be nice to have it places other places, but most of the other places are private property, so we probably can't say anything about that.

Speaker 6:
I'm thinking, well, you know, a lot of times people dedicate benches for somebody who's passed away or somebody who's been, you know, very involved in the community and maybe they're from an area, for example, say the Downing Center. Well, could we have a bench at the Downing Center? Well, the answer is no because it's private property. Um, you know, so that's why I was kind of trying to think this through a little bit. So, thank you for your comments.

Speaker 1:
Also, I'd like to mention when we have the event floor completed for the band stand park, we will at least I remember that we will have opportunities for people to buy benches around that area as well.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thank you very much.

Speaker 3:
All right. Um, I see no hands raised on Zoom. Um, so what we'll do right now is we'll take a quick break. Um, uh, Director Bernham, do you have a sense of how long you'll need?

Speaker 4:
10 10 minutes max. Great. We're We're almost done. Um, we'll reconvene around 8:35.

Speaker 5:
Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Good evening everyone. Um we will reconvene this meeting of the Loscatos Town Council and uh to ensure we don't rush through an important item. Um we're going to come back to the adopt a bench program after staff finishes uh working on some of the edits to the resolution.

Speaker 1:
And we'll go now to item 23. um which is our uh first item of other business um which is the annual agreement for services with the Los Scatos Chamber of Commerce. Um uh and the uh we'll turn to Monica Ren, our economic vitality manager who will introduce the item and present the staff report.

Speaker 2:
Please take Yeah.

Speaker 3:
Yeah. Let me lead this off as she gets to the actual item. Um, I've had internal conversations with our economic vitality manager about the entire structure of our economic development program. Everything that we do that includes the chamber contract and I will be proposing some fundamental changes in the next year's budget and wanting to report to the council the new approach we're going to take. So, I want you to take that into the context as as to whatever direction you want to give us today that there will be future changes to the entire program.

Speaker 4:
Thank you for your patience with me while I open my computer. Good evening.

Speaker 5:
I'm Monica Ren. I'm the economic vitality [clears throat] manager. Um, and as Chris had indicated, before you this evening is the annual agreement for services with the Chamber of Commerce. Um, the oppos the proposed agreement is attached to the staff report tonight along with the scope of services. Uh, the base compensation. So, just a little bit of background. The base compensation for the Chamber of Commerce Services was $55,000 historically and then through um the COVID recovery to get us back kind of back on [clears throat] our feet, we had um allocated ARPA funds to increase that contract up to $88,000.

Speaker 6:
And then through the LA then following two years, we were able to sustain that that um compensation with the caveat that every year we would have to kind of reconsider if we can meet the 88,000. So this year as we built the budget um we work to get that 88,000 back into the budget um just knowing how much work the chamber does do to um support our businesses and to partner with the town on the visitors information center and the visit loscatos destination marketing platform. So after that was built in, we did hear from the chamber that they were asking for an increase in the funding for the for the same agree um the same scope of services that was sent out to the council and attached into staff report. So all of you should have that tonight. Um as we continue this discussion, we are here to support the conversation. But as Chris noted, at this time staff is recommending that we do move forward with the $88,000 um payment for the scope of services that remains the same and is in alignment with the services that have been rendered over the last three years.

Speaker 1:
And then as we move forward through the budget cycle this year, we can look at um reformulating the services and then the compensation for that. Thank you.

Speaker 2:
Thank you very much. I will turn to the town council for questions. Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, thank you. Um, so it's good to understand the historical context for the $88,000 level. Um, has is that number in any way indexed to costs? Um you know for instance our uh town operating budget increases um due to salaries and it also increases due to um revenues that come in. Is there any provision for that to increase due to cost increasing?

Vice Misto:
Historically there has not been a CPI increase um and that hasn't been direction that we've received but it's definitely something that we can consider. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Thank you, Vice Misto. Um, thank you.

Speaker 6:
Um, so manager Ren, I I I guess what I don't understand is how does economic vitality mesh with or work with or partner with the Chamber of Commerce? Because what I'm not clear about is what is staff work? What are we essentially contracting out to the chamber? And is that part of what an upcoming discussion or renegotiation would be? Because I know things keep changing, how we get information, how efficient we are, and what your workload is.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. That's a great question. And so taking a step back, historically um we would actually have two reports coming forward from the Chamber of Commerce every 6 months that itemized the the how the money the allocated funds were being used um to a dollar amount. So they used to be applied to specific um portions of the work that the chamber was doing through COVID. We moved to a subsidy because at that time everything was so fluid and there was you know the inability for the office to be open. And so the visitor center was not available, but the chamber we knew were there 24 hours a day supporting businesses, coming up with with new kind of innovative ways for them to open or to access customers. So during th that time we moved to just a subsidy base for the chamber um and the reporting was limited. So then when coming out of CO when we started to look at the new contract for 55,000 and then the additional 33 this was the same time that we were having conversations with them about destination marketing. So there was also um an independent one-time grant that we did and I off the top of my head I believe it was 50,000 to get the destination marketing up and going and then part of that was the visit Loscatos platform. So they built out the website um that has the itineraries and the restaurants and then they maintain that that website on a very regular basis to make sure that we're keeping track with all all of the businesses that are coming and going. So it's been quite an evolution of services. And then as we as we grew that the newest rendition of the contract, what we were hearing from the chamber is that it's so hard to nail down $10 for this, $300 for this. So they were asking for a more fluid compensation. And at the time that the council agreed to that and said, "Yes, you know, we'll go to one-time report knowing that you're doing these umbrella things, which is a visitors information center where people can walk in and have real time assistance." and then the visit loscatos platform which is a website and the social media channels. So um even further we used to say okay you need to have x number of posts and you need to have x number of engagement and we got rid of all of that as well. Um hearing feedback from the chamber that it was kind of like chasing something that was constantly changing. So, that's how and I I don't know if I'm going to answer your question fully, so please let me know, but that's how we've gotten to where we are right now with the way that the scope works, but um to date, we don't have direct funding attached to direct individual itemized services.

Speaker 2:
Let me add to that. Um I think you're asking a higher level question about just general economic development.

Speaker 3:
Chambers are a very powerful resource in terms of supporting our businesses and most cities partner with chambers. Some cases monetary, some cases property um in other cases of a wide variety of issues. the way we have currently we have an economic vitality manager that engages to identify b uh barriers that we can overcome and some of the changes like the reductions of cups and how they're approved and for what type of uses to make it easier for businesses to come into the downtown for example we have a tremendous resource and data um that provides us a lot of good information for businesses where in my previous communities I would use that to support those specific businesses to do better and increase their economic output In other cases, you know, at least here, I've heard from the council the desire to incentivize um our partners to encourage folks to come visit and stay, increasing our toot and increasing our sales tax generation, which is something that other communities do. And so, there's a lot of pieces right down to what community development does to make it easier for a business to open up in the community.

Speaker 4:
And so one of the things when I looked at the program in general, we got these different pieces and we've never really asked a question. How do we put everything together to really look at the lens of what's the most effective for our community and removing constraints that we may give to money that may go to our partners? For example, the concept of a block grant with lesser restrictions to our partners for with a very limited uses to allow them more flexibility. I don't like the I'm paying you to do five posts. I mean that like what am I trying to accomplish there, right? I'd rather give you money and say this is the general goal we're trying to approach. You as the expert go figure it out, right? And then report back to us the value of what we're receiving for the funding that we just provided to you. It puts less burden on them, less burden on us, and it puts us towards a path where we're trying to accomplish. In terms of internal staff, we're very ben we're we have a huge benefit in having a dedicated person in the economic vitality space to be looking at where are the problems in our code, where are the problems in somebody that's going through the process that's running into barriers, how do we eliminate that to accelerate a business being able to get up and running and producing. And so I want to be able to spend the time to put all that together and figure out what's the best strategy utilizing all the resources that we're committing to it and then working with our partners chamber in this case for one of them and other partners to get us on that same path.

Council Member Bami:
And if I may take it one step further just to add on to that. So, one of the things that we do in economic vitality personally that is um kind of above and beyond is so we take every business or I take every business that comes in or broker and I'm working and I shouldn't say every it's the ones that connect with us that look for help but they get a personalized assistance. So, I want to do this use in this space. How can you help me? So, if that was a residential application, they would be charged by the hour for the services that the you know that the planners are are doing on applications. Whereas my work is more organic and it's more supportive, I also stay on board, I would say, with all of our businesses as they move on. Um, so they're reaching out, you know, someone called today and said, "Hey, can I do XYZ? Is that okay?" So then I remain at that resource for them. Um, and they're very particular questions that are related to the code, related to our policies, related to things that are at kind of a community development, business development level and less at like a marketing or event level. So, that's the value of of having the one-on-one service is they can actually get some that not actually, but they get questions answered that are related to their use specific to our rules. Super helpful. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you, Council Member Bami. So, thank you um for the explanation, but I think what I'm hearing for now um you've got some things in the works that might not be [clears throat] happening now, but for now it might be helpful for them to apply for maybe a sustainability grant. Um seems that they're looking for about 20,000 and then that way they wouldn't have to necessarily report back with specificity on reports. We we did increase the amount of money towards the grant program and the director is increasing the max grant amount to 20,000. That is an option. Um I think the recommendation that I made with Monica was to retain the current funding level until we decide what's the grander structure. We haven't had that conversation with the chamber. I'd rather them reduce the level of service to meet that 88,000 if it's a cost issue until we make those changes. But but I'm not recommending going to the 108,000 at this time. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Um, council member Renie.

Speaker 2:
Thank Thank you, Mayor. Um, the question is starting to be answered and my memor is not so perfect. Um, the what I'm struggling with is is long history on this. We were 55,000 um a year to the chamber to upkeep the visitor center for many years and then it became clear that you know cost are rising and we should give them a little bit more money. Um we then um I think we gave them a little more money and then the next year staff came back and recommended back to the original amount.

Speaker 3:
Um, but confusing all of that was we also added in some money for destination marketing. And now it looks like it's I think it's been simplified too much to really get back to the basics of this and and what's fair or not. It looks like we're back to the 55,000 that they were getting 10 or 15 years ago to maintain the visitors center and then the extra 30 33 to do destination marketing. Um and and so what I'm struggling with is that correct?

Speaker 4:
Again, you know, I think the town manager said it very well. They're an important partner that we can leverage and if we give them a little bit of funds, they can do an awful awful lot with it, probably more than the town could for this small amount of dollars.

Speaker 5:
So, I'm trying to make sure that we are I don't know if fair is the right word, but um give the give the right amount of money to leverage an important resource that can give us, you know, multiples of of what the dollar really is. And so again, I go back to is it are we still at 55,000 that we were giving them to manage the the visitors center many years ago plus the extra 33 for destination marketing. Is that what we're really recommending from staff at 88,000?

Speaker 6:
It's not articulated in those two categories. when it was just the visitor center, you know, to use your words, for the 55,000, there was a much different agreement. There was an agreement about the number of hours and the number of days that the center had to be open, and we don't regulate that anymore. Um, I think that also in that time, they probably received more in-person visitors, and at this point, they're probably far heavier on the calls and answering the DMs or the messages that they're getting through social media and through um the other channels. So I think it's um I think it's difficult to rewind five or six or seven years and then allocate say that we're allocating the same amount for those things. I think there's just been so much that has changed and evolved over time. Um and that gets to how the report has come to be more organic and and less itemized.

Speaker 1:
Um so I think that it's you know it's it's I'm not sure how it's divided. We don't have at this point how much the chamber is spending on these two things separately. Um it's it's more that these are the services um that are in the scope of services. They're very broad.

Speaker 2:
They are visitors information center and visit loads kind of high level to allow them flexibility to do what makes sense to meet those goals.

Speaker 3:
So, what I think I'm hearing is staff is saying the the work is changing somewhat and we don't think we need to to give them more to do that work because it's we're we're doing different work that maybe doesn't cost additional amounts as everything costs more these days.

Speaker 4:
No, I think what we're saying is what we're recommending 88,000 work within that budget so that we can have the conversations of looking at what's actually more value added. Is the desk is destination marketing and a visitor center really the the highest value for the resources we're providing? Or is if I just give you a block grant that allow you to allocate it the way you see fit with the goal being enhancing the the benefits to general businesses, not just memberships of the chamber, but all businesses in a way that's the most effective and finding other ways to incentivize the type of activity uh of bringing folks to our community to generate toot and to generate sales tax.

Council Member Hudis:
I don't know yet. And so the council can decide to allocate more money and we can move forward and the recommendation could be to to direct staff to work on an amendment with the agreement for whatever dollar amount you're recommending. But I still have serious questions as to whether the two items were asking them to do is the most effective use of that resource.

Speaker 6:
Okay, that that's a fair answer. Thank you, Council Member Hudis. Yeah. And just to clarify, so we're not considering a block grant tonight, correct? We're just considering the proposal that's in front of us and the request that uh the chamber has made to increase that amount. Correct. Okay. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Okay. Um with that, I will open public comment. I have two comment cards um in person. Uh the first is Lee Quintana and the second is Jennifer Lynn.

Speaker 2:
Good evening again. Again, I'm a member of the historic preservation committee, but I'm not representing them. I'm uh presenting my own opinion.

Speaker 3:
First, I'd like to say this is one of the buildings that I love in this town and I'm so happy that it's going to uh have the opportunity to be restored and protected over the long term.

Speaker 4:
Can I stop you? Um you had a card for item 23. This is um the chambers contract, right? I'm sorry. Um, did you want to speak to No, only the only thing I wanted to if I spoke to the com commerce would be that uh I've had a couple of visitors comment to me that the the visitors bureau isn't open on the weekends when the visitors are most likely here that but I wasn't going to comment that but since you asked.

Speaker 5:
Great. I'll be back on the next one.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. The the chamber does have a nice building too. Um uh we'll go to Jennifer Lynn.

Speaker 1:
Good evening, mayor and council members.

Speaker 2:
I am Jennifer Lynn, CEO of the Loscatoos Chamber of Commerce. First, thank you so much for the town's long-standing partnership with the chamber. Together, we have built a strong collaboration that drives economic vitality, supports local businesses, and strengthens Loscatoos as a destination. Tonight, I am respectfully requesting a renewal of the town's contract with the chamber at $18,000 for fiscal year 2026 to 2027.

Speaker 3:
This past year, the chamber executed every aspect of our contracted scope of building and delivering the visitor resources, destination marketing tools, and community activations needed to attract visitors and support local commerce. Our focus is on building an integrated destination marketing ecosystem that helps visitors discover, engage with, and return to Loscatoos over and over again. The Loscatoos destination guide is one of our strongest visitor resources with 6,000 print copies distributed annually through the San Jose airport and through our visitor center alongside more than 166,000 annual digital impressions. We strengthened Visit Loscatos as the town's digital destination marketing identity through robust storytelling, expanded visitor engagement tools like the Loscatoos gift card, the perks pass, and free digital itineraries. We also built strategic creator creator partnerships designed to increase regional visibility and position loss competitively for future tourism opportunities. That strategy is translating into real economic activity.

Speaker 4:
Our signature events attract about 90% non-residents, bringing thousands of visitors who drive local spending and sales tax revenue. Our events create welcoming, inclusive, and family-friendly experiences that strengthen Loscatoos as a destination and encourage visitors to return throughout the year. At the town's request, we launched the new entertainment zone through our free Gold Thursday series, increasing downtown energy, foot traffic, and business activity.

Speaker 5:
The actual cost to fulfill the town's contract in 2025 to 2026 was approximately $154,000.

Speaker 6:
At the current $88,000 funding level, the town covers just 57% of the cost required to deliver these services with the chamber covering the balance. Our request of 108,000 would bring the town's contribution to approximately 70% of per current program costs, closer to prior support levels before inflation and rising operational expenses have significantly increased delivery costs.

Speaker 1:
Through your investment in the chamber, you are investing in Loscatoos. We're very proud of what we've accomplished.

Speaker 2:
We're very grateful for your partnership and we're excited for what lies ahead. Thank you for your consideration.

Speaker 3:
Thank you very much. Um, are there questions for Jennifer Lynn, the chamber CEO? Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 4:
Uh, thank you. Um, first of all, I want to say I'm very impressed with the direction that the chamber has been taking in terms of um some different focuses than we had. The previous ones I thought were very appropriate to the immediiacy of COVID recovery. But now um in reading the comprehensive set of programs um that the chamber in collaboration with our vitality manager has developed um I'm I I just want to say I'm very impressed with that. I also um want to comment and then ask a question about um Loscatoos as a truly exceptional destination for weddings and celebrations. Um, you know, having experienced some of these myself, I understand that there are small towns in Northern California, um, that benefit tremendously from sort of the 3-day event of a wedding where, um, people don't just hold the ceremony, but people come from all over the country and they stay and they go to all the restaurants and they walk everywhere and they shop and then they go to the wedding venue, but then they come back um as well. And it seems as though um Loscatoos is really ideal for that and that we're sort of underachieving what we could in that area. So I wanted to ask a question about how we finally make some progress on that. And it's it's not out of frustration that I say finally because I think that there's a lot of great work that's been put in place, but I do think it's a little bit different mindset. And so um what I'm asking is how would the chamber feel about um having its visitor related services um tied to excess revenue collected um by toot.

Speaker 5:
So, you know, in order to under under uh encourage much greater wedding and celebration destination activities, could we perhaps designate um 30% of toot collected above the current baseline, which I think is about 2.2 million. Um, and for anything above that baseline be allocated back to the chamber for destination marketing where the maybe the chamber took 30% of that and the town took 70% because it needs to provide additional services for the additional activity. Um, and so I'm asking what you know us to think a little bit differently about this. Um, and so, you know, the it seems as though if that were the case, we could increase the amount used by the chamber way above the budget of 150,000 u to maybe several hundred,000 and then maybe um the hotels would do more cooperative or co-op or co-arketing for Loscatoos as a destination. Um, and I understand the hotels, uh, difficult for the owners of the hotels to write big checks. Um, but could they provide their marketing muscle? Um, create packages, create ways of showcasing Loscatoos as a really great destination for uh, weddings and celebrations.

Speaker 6:
um and you know, hotels, Airbnb perhaps.

Speaker 1:
Um but it would seem to me that could raise the revenues uh for the hotels, the restaurants, the retail, and maybe even provide a counterbalance to some of the beach traffic challenges that we have. So I coming back to my question, what does a chamber think about that idea? And could the chamber think about having their um budget, their incremental budget tied to excess revenue above our baseline uh toot.

Speaker 2:
Thank you first of all for the affirmation of our uh initiatives and our work. appreciate that very much and I do also agree with you that Los Scatos is a gem and I think well poised to be um elevating our profile as this destination for multi-day stays and I do think there's room to grow there. Um and I do want to say that using toot um tax to help fund destination marketing is definitely a wellestablished model in many cities because it creates a direct loop um between uh visitor activity and tying it back into tourism growth in the future. Um the chamber would be uh absolutely supportive of exploring using toot tax as a longer term strategy to continue strengthening Loscatos as a destination for wedding celebrations and overnight stays. Um at the same time I do view that as a complimentary a potentially complimentary model not a total replacement to a baseline contract. Um and I think you're intimating that. Um, and I do want to say that the chamber's work today does support not only lodging activity, but also same day retail, dining, and community activation and broader broader economic vitality. So, I wouldn't want it completely like the entire contract to be tied just to the toot tax. But, um, I do think that reimagining all of this as a part of the chamber's monies, it sounded like you were saying as incremental, that that could actually make a lot of sense. And like I said, it is done in many cities.

Speaker 3:
Okay, thank you. Then, um, do you think that members of the chamber would be willing to work with our economic vitality manager, our town manager, and perhaps some other folks um to sketch out how uh a really outstanding worldclass uh wedding and celebration destination would work here?

Speaker 4:
For sure. We're definitely already working with some of our premier wedding destinations venues like Nestle Down and Lexington Hills estate and winery. We've been in discussion with some of our businesses about potentially doing some kind of wedding related fair. I think there was one in town years ago, but perhaps bringing that back. We have been working with um another partner called Distinct Locations up in Napa that is working to help us elevate our profile as that that true multi-day destination for celebrations. So, we've already begun that work and I know that there are many members who are excited about increasing that profile. Okay. Thank you. Yes, Council Member Badami.

Speaker 5:
Um, Jennifer, I want to thank you and your staff for your efforts um with the destination marketing in particular. I know you've been working on this. It's a vision you've had and I spend a lot of time downtown as everyone knows. I had an office. Um, so I'm right on North Santa Cruz a but over the last year or two, I mean, I have noticed a significant number of what I think are non-residents because I don't understand a lot of the different languages that are being spoken. So clearly they're being flown in or arriving from other places for a a weekend or a couple days stay. And and not just on the downtown, but I I also do the Lexington Trail almost daily. I I also pass um Mr.

Speaker 6:
as well, [laughter and gasps] but I also noticed a significant number of people on the trail as well, and it looks like they are also visitors that are enjoying all the wonderful things we have to offer. So, I have to thank you for um I've noticed um an increase. So, thank you for all your hard work.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Thank you very much. No more questions? No. Thank you.

Speaker 2:
Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Speaker 3:
All right. Um, that concludes our public comment for this item. Um, and I'll go back to the town council.

Speaker 4:
Um, okay. I'll just try and chime in with my thoughts real briefly. Um, I similarly to to what I've heard from other council members, I want to give a big big compliment to the the Chamber of Commerce. I think we have an absolutely superb team at the Loscatoos Chamber.

Speaker 5:
And for um community members that don't know, it's a very very lean team with only one full-time employee. Um and so uh and I I appreciated the letter we received that highlights, you know, not only your your signature events, but all of your support for our local businesses, both members and non-members. Um I I'm especially enjoy what you've done with our holidays. I think they really feel like Loscatoos and and our summer events. Um, and I also think you've, you know, as you highlighted in your letter, been responsive to feedback from the town council and staff. Um, you know, uh, piloting things like the entertainment zone. Um, and, you know, I I think that the Los Scatters Chamber is one of the town's most single most valuable partners. I I don't know where we would be without our Los Scats Chamber. And so I think investing um like we mean it is is uh you know only reasonable. Um I I hear from from staff the perspective of wanting to look more holistically at economic development. I think that makes a lot of sense. Um and I know we're we're not in a position this evening to do that, but I I do I appreciate that perspective and I think that's that's helpful. I I also do appreciate the the thought of again wanting to get a little bit broader when it comes to not uh telling the chamber exactly every single thing we want to do from whether it's you know destination marketing or or what have you. Um but but more holistically granting a dollar amount and and having the chamber as as the experts implement sort of the the highle vision. Um but but I I just want to say at a high level and then I'll turn it back to the the rest of the council that I am somewhat sympathetic to the the chamber's request um uh given the major investments they continue to make in the town of Los Gatos and um the degree to which costs have increased without um the town responding.

Speaker 6:
Yes, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Um, I've always been a huge fan of the Chamber of Commerce and I feel like, um, [snorts] yeah, your presence, your engagement with the businesses, the new programs. I think I can see you, Miss Linder. Um, and I I think these things are critical. I also look at the fact that you did have a contract that was extraordinarily detailed. You know, how many clicks, how many posts, how many whatever. And so part of what I'm looking at um is maybe it does make sense to say you get $88,000, tell us what you can do with it and renegotiate and see what the contract can be. That's one thought I have. Um because I think the contract is written so specifically that of course costs go up but we don't know which things you're doing that maybe I mean the visitor center is only open four days a week. What if it was open three? What would that impact be? I don't know.

Speaker 2:
Um the other thing I think about is I've I volunteer every year for the wine walk. I know that the events that you create remarkably just pull people like Loscatos pulls people from all over the Bay Area because of our quaintness, because of our businesses, because of our welcoming sense and I know very few of those people spend the night. So I think our big events and our big draw is daytime visitors and I think we want to continue to pull on that. Um the wedding destinations that I think of and that you pointed out, none of them are actually in Los. So if people did have a wedding there, they may or may not stay in Loscatoos or if they were driving all the way up, they might then head over to the ocean or go to Santa Cruz or do other things. So I don't think we're kind of a self-contained location where people will stay here and do everything in town. But I do like in the past I know um some of the hotels were putting together packages that involved doing things in Los Gatos and going to the beach and going to the mountains for wine tasting. So, I think we're a good base for those things and I think probably that can grow. Um, I also think that some of the work that went into destination marketing was creating the really inspired and thoughtful and fantastic visitors guide, the physical visitor's guide that's at the airport, that's in the hotels, that's all over um the place. And I think that says a lot about Loscatoos and I think that was a huge accomplishment by the chamber. I'm assuming all the work that went into creating that was the big lump of the work and maintaining that is still work but it's not the same expense. Um so I'm just trying to think about like is all of the work that's being done the same every year and is it growing or is it morphing? Um, and so I'm also sympathetic to the thought that maybe if we approved a contract at a certain level and then staff worked with the chamber, maybe there could be an amendment, maybe there could be an addition, or maybe we would say, "Oh my gosh, we don't want the visitor center to close." So, I don't know. I don't feel like I have enough information tonight to decide um that I need to expand the contract yet, but I would love to hear from my fellow council members.

Speaker 3:
Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 4:
Um, when I look at, you know, what the chamber is doing now, it is very very different than 5 years ago uh when we were uh just entering um the pandemic.

Speaker 5:
and it's very different than what it was before. So we didn't just go back to what was before. So I think there's been a tremendous amount of definition, innovation and ideas that are uh coming out of the chamber right now without uh the town needing to specify those in a great amount of detail. So, if I look at, you know, return on investment and what we're talking about is um an additional $20,000, I feel fairly confident that the chamber as it's constituted now will come up with um a return on investment that um is worth it for the additional money.

Speaker 6:
So, I would be supportive, but I would say that I think that it needs to be linked to a re-imagining of economic vitality in Loscatoos. And I put forward one idea.

Speaker 1:
There's probably other ideas um as well.

Speaker 2:
And so I would only be willing to support the additional $20,000 if the chamber were willing to work um with the town with other businesses that maybe are not members of the chamber uh to really uh take a run at a um serious uh incremental growth through destination marketing. and through um not just destination marketing but Loscatoos as a worldclass uh wedding and celebration destination and uh making it um a place that would stay and going along with that are defining a new financial model for funding those activities because I think they're way in excess of the 55,000 or the 33,000 or the 33 plus 20 in order to make something like this work. And so, um, I would be interested in expanding, um, the request as it's been made, but also with the commitment that I heard, uh, from Miss Lynn to work on this idea so that we wouldn't be back here looking at necessarily another $20,000 to add some more activities in, but we were looking at a true partnership and revenue sharing where we saw toot increase substantially. We know that sales tax will also but it's much more difficult to attribute sales tax to this kind of activity. But toot um I think it could be very directly related to that. And so where would you get toot increased tot? Well, you get it through um a better um vacancy rate or a smaller vacancy rate at the hotels. You get it in higher room rates. You get it in the hotels upgrading their facilities um over time to make them more attractive because uh that is a very important part of it. But it may also involve um exploring Airbnb as well. And not the old Airbnb where somebody came in and slept on somebody's couch for the weekend, but the kind of Airbnb where someone uh takes a house and the wedding party stays in one house and then another house is taken for other guests and uh they're contri they contribute substantial um uh additional revenue. So, um I would be in favor of uh the increase that's been asked for, but but with the um requirement for me to start to work on something that's really transformative.

Speaker 3:
Council member Bami. So my question probably is more for staff. Um based upon council member Udis's um input uh and if it does go to a motion um would we need to open public comment again to seek this commitment that he might be asking for? I mean I have a lot of confidence in Miss Lynn's stewardship.

Speaker 4:
Um but this would be something how do you how do you seal the deal with a commitment? And number two, would this involve a budget adjustment? We just adopted the budget at the last council meeting and I I had wished that you guys had come forward, you know, maybe a couple months prior to that, but would that mean I mean I've got two questions for you with this?

Speaker 5:
Yeah, I don't think you have to open up the public hearing. It's still within the scope I'm sorry, the public comment because it's still within the scope of the agenda item. That's one. You can if you desire. two, if there's a desire to increase the allocation, my recommendation is to start with directing staff to come back with an amendment. Um, I don't have a funding source that I've identified right now. I just talked to Monica about a contract that I have been waiting to execute, which is a contract with Placer AI for the data that we receive. It it is more than $20,000 a year that we pay for that. And so that may be a source. We eliminate the data that we would collect and just provide that resource to the chamber. But that would have a a different impact on our economic development opportunities. But again, it's it's that the pleasure of the council.

Speaker 6:
Yeah. The the way I interpreted what council member Hudis was talking about and and please correct me if I'm wrong, but it I'm I'm hearing some level of consensus that over the next year there we need to holistically discuss what economic development means in Los. I think that's a that I'm hearing from everyone. Um, and so I I wouldn't necessarily think that that we are directing the chamber to engage in in these specific activities. I think it's a a you know, it would be a discussion between staff and the chamber about how to reinvision the model. Yes.

Speaker 1:
Um, yeah, I I agree with those comments that I don't uh I'm not prepared now to to articulate a program and I think what I brought forward is only one of several that could be part of a way of looking at this. Um, so like I said, I would be supportive of um, you know, the increased amount. The chamber seems to be willing to work on some of these new ideas. Um, but I'll tell you, I wouldn't be willing to do that again next year if they haven't done it. Um, so that that would be uh, you know, from my my perspective, um, I wouldn't want to see another increment um, coming back without us kind of rethinking this. So, it's just my position on it. I don't I'm not asking the chamber to to agree to that. Thank you.

Speaker 2:
Yes, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. question for the manager. So I don't think I quite understood what you said before. I mean that basically if we approve this contract as it is, you would then look toward the um AI work or if we approved it with an increase, you would look toward that.

Speaker 4:
Explain the current staff recommendation has been programmed into the budget for next year. If the council's desire is in turn to an amendment to increase that by 20,000, we would probably either go to the ending fund balance which is negative or the um the projected ending fund balance which is currently projected to be negative next year or look at an alternate source like our data contract since I have not executed it and not executing it and then reallocating the funds to the chamber.

Speaker 5:
So I don't know that I'm willing to do that. I would like to know from our economic vitality manager. I mean, this sounds like this is information that you were intending to use to drive vitality.

Speaker 6:
It is part of our draft kind of strategy that we're looking at right now and the the things that um Chris and I are discussing. We, you know, if that's the will of the council, we could definitely make changes. Um we would just need some time to talk about that. I don't I can't sit on the days right now and say that we can or can't do without it. I think it's um kind of two things. one is what the council wants to do, you know, with the contract and then I think whatever that direction is, then staff will go back and and discuss that and then see what we have as far as funding um as we look to the new kind of holistic approach of economic vitality.

Speaker 1:
Um and then furthermore, if we don't approve the increase, if we follow the staff recommendation, is there follow-up work staff would be doing with the chamber to understand the work they'll be doing? I I think I'd want to little know a little bit more about the costs associated since we several years ago stopped asking for a breakdown of all the expenses for obvious reasons. A lot of them are small dollar amounts and whatnot and it could be administratively burdensome. But I'd want to get a better understanding of this $150ome,000 cost 150 something.

Speaker 2:
I think that was the quote of the total cost of providing this program. Uh let me just highlight we have a number of partners that we work with that we provide subsidies to LGS wreck current you know we we service with a building at a high amount of subsidy um they will be coming to us in the next year or two to if to continue our 55 plus with a grant that's expiring and that grant's a4 million a year and so if we want to continue our 55 plus we're going to be looking at that. We work with Numu and the friends of the library. We provide very below market leased property for them to to operate. In the case of the friends, we derive a pretty significant investment in return from money that goes to the library. And with new moo is in according to the reports driving activity to come to the town. And so this is no different than with the chamber and the partnership we have. It's really the desire of the council.

Speaker 3:
What level of investment? What are you asking for that investment? and what are you expecting in return to demonstrate the return on that investment and that is completely within your purview how you want to set it our recommendations I'm okay not you not taking the recommendation it is your choice but I have to but I would really like to look at at least in regards to economic vitality what do we really want to do because our investment isn't just 88,000 or 108,000 if you go there you know salary and benefits of staff there are three different events that we have the dollar amount that you would allocate at 108,000 is a significant percentage of what we currently offer in events for the three events that we have. There's a lot of pieces to it that when we make a peace mill decision and you know we did this at the last meeting where we allocated $50,000 because of a request that came from a group in the public, we make a decision snap decision and then now we got to deal with how do we implement that? And so here, yes, you could allocate $20,000. Will it break the bank? No. But once again, we're making a a change and we don't really sit and think about the actions we're trying to trying to make. And I think Council Member Hudis hit upon one of those. If there's a desire to increase visitors, [snorts] the data just from the reports that we're seeing show about a 26% leakage of folks that are not staying overnight, right? Do we want to make an impact on that number? Working with the chamber, we got to figure out what's the best approach. Is is the visitor guide really the best approach for us to do that? Is it really getting and penetrating and resulting in people coming to our community? Or if I just gave you a block grant of money that says here's generally what I want you to achieve. Go do it and demonstrate what you did. Some some of the initiatives may fail. Some of the initiatives may be wildly successful in the kinds of things that we as the council and staff would have not directed as a condition of the money that we're giving the chamber. You know, in some cases, you may want to let them run free and let them succeed and then let us decide, yes, that's something we may want to invest more in. It's just really what the council desires.

Speaker 4:
I'll just say I think those are all good points. I think one of the challenges with trying to dictate the work of the chamber is a they're a entirely separate entity.

Speaker 5:
They're a nonprofit. we don't it's not really our role to tell the chamber uh uh what they should and shouldn't do.

Speaker 6:
And this is this has I know at one point this was a contract for service. I don't really think it I mean in some ways it is in some ways it's very much not. Um I also think you know something like the visitor guide as an example. I think that's something that's very smart, very innovative. I've heard a lot of great feedback on and I don't know that's something the council would have come up with, you know, to say chamber go do that. The chamber can also make decisions that are um perhaps things that that the council would never be able to direct because they would be, you know, politically unpopular. I think the chamber reimagining uh the holidays in Loscatoos, moving to the trolley has been an excellent decision. I think if you would have come to the council and said, "Oh, should we do the horses or the the trolley?" That people probably would have been really mad at the council and said, "No, keep the horses. despite that being the right decision.

Speaker 1:
So, I don't know that that it makes a ton of sense for the council to be directly directing the the work of the chamber.

Speaker 2:
Um, and and so I I mean I at a high level I think we need to be the town of Los should be providing the chamber the resources it needs to succeed and and and letting the chamber do what the chamber does. And I think they've been very successful. Um, I I would definitely be concerned about um, you know, pulling back on something like the Placer AI. I think that's been a very, you know, from everything I've heard, that's been a very effective tool. I think that's a an asset. And so, um, you know, I I don't know the the right dollar amount. Again, it seems like we we need to have a larger conversation about this that we're all sort of we all seem game for. Um, but for me, I think we might want to add I don't know if the 108 is is the right number, but I I do still think um giving the chamber a little bit more wiggle room over the next year to to succeed I think still makes sense for me.

Speaker 3:
Well, I think the options before you is the staff recommendation 88,000. You also can consider the alternate which would be directing staff to come back with an amendment uh for $108,000. And that's something you can consider if you look at the contract as being really a contract for services and the chamber indicating that that cost exceeds the $88,000 that's being provided. Or you can give us an alternate direction. Um it it sounds like the council is pretty conflicted in terms of making making that. So let me just make it simple. Why don't we just do the 108,000 direct us to do the amendment because we are going to be working with them. I will not be proposing $108,000 in the budget next year. Now we will be looking at a different strategy. We'll partner with the chamber to figure out what the best use of that money. Maybe it's a block grant. Maybe it's a block grant partnership on toot. Maybe be a whole variety of different things. But what we have to do is we have to start looking synergistically at what we're doing and leveraging the assets and attributes of our partners that they're best at with what we're best at for ours and maximizing every dollar that we have to get what's really the goal. Driving activity, getting people to stay, getting people to spend, and getting people to enjoy the highest quality experience when they come to our community.

Speaker 4:
So, I will make that alternate recommendation that you direct us to do that.

Speaker 5:
Okay. So, that would be $108,000 for for this upcoming fiscal year and and over the coming fiscal year, you will work with the chamber to bring back something else for the council to consider for the following fiscal year potentially. Yes. Okay. Council member Hudis.

Speaker 6:
Um I'm prepared to make a motion. Um so um I move to direct staff to come back um with a um an alternate uh proposal working with the chamber for a total of uh no more than $18,000.

Speaker 1:
Um and I don't think I need to add the language um about next year. That's what we're going to do next year. So, I'm going to just keep it at that.

Speaker 2:
Council member Badami, a second.

Speaker 3:
Um, okay. And so, to to clarify, we have a question from council member Renie.

Speaker 4:
I'll just one sec to clarify. Um, and maybe this is a question for the attorney. the the council. Could the council allocate the 108 this evening and then have the contract discussions over the coming year.

Speaker 5:
The agenda description is broad enough to encompass a change to the contract amount. Um, I understood the town manager to be suggesting that the staff return um with information regarding how where the extra 20,000 will come from so that the council will decide how that's funded, but I'll let the town manager follow up.

Speaker 6:
I'd like to come back. Do I don't believe we have an executed agreement at this time. Correct.

Speaker 1:
I'd like to come back with an agreement for that dollar amount because there may be other provisions I want to add if we're giving $108,000.

Speaker 2:
But my recommendation is just to direct and authorize us at $108,000 to take that funding from the ending fund balance which would increase the deficit and then we will execute that set agreement which would have to come back to the council.

Speaker 3:
Okay. Thank you. Um council member Yeah, I'm okay with where we're ending up here. I just thinking we're having this discussion at the the wrong time. If we've already set our budget and then we're being asked as council to agree to a contract with a set amount, that seems, you know, I realize it's a little bit of a chicken and egg thing, right? We've got to figure out what what can we afford in our budget then decide what we can have a contract on or should we talk about what the contract should be and how much we need and then set our budget. It just feels like maybe that should come first.

Speaker 4:
Is that the egg? Maybe. Maybe the egg came before this chicken. Um, so I would just say, you know, we're talking about next year and I sounds like we're going to do it, but we should have a discussion about the contract and what's needed in the contract before budget season, not after, because it leaves council no flexibility to really make any decision. I mean, this is this is painful because we've already set a a budget and, you know, thank you, town manager, for trying to make us stick to our budget, but we're already, you know, kind of locked in and and I don't feel like there's any any discretion here. So, I I would just say this feels like the wrong order this year.

Speaker 5:
That's I mean, maybe good feedback to staff that that we would have this discussion sometime before June of 27.

Speaker 6:
And I recognize that, but based on the timing of when the request came in, it makes it really challenging. This is why I'm telegraphing now for next year that we were not going to have this conversation in May, June, because I'm just not going to put it in the budget at all. And so, we're going to have that buildup. So, what we'll do as a next step is come back with an agreement for the dollar amount specified, that $108,000, and then we will start engaging in the grander conversation because that's a conversation that Monica and I have been having for several months about what is the real vision for economic development. It just feels like it's too peacemeal in our community and we need just to do a better job thinking strategically and then maximizing the dollars.

Speaker 1:
Okay, great. That sounds good. Yes, Vice Mayor.

Speaker 2:
So, it sounds like the motion did not cover that. So, I'll make an alternate motion that I I I don't think we need the alternate motion. I think that what I took and interpreted is that you're authorizing entering into an agreement at $108,000 with the funding coming from the general fund and that we already have direction from what I heard to work with the chamber to look to something grander for the long term.

Speaker 3:
Come back on consent in August.

Speaker 4:
Okay. I missed the the approval of 108 and that agreement will come back to you hopefully in August. Yeah. Okay. Sounds good.

Speaker 5:
Yes. To the town clerk.

Speaker 6:
I I just wanted to clarify that the motion that was actually made by Hudis was to direct staff to come back with an alternate proposal working with the chamber for a total of no more than 108,000.

Speaker 1:
So if the motion wants to be clarified, that's the motion that was made and was seconded.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thank you. Council member Hudis, do you just want to clarify that what the town manager just shared is the the nature of your motion?

Speaker 3:
I don't see any difference.

Speaker 4:
Yeah, I think it's I think it's the same. It's we have to come back. It's a contract exceeding 100,000. So, the council has to approve that contract.

Speaker 5:
So, the proposal is a different contract than what we were proposing in the budget to reflect 108,000.

Speaker 6:
Okay. Yes.

Speaker 1:
Yeah. I don't I don't mean to sound picky. I'm hearing a big difference because what I heard was not an approval of 108, but asking staff to come back with something not to exceed that, but it didn't allocate the 108.

Speaker 2:
That's that was the motion that I heard from the clerk and from council member Hudes.

Speaker 3:
No, I think what we're going to see is you're going to see the contract and the appropriation for it at the same time coming back to us. Yes.

Speaker 4:
Okay. So, tonight we're not allocating any money. We're not approving any amount of money.

Speaker 5:
I interpreted the motion to be giving staff direction to return with a contract that has 108,000 in compensation and other parts of the agreement may change and it'll come back to the council for consideration. So yes, you're not approving a contract.

Speaker 6:
You're directing us to come back with a contract at 108,000 in August. Okay. Council Hughes.

Speaker 1:
Yeah. And the reason I think that's a good idea is that I don't think I would have enough information to provide um where that appropriation would come from. And so I would appreciate the town manager coming back with that.

Speaker 2:
All right, I think we're ready to call the question unless the town clerk has a Yes, please.

Speaker 3:
Sorry, I don't mean to be a stickler, but that it's your job. [laughter] But for the record, the motion was actually as I stated. So if there's any further direction or clarification, I think that needs to be stated in the motion because what what I read out to you is going to be what's reflected in the minutes. So if there's different direction, then I think that needs to be stated.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Yes, Vice Mayor Sto.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. I'll make a friendly amendment that we actually allocate $108,000 to the contract and staff comes back with what the or up to 108,000 and staff comes back with what the contract look looks like. So, we're actually authorizing 108,000 up to 108,000 tonight. Is that clear to the clerk?

Speaker 6:
So, let let me just take a step back.

Speaker 1:
The initial action was to approve um an annual agreement at $88,000 with the chamber which would then have allowed us to expend funds starting July 1st.

Speaker 2:
the action that's the all the second action that we're taking which was council member Hudis the intent was we want you coming back with an agreement at a up to $108,000 which would be in August which would mean we would presume to not have an agreement until August with that dollar amount what you're recommending council Risto I'm interpreting as authorizing $108,000 but it's it just doesn't wouldn't have the legal effect I enter into an agreement I think No, you're right. You're right. I'm I'm wrong.

Speaker 3:
I I think one of the I think maybe the easiest Let me ask for a substitute motion. They make it really easy. That the council authorize the town manager to execute uh an agreement with the chamber to the amount of $88,000 and to return to the council in August with an amendment that would increase that allocation to $108,000. that would allow us to expend the funds starting day one and then bring back the increased allocation before they've exceeded that $100,000. I think that's a good way to do it.

Speaker 4:
Council, um I'm prepared to make that substitute motion. Please do it.

Speaker 5:
Um so it would be to approve the contract as stated for 88,000 and for staff to come back um with a proposal working with the chamber for up to 108,000.

Speaker 6:
you. Yes. Second.

Speaker 1:
Excellent. Thank you. Okay. Seeing no other hands raised, I will uh turn to the clerk for a roll call vote.

Speaker 2:
Council member Annie I.

Speaker 3:
Council member Hudis I.

Speaker 4:
Council member Badami I.

Speaker 5:
Vice Mayor Risto I.

Speaker 6:
Mayor Moore I. Passes unanimously. Thank you all very much. Thank you very much to the Los Scatos Chamber. Uh good to see you as always. Um, okay. We're going to go back to item 22, assuming that um, parks and public works is ready to go.

Speaker 1:
Sorry to our assistant town manager who would looked really ready for 24.

Speaker 2:
All right. So I think um we've worked out a motion.

Speaker 3:
Um so we went back verified everything verified all the numbers so I can tell you application cost plaque cost installation cost the cost of each bench and 10-year maintenance. Aggregated all of that put it into a motion. Um you want to use this one or do you want to use the other one?

Speaker 4:
Let me just read the motion really quick so I can and and and just real briefly for the purpose of the public just so it's clear um to anyone listening. This is the adop we are back to the proposed fee schedule for the adopt a bench program.

Speaker 5:
Correct. And we're going to send it right now to the clerk so she can put it up online so everybody can see it as we're reading through it and to make sure we're all on the same page.

Speaker 6:
Yeah. Thanks for making our jobs easy.

Speaker 1:
Teamwork makes the framework. The effect of the the recommendation to adopt a resolution would take the resolution that's currently in the packet that's being recommended and would revise the number two item at the bottom to read as what will be on the board.

Speaker 2:
I could read it if you want while we're waiting for it to get projected.

Speaker 3:
Is it just number amendments? I I think we just wait. Yeah.

Speaker 4:
So, the recommendation would be to adopt the resolution as provided in the package with the amendments of other two to reflect um an amended fee for an initial bench application installation at $7,517 for the initial 10-year term. um the fee for each subsequent 10-year renewal term at $2,958 and the fee for just a plaque on the existing bench and initial 10ear maintenance period at 3,638.

Speaker 5:
So that would mean somebody who is dedicating or sponsoring a brand new bench would be paying $7,500.17 and they would be getting the bench plus the 10 year first 10 year maintenance.

Speaker 6:
And since those benches tend to last longer than 10 years, if they want to continue that sponsorship, they would pay an additional $2,958 for every 10 years after that. Or if they want to sponsor an existing bench that hasn't been dedicated and they want to do the application and the plaque that goes on there, they'd be paying 3,638, which would cover the plaque, the application fee, and the 10 years of maintenance. And with that, I'll turn it back to you, Mr. Mayor.

Speaker 1:
Thank you very much. Um, my only question on this is would I assume that staff would very clearly publish on the town website that you have two options and and share those dollar amounts up front. Yes.

Speaker 2:
Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, I will look um Yes. Uh, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 3:
Um, and then Council Member Renie.

Vice Mayor Risto:
Yeah, I was going to make a motion just to move the thing along. So, I move to adopt a resolution establishing a fee for the adopt a bench program as amended to set the fee for an initial bench application and installation at $7,517 for the initial 10-year term. the fee for each subsequent 10-year renewal term at $2,958 and the fee for a plaque on an existing bench and initial 10-year maintenance period at $3,638.

Speaker 5:
Thank you, Vice Mayor Risto. Second. Thank you, Council Member Renie.

Speaker 6:
Yeah. So, I have a a clarification on this. Thank you for making it clear on on the just the plaque cost, but the tenure um at 7 12,000 um sounds like it's below cost and we're subsidizing the benches based on what was in the report and it should have been a lot more than this number, maybe 2,000 more or even more than that. Is this a subsidy or have you reduced something in the cost? So, this is still cost redu recovery. I'm confused a little.

Speaker 1:
We reduced that 10-year maintenance period cost and that is what's reducing the cost from the 9,000 in the report to the 7,517.

Speaker 2:
And and in in this reduction, is it are you adjusting what you think it will cost like maybe you didn't get it right or are you doing less work and this is still cost recovery?

Speaker 3:
It we believe it's still cost recovery.

Council Member Hudis:
In the initial calculations, we had included time for a lead maintenance worker and a maintenance worker. And as we looked at it more, we thought we could reduce the amount of time that a lead maintenance worker spends on bench maintenance. And it was that reduction in time that that reduce the cost.

Speaker 5:
Oh, okay. Thank you. Just that now it's clear to me. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 6:
Yeah, just a comment. First of all, um I want to thank Parks and Public Works um for taking some feedback and taking another look after the initial report came out. And I feel that uh I I am fairly confident that the uh $7,500 is um attainable because Saratoga charges $7,500 per bench and they are the highest municipality. The other ones were at 5,000 and 3,000 uh per bench. And so I think that um it's uh you know it's probably very realistic that we're not very different than Saratoga in uh what goes into the benches themselves and the maintenance costs. And when I looked at the initial maintenance estimate, I appreciate you're sending that. Um it did just look high to me in terms of how many hours were going to be spent maintaining each of these benches at the um it was close to $5,000 level. So I you know having looked at the numbers I feel pretty confident that um this makes sense and that we're not digging a hole for ourselves uh by uh you know underpricing this at all. It is a jump for our residents. Um it is uh twice the current cost. Um and uh that is significant. But I also think that we have to be responsible in terms of what really goes into maintaining these.

Speaker 1:
These are a beloved part of our community. They're part of the community character of Loscatoos to have these benches and to be able to u word them in an appropriate way and to commemorate um people who u are then sort of recognized for a long time in the community. So it's it really is part of our character of our uh town and our community be able to do this. And so I'm glad that we were able to reach a level um where it's not costing us money, but we're definitely not uh the the low spender on this when you look at the other communities. And thank you for preparing the um the comparisons to other communities as well.

Speaker 2:
Yes, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Um I appreciate the work you did on this. I do agree that we probably should not be subsidizing, you know, private donations. So, I appreciate that this is cost recovery. We need to be looking at that everywhere if we're going to be responsible users of our taxpayer money. Um, one of the thoughts I had, which is not part of the motion, but I think going forward hopefully it'll either be online or easily accessible for somebody wanting to do a bench to have a map that indicates where existing benches are that can be adopted so somebody can know where that is. Um, and the other thing would be, I don't know how hard that is, but to have in your mind, I know that there's certain parks that are overs subscribed, but if all of a sudden 40 people wanted to put benches in Bachmann Park, we'd probably have to say no. And so I think, you know, that doesn't need to be a council policy decision, but you know, for parks or the parks commission to have an idea that I mean, I don't know if we want to be this specific, but certainly a map of where the existing benches are and potentially on that map a location of desired benches if it's identified, gee, we only have one bench at this park and we'd like three more or something so that when someone's making a choice, they can make an easier choice.

Speaker 4:
I'm really glad that you brought this up because I was listening to Miss Child's comments even though we were over here crunching numbers. Um, and we talked about this a little bit when we adopted the policy, but that was months ago.

Speaker 5:
So, as part of our effort to revamp this program, we did geoloccate and map every bench in town that we're talking about as part of this program. With the roll out of the program in July, there will be story GISbased story mapping. So anyone can go into any location in town, see a map where all the existing benches are, and they're identified as either having been adopted already or available for adoption to help with that exist specific issue. And I was really I was feeling her pain as I was hearing it. Um be the the pain points that she talked about, the inconsistency with location, some people being told yes, other people being told no. That's exactly why we went through this exercise. um so we can try to put this program back in a box because it I I do I I think she's right.

Speaker 6:
I think it probably has been inconsistent in the past.

Speaker 1:
And one the further thing I mean I think we can't promise nothing will ever change because streetcapes change, parks change, um but to the extent that we have these mapped out and we know where we have benches and where we want them.

Speaker 2:
I mean for example there's a bench that a group and I had but it got taken out because of the parklets. So you know things change and I you know it was painful at first but I understand it. So I think people will have to understand that which leads me to another thought.

Speaker 3:
If for example somebody put a bench in and two years into their 10 years it can't be there you know a tree falls and we rellandscape a park or something would they be able to would their purchase have purchased them another eight years in a nearby location or you know yeah I think that's such a case- specific thing that we'd have to cross that bridge as we get to it but we would work certainly to make the community member whole u you know with the town manager and we don't I mean nothing I don't want to make any commitments. I think is there's some accounting that goes into it too. I think it's if you desire to be there and you bought bought the 10 years, you bought the 10 years and then we we grapple with case by case how do we want to go forward with it?

Speaker 4:
Okay. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Great. And I'll just echo um Council Member Hudis's sentiments of of appreciation and and I you know I think it's when I first saw the number I'm I'm sure some folks in the community will still be frustrated by how high it is. I I recognize that it's it's very high. Um but I I do think this is an appropriate step for us to take. I'm glad to see we're not way out of whack with um other communities that that do similar programs. And again, I just want to reiterate this um might sound, you know, this this program is um you know, it might seem a little silly to some to spend so much time on on this program, but I think it's really important. I think a lot of these benches are memorial benches. This is an important thing. And so I I appreciate staff uh putting the the time and effort it clearly required to uh get this across the finish line. So thank you. Um uh and then Council Member Ren and then we'll call the question.

Speaker 6:
Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to um maybe understand a little better for my own edification. I I agree with the direction we're taking here. Um, I I just want to make sure I understand when I read the report, it it didn't jump out to me or it seemed to me that we haven't been charging people for 10 years. We've been giving them a bench in per pert peruity and now we're changing it. So you basically purchase a bench for 10 years and if you don't renew that's now a location available for other people. If if that's if I'm remember understanding this correctly then we have a lot of benches that could become available at some point because we didn't have a 10-year program before.

Speaker 1:
I think we we talked about this when the policy came forward and grappled with this and ended up settling. I think the direction we got from council was just hold the existing benches unless someone, you know, in some cases we were able to locate the people, but in a lot of cases we weren't. So, we're just going to let those ride until we need to address them. Um, because just no point in spending t staff time, you know, chasing people down. Um, but I think if the bench were to need replacement, then we would reach out to people and and figure out how to handle that.

Speaker 2:
Okay. So, I I sort of remember that discussion. I forgot where we landed on it. And I I'm sure we were trying to make it less cumbersome for staff and and again I'm just trying to you know the the idea that benches might come available is um probably a good idea for people that don't want to spend the the bigger number and want to spend the smaller number if and I I don't want to change what we decided but it you know again it sort of sounds like we have given people benches is until they rot and fall apart and and there isn't any limit to it then. Is that correct?

Speaker 3:
Yes, that is in effect correct.

Speaker 4:
Okay. And maybe that's fair because maybe that was the understanding before.

Speaker 5:
At least I have it in my mind what we're doing. Thank you. Thank you. Um can we please take a vote?

Speaker 6:
Council member Renie I.

Speaker 1:
Council member Hudis I.

Speaker 2:
Council member Badami I.

Speaker 3:
Vice Mayor Risto I.

Speaker 4:
Mayor Moore I. The motion passes unanimously. Thanks again to Parks and Public Works. Um okay. So quick time check. It is 1000 p.m. We have two items left on the agenda. We're doing well for having a a very packed meeting. Um but uh I think we can get through these in an expeditious um and thoughtful fashion.

Speaker 5:
Um okay, we will move to item 24 which is um Yes. Uh Vice Mayor Risto or go ahead and announce the item and then I'll make my announcement.

Speaker 6:
Yeah. Um we're moving to item four, which is a resolution to sell the Fort Tate property. Um and I will turn to Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 1:
Thank you. Due to the fact that my home is within 500 ft of this property, I am required to recuse myself.

Speaker 2:
Thank you very much. We'll let you know when we get back to item 25.

Katie Namura:
Thank you, uh, honorable mayor and council members. Katie Namura, assistant town manager, here to give the verbal report on this item. And so we are uh considering a sale agreement for Fort Tate uh Fort Tate Avenue in Loscatos.

Speaker 4:
This property was originally used as a fire station and later as a museum. Uh in 2016 it ceased to be a museum and is currently unoccupied. From 2020 to 2024 uh the town attempted to lease the property for commercial purposes but was unsuccessful. And so, um, on January 21st of 2025, uh, the council adopted a resolution declaring the property to be exempt surplus land and in, uh, signaled our intent to sell the property. Uh, HCD has approved that exemption as of August 2025.

Speaker 5:
And so, since then, the town has entered into a brokerage agreement with Cosmont Realy. We have some of our representatives with us tonight. So, if we have any additional questions, they're available. Uh, and then we also went through a reszoning of the property from commercial to residential.

Speaker 6:
We listed the property for sale on the market uh in February and uh at a price of 3.5 million.

Speaker 1:
Uh we are happy to report that we have received offers above the listing price and tonight we are considering uh an offer by uh Branis Lavage Dick uh for the property asis for 3.8 million in cash with 21day due diligence period and a subsequent 21 days to close escrow. Uh they have indicated that they have intentions to renovate and live on the property as their residence. Um, the buyer has also agreed to the historic preservation covenant that would be recorded against the property and run with the land. This historic preservation uh covenant would require compliance with all applicable historic preservation laws um and require that any element of significant historical or architectural value be preserved and in addition requires town approval for any changes to the facades along Main Street and Tate Avenue. So in conclusion, staff recommends accepting this offer as it uh aligns with our strategic priority of fiscal uh management as well as leveraging unused resources uh that the town does not have the resources to maintain and there are capital improvements that would be needed. Uh the property remains vacant and we would generate an estimated $3.6 million from this sale after closing costs. and the once it transitions to uh ownership uh not from a government entity it will start uh generating some property taxes as well. So for these reasons we are recommending uh to move forward with this sale. Uh you will also see a desk item where we have included in the resolution to explicitly grant the town manager authority to execute the certificate of acceptance for the declarations of covenants and restrictions. And so if when you if and when a motion is made, please make sure to uh include that new resolution so we can ensure that's part of it. And that concludes my presentation and I'm here for any questions.

Speaker 2:
Excellent. Thank you very much. Any questions?

Speaker 3:
Seeing none, we have two public comments in the room and we'll begin with Lee Quintana and then go to Bran Vidic.

Speaker 4:
Hello again. Um, again, as I stated before, I'm glad to see that uh the long um efforts of the town to preserve this property are finally showing some fruit.

Speaker 5:
Um, I two comments again about Oh, excuse me. To back up, I have to say I'm um a member of the historic preservation committee, but I am not representing the historic preservation committee. I'm representing myself um in the notice again this is something that involves eventually the historic preservation committee and uh the implement and and the historic preservation ordinance [clears throat] but again the historic preservation committee was not notified of this but specifically the covenant as I read it uh and maybe you can clarify by this does not seem to me to provide any additional protection than uh any other property with the same designation of historic uh and in a historic preservation district would have.

Speaker 6:
It it states that um in order to change the facade on Maine or um Tate would require the approval of the town. And it states that uh the uh any renovations to the property would have to be consistent with the uh his cl excuse me characteristics historic characteristics of the of the property itself.

Speaker 1:
That's what we look at when we look at any project that comes before the historic preservation committee. So I would ask that you be a little bit more specific. Uh, I wish that this had could go to the historic preservation committee and actually identify the uh characteristics that were to be preserved.

Speaker 2:
Um, but I'm happy to see that something is finally taking place. Thank you.

Speaker 3:
Thank you. Um, now we will go to Brian.

Speaker 4:
Thank you so much for the opportunity uh to speak uh here tonight. I'm going to offer some details uh about my own background and uh why I'm so excited about the prospect of being uh resident at 4 Avenue. Um uh by the way of introduction you know I grew up in Europe uh came to the United States uh for graduate studies uh got my advanced degrees in engineering worked for a big company in the area for about 20 years and last 20 years I've been part of the small company a startup scene here in in in the Silicon Valley.

Speaker 5:
I moved to Los Gatos uh back in 1990 16505 South Kennedy Road uh was our residence for a number of years. Then we moved to uh witty road about the serino and uh about 40 years later or 36 years later you know I am retiring and my ideal home is not anymore an acre property a big house it's a smaller house it's a single level it's a walking distance to Losatus roasting company the farmers market and and indeed the the restaurants downtown.

Speaker 6:
So uh Fort Tate uh is ideal match for this description of my ideal retirement home and that's why I'm so excited about uh the prospect of of living there. Um, on top of that, uh, you know, there are many nice homes in the downtown area, but this one is special, uh, because of the historic nature it it it offers. And, you know, I can assure you that, you know, I will, uh, do my utmost to restore the property. I plan to hire a private consultant historic historic u you know architecture consultant to work with preservation uh historic preservation staff here so that we can jointly really you know arrive at something that we all be proud of. Uh so that's basically at the top level you know why I'm so interested and I really appreciate uh you know the opportunity to uh to be you know resident at that address. Thank you.

Speaker 1:
Thank you council member Hudis. Just quick question for you.

Speaker 2:
Yeah. Uh first of all I want to thank you for coming forward um for this property. It's a very important one for the town and um it not only served as our fire station starting in 1915 uh it also uh served as our museum. Um and so I was very much in support of preserving every aspect that we could of the historical essence of this property.

Speaker 3:
Um, and so I would like to thank you for your commitment to do that and then ask you um would if if you uh have any doubts or questions about being able to do that, would you be willing to come forward uh to our staff and ask for guidance on how to best preserve the historic aspects of this property?

Speaker 4:
Absolutely. it. I fully intend to uh work with the staff and again you know not being professional. I will hire a professional to help me, you know, and the staff, specifically historic preservation staff, you know, arrive at a again a u solution that will uh meet all the requirements of the town. And I don't see any conflicting requirement between what I'd like to see and what most likely the town wants to see. It's restoration.

Speaker 5:
Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Speaker 6:
Okay, with no hands raised on Zoom, that concludes public comment on this item and I'll turn things back to the council.

Speaker 1:
Yes, Council Member Vami.

Speaker 2:
I'm comfortable that Mr. Vaduk, I'm hope I'm saying the name correctly, will cherish this property um and will work with the town. um will make us proud as proud as he is to obtain this property.

Speaker 3:
So uh with that, I'm going to make a motion uh to adopt a revised resolution per attachment 4 to sell the Fortate Avenue property, which is APN number 510-44-054.

Speaker 4:
Approve and authorize the town manager to sign the historic covenant and authorize the town manager to negotiate and execute all required documents for the sale, including a sale agreement accepting an offer of 3.8 million for the property and substantially the form presented.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. Yes, council member Hus. Yeah, I'll second the motion. Great. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Um and and I'll just comment that this is, you know, this has been a long time.

Speaker 1:
Uh this has been a long process with this property. Uh the the town has tried a variety of approaches um long before I was on the council and I think before most folks were were on the council. Um, and you know, while property owned by a local government is a real asset and something that I think should be um, cherished and and taken great care of. The town spent several years trying to lease this property without success. Um, and I think we have a a really excellent buyer who clearly is is interested in preserving the historic nature of the property and and uh understands what he's getting himself into. Um, and so, um, I think we have a a a great arrangement here. I completely understand that that there will be, you know, I've received several comments from folks in town who who are concerned that the town is selling this property, but I think, you know, understanding everything that's involved with this sale, I think this is the best step the town can take to preserve the historic nature of the property. Um, the town is not upkeeping the building like um, you know, it it would if if we were going to try to continue to to preserve it. So, um, uh, all to say, I think this is a a a good idea and something that staff has worked very hard on and I appreciate very much. So, um, I'll support the motion.

Speaker 2:
Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 3:
Um, I had a question for staff. So uh two weeks ago we considered the budget and in the budget I believe it was anticipated that there would be 3 million in um revenue net of costs to sell it. And um now it appears that it's um going to be 3.6 6 million net of costs which would be 600,000 more um that was considered in the budget. So, um, and and you know, the the reason I'm raising this is that one of the big motivations for our town based on the survey that I did and the um the conversations that I've had uh was that the proceeds from the sale of an asset of the town um be put to similar use And so the council unanimously agreed and I am very thankful for the support of the council to take the proceeds and put it into a fund that is uh a fund that is committed um and uh would take an act of the council to change that. And that commitment is for a long-term community benefit. Um, and we listed several options for that, but the amount was 3 million. It appears like it may be 3.6.

Speaker 4:
Correct me if I'm wrong on that. Would there be what would be the opportunity to take budgetary action and what would the timing for the um additional 600,000 or whatever the amount is?

Speaker 5:
Thank you for the question. Um so what we would do is 3.6 is estimated what we believe the revenue to be at the end of the sale but we would like to let the sale go through and complete the sale.

Speaker 6:
We have the money in hand. we will come to council for that uh revenue appropriation and that can be clarified at that time.

Speaker 1:
And so that would follow the close. So it probably be in the fall sometime or that. Yeah. So there's 20 21 days of due diligence followed by 21 days close of escrow. So roughly two months there um give or take depending on what uh what work and what we need to work through.

Speaker 2:
Okay. So, yes, if I may just clarify though, um we're not going to bring forward automatically, I think you have to go through your agenda setting policy to direct staff to come forth with an allocation of an extra 600,000 to that purpose. The direction of council at the last meeting we discussed this was allocate $3 million to the committed reserve. It was not to um come back and agendaize increasing that amount upon the sale.

Speaker 3:
Thank you.

Council Member Renie:
So, yes, you can do it. Let's wait for the sale and then you can give direction.

Speaker 5:
Okay. Thank you, Council Member Renie.

Speaker 6:
Thank you, Mayor. As you know, I often don't don't uh make comments, but I'm I just have to make comments on on this.

Speaker 1:
Um, you know, I'm echo I'm going to echo your your comments. I'm in year 12 on the council, and this property had already had the museum move out when I started on the council almost 12 years ago, and it's been a long road. We we started off with how can we um make make some economic benefit out of an asset we have while preserving the historical value of it. And we spent a long time trying to do that over and over and over. Um, and it it's been a little frustrating to me as we weren't able to achieve that and then as time went on it just became historical asset that was decaying as an asset. Um, and you know, we're not when it's not used, it's not really being kept up and it's it does need some improvement. So, I I'm really quite excited that we're finally um going taking care of this and you know, both both um well, you know, we're getting some economic benefit out as as the town, but also we're we're selling it to and I'll try not to um disclose too much that was discussed in in close session, but we had multiple offers and you know I'm I'm very happy that this particular buyer was one of the offers as as he spoke it you know we could even tell that this is was the right kind of person that was going to really respect the historical value of this property and preserve it and and bring it back because it it really is kind of at a decayed point at at at this point. So, I I just want to also say how appreciative I am that we found the right buyer for this. This wasn't just us chasing necessarily top dollar, but also chasing a buyer that would really appreciate the historical value and and preserve and take care of this this historical gem of Lascatoss. Right.

Speaker 2:
Thank you. Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 3:
Just one more comment on the historic preservation aspects of it. Um I I have to say that I you know in reading the covenant and in the steps that have been taken um I am confident that we are providing strong protection on the historic preservation of this. And I want um certainly for the public to understand um that we're doing I think everything that we can to preserve uh the historic aspects of this structure.

Speaker 4:
The co having the covenant having it recorded is very important and specifying uh some of the um items [clears throat] that are articulated in the covenant and the staff report I think um illustrate that. So, I do have a lot of confidence that um the town has done what it can uh to preserve the historic aspects of this.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. And I will turn to the clerk for a vote.

Speaker 6:
Council member Renie I.

Speaker 1:
Council member Hudis I.

Speaker 2:
Council member Bidami I.

Speaker 3:
Mayor More I. Um the motion passes unanimously with council with Vice Mayor Risto recused and we'll invite her back and move to our last item um where uh we will receive a report from the town clerk on a remote public access disruption policy and an amendment to the agenda format.

Speaker 4:
Good evening, mayor and council members.

Speaker 5:
Wendywood, town clerk. The item before you tonight is a recommendation to approve the remote public access disruption policy and adopt a resolution establishing reasonable efforts to encourage public participation in meetings and consider an amendment to the town council agenda format and rules policy. As background on this item, Senate Bill 707 was signed into law last year and amended the Brown Act to require eligible legislative bodies to provide hybrid public meetings through a two-way telephone or video platform system. In addition, the legislation requires agencies to adopt by July 1st, 2026, a policy addressing how the agency will respond to disruption and service that prevent members of the public from remotely observing and participating in the meeting. The legislation also requires agencies to determine and make reasonable efforts to encourage participation by individuals and groups that do not traditionally participate in public meetings. The town already conducts town council meetings in a hybrid format using Zoom and will continue to comply with those requirements. The action before you tonight are intended to address the remaining requirements of Senate Bill 707. The proposed remote public access disruption policy establishes procedures for responding to disruption and remote access service that prevent the members from observing and participating in the meeting. The policy outlines the procedures for announcing a disruption, recessing and reconvening meetings, documenting restoration efforts, and making good faith attempts to restore remote access service. State law requires that good faith restoration efforts continue for up to one hour before the council may consider whether to adjourn or continue the meeting after making the required findings. Under government code section 54953-4, if remote access service cannot be restored within one hour, the council may adjourn the meeting or continue it with the findings. The proposed policy addresses the circumstances such as late night disruption, facilitywide power outage, and other conditions where waiting for restoration efforts to continue for up to an hour may not be practical, and adjournment may be appropriate. The policy also requires documentation for the disruption restoration efforts in the meeting minutes. Following review by the policy committee, the policy was revised to clarify that a meeting may continue under certain circumstances if a council member experiences a disruption in service or is otherwise unable to participate from the designated teleconference location. The policy committee also recommended amending the town council agenda format rules to change the council meeting end time from midnight to 11 p.m. Under the new legislation, the remote access disruption could require a recess for up to 1 hour while restoration efforts are underway. Because the new law may not the new law may require recess for this duration, the policy committee is recommending moving the meeting time to 11 p.m. to help avoid situations where council staff or members of the public may be required to remain in attendance until midnight or later to accommodate the 1-hour period. Accordingly, the proposed remote public access disruption includes provisions to allow the council to adjourn rather than recess if a disruption occurs after 11 p.m. The presiding officer determines that continuing the meeting would be impractical or inconsistent with the established meeting procedures.

Speaker 6:
Additionally, Senate Bill 707 requires the legislative body to determine and make reasonable efforts to encourage participation by individuals and groups that do not traditionally participate in meetings. To satisfy this requirement, staff is recommending adoption of the draft resolution, which establishes a framework for reasonable outreach efforts, including media outreach, electronic agenda access, and subscription services. and organizational outreach.

Speaker 1:
Staff recommends the town council approve the remote public access disruption policy, adopt a resolution establishing the reasonable efforts to encourage public participation in meetings, and consider the amendment to the town's agenda format and rules policy. This concludes my presentation and I'm available for any questions.

Speaker 2:
Yes, Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, thank you. Um, I wanted to understand how does the 1hour rule relate to changing the adjournment time from midnight to 11:00 p.m.? I didn't I didn't really follow that.

Speaker 4:
So, the the um thought was that if we set the meeting time for 11 and we do adjourn at 11:00 p.m., then if there was a disruption past 11, we wouldn't have to stay past that time. So, it's trying to to keep that 11:00 p.m. time so that we wouldn't have to proceed for an hour to try to restore service if there's an event that we need to continue the meeting and have to wait that amount of time.

Speaker 5:
And I'll just clarify from the policy committee. I think this was also just we were discussing the agenda format and rules and this was a change that was recommended.

Speaker 6:
So if I could just understand. So we're changing the adjournment time because sometimes we might have to invoke this one hour or there's a recom there's a reason why meetings should adjourn at 11 p.m.

Speaker 1:
I'll I'll just answer from my perspective that that I think the policy committee, not to speak on council member Badami's behalf, but I think the council member uh uh the policy committee separately and with this new policy thought that the 11 p.m. adjournment would be a good idea. But that the 11 p.m. adjournment on its on the face without this is a good idea.

Speaker 2:
Yes, Council Member Budami. So, what I I would also expand that um I believe we are in agreement that um some of our meetings have gone almost till 1:00 in the morning and in consideration of staff and the new modified Rosenberg's rules where we can put a motion on the table and and just kind of button up the meetings um that it just seemed maybe um a prudent thing to do especially in consideration of the public participation we get where they sometimes have to stay till very late hours where we could maybe just be a little bit more concise and and again um just kind of button things up.

Speaker 3:
Yes, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. I have a a comment and a question. I mean, years ago when council meetings used to go till 1 or 2:00, it was changed so that they had to end at midnight. It doesn't mean that we end at midnight. If we've got business to do and we have a majority vote to go past midnight, we do that. Um, so the question is, and I support planning that we end at 11, that might keep us on track more. If we are approaching 10 minutes to 11 and we make a motion to go on till 11:30 because we have an item and then we have an outage, do we then have to try for an hour to keep going?

Speaker 5:
That's what the state law currently provides. Okay. I mean, so it doesn't really eliminate it going us having an hour to try and close it, but I think this is sort of while we were while you were doing the policy policy people just addressing getting us it was something we discussed prior to the 707 and it got lost in terms of the final draft that came to council.

Speaker 6:
Let's just make it very clear. The council is in full control of when you decide to end your meeting. There's no question there. If you change it or if you eliminate it, you at any time can end the 12:00. You can extend it, not extend it. You're just saying we'll go all the way to 12 before we even get to the point of saying we should vote to we're thinking about should we go longer or has it been too long?

Speaker 1:
So 11:00 I think makes total sense. When you add the 7:07 and the fact that you have to stay for an hour, irrespective if you did not want to go that long, you're going to be stuck doing it. And so if the time is 12 and it's 11:59 and we lose connectivity, you are here till 12:59 even if you wanted to just end it and not extend it from 12:00. And so the the balance was well at least we know we'll be out by midnight if we have a technical issue and it happened after 11:00. But if we want to be here till 3 in the morning to consider all the items on the agenda, the council is fully within their wherewithal to extend it at 11 o'clock until as far as you need.

Speaker 2:
Okay. Thank you. I think we're starting to get into discussion. So I'm going to open up public comment before I go to Council Member Renie. Um is there anyone here to speak on item number 25?

Speaker 3:
Seeing none, I will close public comment and go to Council Member Renie.

Speaker 4:
Yeah, that was good because mine's not really a question. It's a it's just a comment uh or maybe provide some perspective. Um as mentioned, sometimes we had council meetings that went past midnight, but we've made a fundamental change and I don't know if it'll continue with f future mayors or future town managers, but we um used to stuff everything into our regular council meeting. So if that was a land use item that had 30 people that wanted to speak and we needed to discuss it for two hours and then we had other agenda items on top of it easily goes past midnight.

Speaker 5:
What what we've I guess sort of consciously done is now we hold our long land use meetings as a special meeting on a different date. So, we don't need to go till midnight nearly as much as we used to because we're we're making this is sort of cottifying this idea that we're going to have more meetings in order to cover the long land used ones and our regular meetings won't need to go as long. And and I think council member Risto, Vice Mayor Risto was starting to um make are making the point that when we get close to midnight, we actually kind of move a little more efficiently along as we know the end of the meeting is coming. I think if the end of the meeting is supposed to be 11, we'll do the same thing. We'll start moving a little more efficiently and you know, maybe we make a motion to go a little past 11 like we do a little past 12, but I think it will help us to focus a little bit. So, with all of that sort of perspective in mind, I'll say that, you know, I I do I'm I'm supportive of the changing to 11:00 idea.

Speaker 6:
Council member Hudis, um yeah, question. Have we done um any survey or view of how uh what time other municipalities um have their uh adjournment time?

Speaker 1:
Um I have not done that. Um but then I also wanted to add a little bit of clarification um in regards to your question. So um it's regarding the 1 hour limit in the late night. The code doesn't [clears throat] have any specific exemptions for that late night hour, but the Brown Act does allow legislative bodies to adjourn a meeting um if they determine it's impractical or inconsistent with procedures. So there that is a procedure in the policy that we would then follow if there was that late night disruption, but if if you'd like me to look at other jurisdictions for their end time, um I could do that as well.

Speaker 2:
Great. Thank you. And and I know this is a little challenging because I know the town manager really likes it when we go to midnight. Um but I do think this is uh the right thing to do for for our community. Um, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 3:
Yeah, with that and you know, moving the meeting along with Rosenberg's rules, I will move to approve a remote public access disruption policy, approve an amendment to the agenda format and rules policy 2-01, and adopt a resolution establishing what constitutes reasonable efforts to encourage public participation in meetings.

Speaker 4:
Council Bami, second. Great. Thank you.

Speaker 5:
Um, seeing no other hands raised, I will turn to the town clerk for a roll call vote.

Speaker 6:
Council member Annie, I.

Speaker 1:
Council member Hudis, I.

Speaker 2:
Council member Padami, I.

Speaker 3:
Vice Mayor Risto, I.

Speaker 4:
Mayor Moore, I. Passes unanimously. Excellent. And look at us at 10:35, 25 minutes before um 11 p.m. Um I will now turn to council matters. Um, and I'll begin with our remote member, Council Member Renie.

Speaker 5:
Um, thank you, Mayor. I had, I guess, two meetings of of interest. Um, I met with some of the neighbors of the West Valley um, Muslim Center um, to get a better understanding of their perspective on the the agreement that we um, actually continued. Of course, I did not give them um, any assurances of how I was going to vote. I um was just collecting information and trying to understand their position and of course told them that I I couldn't tell them, you know, how I was going to frame a motion or vote until I've heard all the information. The second item, um I met with um the developer for the um other meeting that was um rescheduled for tonight of the Oka Road development. I met um with that developer and I did not I don't think I learned anything new from him that uh the other council members don't already know. Thank you.

Speaker 6:
Thank you. I'll go to Council Member Hudis.

Speaker 1:
Uh thank you. Um let's see. On June 3, uh, I met with the leadership of El Camino Hospital to discuss their plans for, um, building a new facility in Lascatos. I was very impressed with their plans and, uh, their focus on being truly a community hospital. Um I same day I attended the Saratoga Council meeting where they considered um a proposal from the town of Loscatoos or whether to negotiate a proposal from the town of Loscatoos for police services. And I have to say it was um I thought it was uh Loscato's leadership did an excellent job of uh outlining uh the uh benefits the synergies uh from that process.

Speaker 2:
Um I participated in two uh Loscatoos Thrives uh meetings and then on the 9th I participated in the community health and senior services uh commission meeting. I think they've canceled the other meeting and um uh they had uh very interesting discussions there um where uh Tyler Taylor um provided some insight into the challenges in funding um senior activities. And I think that it's a little bit of a warning that um this isn't going to end. uh that it isn't only um issues with uh the federal administration but also with the county fundamentally uh taking on the operation of four hospitals and uh the need to provide those as probably their highest priority. And so I think that the town is going to have increased pressure to look at funding um services particularly for our seniors nutrition programs and things like that.

Vice Mayor Risto:
Um I participated in a meeting uh with Jim Foley regarding a development and also the chamber activities and um I participated in the cities association wonderful summer u membership meeting and I know a number of folks were here were there for that as well um focusing on panel discussion of emergency preparedness and preparation And I learned a great deal uh from that that presentation.

Speaker 4:
Um and that's it. Thank you, Vice Mayor Risto.

Speaker 5:
Thank you. I don't have a lot to report.

Speaker 6:
Yesterday I met with Jim Foley um to hear his point of view about the chamber contract and also um he wanted to talk to me about the Suriri Farms project um development which will be coming to the council. And then this morning I met with Eric Hayden, the developer of the Oka project um prior to knowing that we weren't going to hear it tonight. So, um, anyway, didn't learn anything from either of them that I didn't already know from watching planning commission meetings.

Speaker 1:
Council member Bami.

Speaker 2:
Thank you, mayor. Um, on June 8th, I participated in a meeting of the resident wildfire advisory group. Uh, on the 11th, I met with the CEO and executive director of El Camino Health, as mentioned by council member Hudis. Um they showed some really exciting plans uh for the development of a hospital uh in Lascatus uh off Pard and it looks beautiful. I'm I'm excited about them being a partner with Lascatus and making it really fit and being part of our community. On the 10th um I participated in a meeting of the conceptual development advisory committee. Uh and that was regarding potential development of a threestory multi-use development at the corner of North Santa Cruz A and Bachmann A. Um it would be 43 feet tall.

Speaker 3:
Um it still fits within the height guidelines of the area. Um there was a number of residents there that provided um a lot of feedback um asking the developer to maybe kind of refine or modify his plans to make it fit more within uh the character of Lascatus. He seemed amendable to coming back because it's an important piece of property that could be developed um and improve the corner. Um, but there was a a lively discussion not only from the committee members but also from the input provided by the community. Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Thank you. Um, I also met with staff from El Camino Health and the developer of the Oka Road property. Um, I also attended a Whimo training along with town staff and the Loscatos Monte Sino Police Department along with council members from Monty Serino and Saratoga to learn more about the Whimo expansion to Los Gatos. Um, which as I've shared in the past, surprisingly has nothing to do with the town of Los Gatos. The town has no say. Um, and there supposedly will be Whimos rolling out on the streets of Los Gatos in the next few weeks. Um, I provided opening remarks at the Bellwood Dolphins uh, opening meet of the year. I was a long and proud Bellwood Dolphin. Um, I swam on that swim team for for many years and um, it was a very fun full circle moment. I attended the opening day of the summer service of the Billy Jones Wildcat Railroad at their pancake breakfast. The Billy Jones Wildcat Railroad is now open seven days a week for business through the summer. Um, and uh I recommend checking it out. Um, had a lot of fun riding the train. Um, I uh swung by the KCAT camp which was a lot of fun. Kat Camp is going this whole summer. Really cool uh video and TV and movie training camp for kids. Uh, really, really neat.

Speaker 5:
And what I participated in was at the Apple store which every week is working with the KCAT campers to tell them about you know how um Apple works and what they do there. So very very neat. Um, I also attended the city's association emergency preparedness session where I'll just um add on to what council member Hudis said um in that our town manager was one of the uh panelists um and provided a lot of excellent expert perspective on um what happens in the event of an emergency especially um uh what councils should and should not mostly should not do. Um this morning along with the town manager I uh spoke to the NUMO summer campers which was a lot of fun. Um really good group of kids right above us here. Um today I also met with the uh Bill Wilson Center Youth Impact Partnership Group. Bill Wilson Center is an organization that serves Santa Clara County and beyond and has um at least one property in Loscatoos um a uh a home um a single family home where where um I think largely foster youth are housed. Um and the Bill Wilson Center is really working on trying to combat youth homelessness specifically in our community um and beyond. And so um a lot of good happening there.

Mr. Mayor:
They're very concerned about some um key state cuts and so trying to help them uh navigate those and advocate to our state partners. Um I held my community coffee where I met with a variety of residents including um regarding uh the uh mosque appeal among other things. And lastly, I will just announce um as the town manager might be getting ready to that we have our July 4th celebration coming up on the 4th of July um happening on the the Saturday of July 4th. Um it'll be a really fun event. One of the particularly exciting things is that this is the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. and the um town of Los Scatters will be rolling out a bell, a historic bell that we used to ring for many many years um that we would ring right at 11:00 a.m. um when the declaration was signed in uh you know on the East Coast at 8 a.m. And this bell was hiding in the uh Billy Jones Wildcat Railroad Storage for many years. And so we will be ringing the bell at 11:00 a.m. It'll hopefully uh is a new or or returning tradition that we get to uh uh you know ring in. So um I will turn to the town manager and then the town attorney.

Speaker 1:
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And that event on Saturday, July 4th, will start at 10:00 a.m. and go to 1 p.m. And I'm certain it will be an awesome event.

Speaker 2:
Well, we're now two weeks into our official deployment of our 311 uh application called My Lost Gats 311. And we will be happy to note that we currently are up to the 42nd request that has come through that software. Uh much more than has happened in my last jurisdiction in the first two weeks. So, we clearly have a community that is very engaged and we are deeply appreciative for that. It's probably the best way to get that message to the right staff and have that back and forth with staff. And so we continue to encourage our residents to download the app on their Android or iPhones. Or if they can't access those, they can access it on our web page at loscatosca.gov and go to the upper right where it says uh find a concern or report a concern, I should say.

Speaker 3:
Lastly, I'd like to let the folks know and that are watching that the administrative offices will be closed February June 19th in observance of Junth. Um, that does not mean the police department gets a vacation and nobody's working. Our emergency services will continue to operate. It's just the rest of our operations will not. And that council will be on recess for the month of July with the next regularly scheduled meeting occurring on August 4th. With that, I'll turn it back to the mayor. Um any report from the town attorney? Uh nothing to report from close session. Thank you.

Speaker 4:
Great. Thank you very much. Um with that again before our 11:00 uh new 11:00 deadline, this meeting is adjourned.

Speaker 5:
Thank you.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>